Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"The Introduction to my book: "America's Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama's Story of Race and Inheritance""

27 Comments -

1 – 27 of 27
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, Steve, you may be about to make a lot of money!

10/30/08, 5:30 AM

Anonymous Skip G. said...

"Occam’s Butterknife".

There's meme for all seasons!

10/30/08, 6:10 AM

Blogger Sebastian said...

Oh yeah...you got him...right where you want him....

;-)

10/30/08, 6:21 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve, don't rush this book to press. Judging by the firt chapter, it could use some editing.

And, realistically, not many people want "Half-blood Prince" on their bookshelf.

10/30/08, 7:17 AM

Blogger Conrad Bibby said...

Steve - Congrats. It's a good read so far.

You ID Harold Washington as the first black mayor of Washington. Should be Chicago, of course.

10/30/08, 7:55 AM

Anonymous AS said...

I've almost finished your book and...

Actually because I read your blog, I found your second chapter to be weak, compared to your fantastic blog posts on the subject.

Your blog posts and the subsequent chapters of your book just read better, smoother, possibly because you created each piece as an organic whole.

You second chapter though has been taken almost completely from your blog posts but rearranged.

10/30/08, 8:41 AM

Anonymous Bill said...

Alright Steve!

You are really the perfect guy for this book. However, I'm not sure it will be an easy read (both intellectually and emotionally speaking) for people going into it cold with no previous Steve experience. I can already see that this will be undiluted Steve Sailer.

Let us know when we can order it online and you'll probably get a lot of your fans linking to its Amazon page.

10/30/08, 11:10 AM

Blogger mnuez said...

Good stuff.

10/30/08, 11:45 AM

Anonymous Gotham Dweller said...

Mr. Sailer,

I think it would help to stir up interest in the book if you'd share a little bit about its genesis - why you wrote it, what unfilled need it's meeting, and perhaps a bit of the story of how it came into existence.

For example, did you take it to major publishers and not see eye to eye with them, even with conservative press such as Regnery? Or did you want to go the self-published route from the beginning (assuming that's what you did), and if so, why?

Also, and I don't mean to sound like a spendthrift, buy why such a high price tag for a paperback? I'm sure I'll want to give copies of it as a gift but can give fewer at that price point.

10/30/08, 12:25 PM

Anonymous Bill said...

I don't spend much time banging the drum for my political philosophy because factual matters are so much more engaging, but in case you are wondering, I advocate what I call “citizenism“ as a functional, yet idealistic, alternative to the special-interest abuses of multiculturalism.

Citizenism calls upon Americans to favor the well-being, even at some cost to ourselves, of our current fellow citizens over that of foreigners and internal factions. Among American citizens, it calls for individuals to be treated equally by the state, no matter what their race...


I see the people propounding citizenism, which Americans have been doing on and off for our entire national history, getting steamrolled by those with racial, religious, sexual or economic grievances. I've never seen true citizenism in any government, and I just don't know whether it can work.

It's a great idea, and one that I believed in for most of my youth, but I don't think it takes human nature into account. I doubt the founding fathers believed in it, and because of their lack of confidence in such a perfect society they instituted the best checks on power they could think of.

Perhaps the best bet we have is legal citizenism; i.e. no special rights or entitlements for any individual or group of people. That's an ideal worth working for, because it has a fighting chance of becoming a reality.

10/30/08, 12:43 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve, I am partway through your amazing book.

It strikes me that Barack is self-promoting opportunist and possibly sociopathic. He's, plain and simple, a fraud.

Clearly he never endured any such true "racism" and is making it all up, is posing; all the "righteous anger," all the angst, all the "hope for change"; because he, being intelligent as he is, sees a chance for craven profit unto himself by playing into the masochistic wishes of white liberals for a black "savior" to absolve them of their imagined racial guilt.

This dude's gonna be president during one of what will surely be one America's most difficult eras, facing peak oil?

We're doomed.

Can we have a primary-elections do-over?

10/30/08, 1:52 PM

Anonymous David said...

bill said

no special rights or entitlements for any individual or group of people. That's an ideal worth working for, because it has a fighting chance

It has the smallest chance of all. Only a few goofy white people have ever been seriously interested in such a thing, and it works (very partially) only with other goofy white people. (No special rights or entitlements for ANYONE?)

Racial nationalism is natural and the barriers to its resumption are as ultimately destructive as any other form of leftism.

10/30/08, 2:19 PM

Blogger Ronduck said...

Steve, if you want to see what happens when race-denial meets environmentalism click here.

10/30/08, 2:27 PM

Anonymous tommy said...

How well this book will sell is hard to predict, especially for "insiders" who are already familiar with Steve's essential ideas about Obama, but it is a pleasant read. I read about a third of it last night and finished the rest today.

Steve, I don't know if you have any say in the matter, or if you have the time, but I highly recommend the Electra typeface used in Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World. It's very gentle on the eyes.

10/30/08, 3:20 PM

Anonymous as said...

Steve,

A commentator named "Tommy" analyzed "Moby Dick" for the sort of nautical metaphors that Obama uses and came up short.

