Friday, April 29, 2016

MGTOW 101: What is MGTOW?

Decided to rattle the hornet's nest because I was bored.  It's always fun to rattle the cages of the MGTOW theoreticians:

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Minority Women in STEM

Oops....those damn fathers.  Why are they never available for comment?

What the Heck are "Critical Thinking Skills" Anyway?

"Critical thinking" or "critical thinking skills" come up in two common scenarios.

One, when a leftist defends their worthless liberal arts degree, claiming it provides them with the rare and enviable skill of "critical thinking."


Two, when liberal arts professors defend their bogus fields of study by claiming the "#1 thing employers look for in college graduates is critical thinking!"

Of course, I never gave "critical thinking" much thought, writing it off as some kind of worthless, commonsensical skill your average person develops during childhood.  But because of the cacophony coming from academia, not to mention, the academic left's complete and utter reliance upon and championing of it, I decided to find out, once and for all, what the heck are "critical thinking skills anyway."

A standard google search will pull up a ton of results, but the first thing you'll notice is that there's NO standard definition of critical thinking skills.  You can go to Wikipedia and you'll see two amorphous definitions with pages and pages of text vainly trying to define it.  You can even go to the "Critical Thinking Community" (which serves, I presume, as the "professional association" of critical thinkers) and even they have four separate, equally amorphous definitions.  But as far as my evil, empirical, logical, and sane mind can tell me, critical thinking closely follows what I set out in my "reality principle" video.  It is merely the discovering of reality.  A commitment to intellectually honesty.  Or what we normal people, with normal jobs, who live in the real world call...

"getting to the bottom of things."

Naturally, leave it to the wanna-be adults of academia to take a simple concept your average 10 year old understands and turn it into an entire 4 year study unto itself.  Leave it to inferior-minded people to extrapolate thousands of painful pages from a concept as simple as "be intellectually honest."  And do you want pain?  Just imagine how anal retentive, unimaginative, and truly void of any intelligence you have to be to come up with a "Critical Thinking Community" replete with:

a bookstore
a library
professional development
assessment and testing.

But, as are with most things in academia, their championing of "critical thinking" is not merely an intellectually-void, navel-gazing, masturbation exercise to falsely validate handing out worthless doctorates and self-importance in a field that provides no value to society.  It is to provide them authority over the rest of society.  And it is here their nefarious and malicious intent is exposed.

On the face of it, any introductory video to critical thinking will explain it as intellectual honesty, the pursuit of reality, and (as we commoners call it) "getting to the bottom of things."  It is based in sanity, reason, logic, and reality.  However, if you delve into the world of academia and critical thinking "experts," you'll start to notice a common refrain.  They not only obfuscate a simple concept like "reality" in volumes of unnecessary pablum, but they always include some sort of "social awareness" or "adherence to other people's feelings/thoughts/opinions/culture" political component to that definition.  AND usually that component trumps reality.  Matter of fact, I rarely saw the word "empirical" or "empiricism" mentioned in these definitions.  And all one has to do is take a look at a sample definition from one of these "critical thinking authorities:"

"Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way.   People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, emphatically.    They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked.   They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies.   They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking.   They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason.   They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can always improve their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest.   They strive to improve the world in whatever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society.    At the same time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so.   They avoid thinking simplistically about complicated issues and strive to appropriately consider the rights and needs of relevant others.   They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice toward self-improvement.   They embody the Socratic principle:   The unexamined life is not worth living , because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical, unjust, dangerous world.               ~ Linda Elder, September, 2007"

That's a whole lot of SJW-ing and crusaderism when all we want to do is get down to the truth.  But keep in mind this overkill of verbosity is on purpose as they are more concerned about advancing political agendas (not to mention keeping their academic fiefdoms financed by leftist governments) than they are pursuing empiricism.  And they obfuscate these ulterior motives by attempting to not only hijack a concept like "critical thinking," but by self-appointing themselves as the final authorities and arbiters as to what is "reality," "truth," and "empiricism."  This not only grants them sweeping powers (in their minds anyway) to dictate to the rest of us what reality is and how society should be ran, but why when one of us "commoners" question their politics, their motives, and their incentives, they simply bog you down in minutiae, academic pablum, bogus studies, and of course, the always reliable accusation of "you lack critical thinking skills."  

However, rather than fight them in their own turf, allow me to simply debunk, disprove, and destroy them in a much simpler, and sniper like way from the opposite direction.  If they are so committed to reality.  If they are so correct.  And if they truly know better than all of us.  Then why have nearly all the liberal arts and humanities failed to improve, let alone solve, any of the social ills they purport to be solving?

The wage gap between blacks and whites has not closed, nor has the wage gap between men and women.

Income distribution has worsened since the academic left's wet dream of The Great Society has been implemented.

Divorce, single-parenthood, and broken families have skyrocketed.

And they never seem to point to any success they've had in solving the social ills they purport to (thus always resulting in a hypocritical clamoring for more money and funding).

It is exactly like the laughable Keynesian economists, whose economic policies have spectacularly failed to combat the great recession, but still have the gall to demand the taxpayer "didn't pay enough, because if they did THEN our policies would have worked."

In short, the irony is that if we were to use GENUINE critical thinking, we'd look at all those academic left champions of critical thinking, see that they have made virtually NO progress in their OWN respective fields, and empirically deduce they not only have failed, but are con-artists, charlatans, and parasites cowardly using "critical thinking" as a means to avoid working real jobs in the real world so they may continue to live off of the rest of us.  So the next time you hear an academian, a liberal arts graduate, or any other variety of leftist boast about their "critical thinking skills" tell them the truth.  Critical thinking as a skill is no more impressive than wiping your own ass.  And sadly, most of them lack the intelligence to do either.

A related somewhat response
Amazon Affiliate

From Our Millennial College Graduate Agent in the Field

A relatively recent college graduate wanted to report about how his attendance of college had NO bearing on his future life.  This is a guest post written by him:

The Reality of Post College Graduates

The reality of college in today's modern world is this: college doesn't do a whole lot.

I'm a living and breathing example of this. In December of 