What do you think of this?

http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2008/10/tommy-adds-more-for-thought-to.html

10/30/08, 3:48 PM

Anonymous Richard h said...

I'm sitting here thinking that Steve Sailer and Tom Wolfe need to be merged into one person and this person needs to write a historical novel of Obama's life.

10/30/08, 4:57 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve, the theory that Obama's mom inculcated black racialism into him to spite her second husband is the least fact-based one in the book. I wish you'd left the whole Asian/white interracial marriage bit out, since it's distracting and needlessly inflaming.

10/30/08, 6:17 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Damn. Sailer is still dragging out the Citizenism for special occasions. Too bad it will always be a pile of goo. Worse, it's utopian goo.

Citizenism. This is the genius political theory from the guy who recently claimed that the past ten years living in Southern California was a period of personal happiness.

That's a funny comment coming from someone who writes professionally on political issues and immigration.

Yes, it's funny considering that the same ten year period featured the culmination of assorted negative trends in Southern California:

Mass replacement of the population by illegal aliens; Latin-style corruption of the political culture; normalization of public school system race riots; record gang membership; documented extreme low trust level between community members; economic chaos in the private sector and government; profound erosion of the middle class; and all-in-all political revolution from an affluent, orderly, conservative white American society to a broke, dysfunctional, left wing multicultural Post-American society.

One might conclude that the radical transformation of the society all around Steve Sailer does not much disturb the man on a personal level.

Such is the mind of the man behind Citizenism, a theory of "workable" modern post-racial society.

10/30/08, 6:26 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was becoming evident that local voters considered Richie Daley to be the trueborn rightful heir to his famous father’s throne of Mayor-for-Life.

Nonsense, Steve.

Chicago currently has a black party, a white party, and an Hispanic party. Daley II knew he could count on the white votes, and he was smart enough to realize that the Hispanic vote in Chicago could swing an election for him, and would become more important. So he co-opted pretty much all of the Hispanic politicians in the city, with the possible exception of Luis Guitterez, through things like the Hispanic Democratic Organization.

The various grandees of the black party weren't willing to give anything to the Hispanic party: they got a big chunk of the spoils under Harold Washington, and they didn't want to give up some of that to people they held in contempt.

Daley wins because he gets the votes of the white party and the Hispanic party, and his margin gets bigger because he's bought off about half of the black party. (Cf. Cook County Commissioner William Beavers, who used to be a die-hard opponent of Daley, but has been bought off enough that he openly bragged that the Machine won the last election.)

Daley I, by contrast, actually depended on the black vote, delivered by Big Bill Dawson, to push him over the top for a good chunk of his career. (Dawson backed Daley when Martin Luther King, Jr. came to Chicago, not that you'll hear much discussion of that from anyone in Chicago, since Michael Dawson, Big Bill's nephew, has totally controlled the public narrative on his uncle since at least 2000).

Daley II is going to be in real trouble when Chicago gets to the point where it has an Hispanic plurality and a Mexican politician decides to challenge him. (Guitterez has talked about challenging Daley for years, but he's Puerto Rican, and Daley could exploit the Mexican-Puerto Rican rivalry).

Planetary Archon Mouse

10/30/08, 6:47 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've read this first chapter, and while you are convincing as always, the reading flow is choppy.

10/30/08, 8:00 PM

Anonymous call me ishmael said...

A commentator named "Tommy" analyzed "Moby Dick" for the sort of nautical metaphors that Obama uses and came up short.

In terms of "Moby Dick" and "Dreams", I think the comparison is more about substance than style. Obama has inherited the the unbearable self-righteousness that possessed both Captain Ahab and the 60's radicals.

"To put a stop to the hand-wringing, Rudd, who once told a Columbia history professor he had read Moby Dick nine times, gave a speech declaring that, a revolutionary dedicated to destroying the United States, he was a monomaniacal as Captain Ahab pursuing the Great White Whale. Bernadine Dohrn praised Charles Manson, the cult leader who ordered the Sharon Tate murders, as a “right-on” revolutionary, and a leaflet handed out to War Council participants made it clear that the time for armed struggle was now."

-- Castellucci, The Big Dance (122)

"Mayor Richard Daley played a perfect Moby Dick for us -- white and fleshy, he reeked with the stench of evil."

"Our Captain Ahab was Tom Hayden, former president of SDS, new leader of the National Mobilization to End the War, the coalition leading the convention protest."

-- Bill Ayers, Fugitive Days (121)

Ahab was (probably) modeled partly on John Brown, a person evoked by Ayers as a man to emulate, and partly General Sherman.

Melville understood that there is nothing more terrifying than people who are anti-racists and anti-war. In other words, people who cannot accept that evil is, to use Henry James' phrase, "the bulwark of God's power inexpugnable".

I would really like to believe the election of Barack Obama would finally satisfy the desire of the chosen few (the SWPL crowd) to sanctify the wicked, but I'm not optimistic. Actually, I'm a bit of a fatalist. I can't help but wonder how many people, the last time we elected a senator from Illinois president, asked "what's the worse that could happen?"

10/30/08, 8:28 PM

Anonymous testing99 said...

Ishmael -- I doubt Ahab was modeled on Sherman. Sherman was, by all accounts, an able soldier before the Civil War, and the first Superintendent at the Louisiana Military Academy, later to become known as LSU. Sherman knew and liked Southerners. He certainly sat on his behind when the San Francisco Committee of Vigilance hung Casey and Cora, deciding discretion was the better part of valor, no matter how he fashioned it later in his memoirs, as Commander of the Militia, which stood by and did nothing as the Committee raided the Armory.

Before Shiloh, Sherman had a nervous breakdown, due to his horror at the casualties caused by the campaign in Tennessee. He was on very shaky ground and only Grant's personal intervention kept him on.

During the shock of Johnston's near 100 mile march (undetected) and engagement at Shiloh, Sherman had three horses shot out from under him and numerous bullet holes in his clothes, as he personally rallied his troops in a hurried defense.

His performance during the surprise attack got him his own command, and the march through the Georgian, and later South Carolina countryside was carefully planned. Sherman knew down to the mile how much he had to cover each day (to avoid being foraged out of supplies and having his troops starve to death) and actually sought to avoid engagements with enemy forces. He by the third week even left warehouses alone, he'd simply destroy the railroads, leaving the supplies intact and useless, because destroying the railroads was faster and more certain (he waged a resource war).

His troops were devoted to him (called him "Uncle Billy") and he tried to avoid frontal assaults out of caution for casualties. He was known to years after the war hand out money and food to his former troops. He had negative views about Blacks, generally, though he disliked slavery intensely. He was roundly criticized for letting many slaves who had attached themselves to his column drown as he rapidly moved over one particular river with Confederates in pursuit. Sherman did not care -- his focus was on ending the war as quickly as possible (which he argued was the most humane thing) and conserving the lives of his troops.

Brown perhaps a model for Ahab, but Sherman, a man known to favor maneuver over frontal assault to conserve the lives of his men? Hardly. Above all, Sherman was a calculating man, though capable of great bravery, and one who at various times avoided direct confrontation.

Obama's character is far more different. He wants confrontation AND avoiding the costs of it ... at the same time. He's the ultimate Yuppie. Radicalism as a fashion statement AND radicalism in and of itself, as part of his quest to be "Black Enough." Sherman always knew who HE was. Obama? Constantly proving his "street cred" as if that mattered.

When Sherman fought, he fought. Obama fights, then wants people he fought against to like him. Sherman cared not, only that he won. Otherwise he would not fight in the first place, if he thought there was a good chance he could lose and he could avoid it.

10/30/08, 11:32 PM

Anonymous testing99 said...

Follow up --

Obama, as Steve makes clear, has chosen fights that make little sense, except to prove his own inner "Black Enough" credibility.

People who were toxic, and provided little advantage, like Ayers and Dohrn, were courted instead of say, Daley directly, or someone like oh, Frist or something. To provide cover on the Right. Or Khalidi for that matter.

What did Obama get out of these guys? Why the association for decades with Ayers? His kind of people and his kind of FIGHT. A stupid one.

But if your main goal in life is not to just get power but prove you are "Black Enough" then that makes sense.

10/30/08, 11:35 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Captain Ahab, a character in a novel written in 1851, was based on John Brown, who didn't become nationally prominent until 1856, Herman Melville had some interesting abilities.

It's possible Melville knew Brown, but in 1851, Brown was a businessman who came close to being bankrupt.

Planetary Archon Mouse

10/31/08, 3:13 AM

Blogger Jeff Burton said...

The interesting thing about this book for me is that I watched it being written as a series of blog posts.

10/31/08, 4:34 AM

Blogger Michael said...

I agree with a lot of your premises (though I am to the left of you on virtually all issues) One of the reasons I like Obama is that his race and narrative provide one of the best ways to get a nerdy leftwing pragmatist technocrat in the white house.

He's Bill Clinton but instead of folksiness and super empathy he's black. He's very self absorbed like Clinton, but I think less emotional and less impulsive. That sounds like a good combination given my starting conditions.

10/31/08, 9:27 AM

Anonymous call me ishmael said...

If Captain Ahab, a character in a novel written in 1851, was based on John Brown, who didn't become nationally prominent until 1856, Herman Melville had some interesting abilities.

He certainly did have interesting abilities. Melville was an Old Testament prophet. I guess we don't believe in such things these days, but perhaps we're living in an age that's superficial and overly optimistic.

"The truest of all men was the Man of Sorrows, and the truest of all books is Solomon’s wisdom yet. But he who dodges hospitals and jails, and walks fast crossing grave-yards, and would rather talk of operas than hell; calls Cowper, Young, Pascal, Rousseau, poor devils all of sick men; and throughout a care-free lifetime swears by Rabelais as passing wise, and therefore jolly;--not that man is fitted to sit down on tomb-stones, and break the green damp mould with unfathomably wondrous Solomon." -- Moby Dick (465)

10/31/08, 10:27 AM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL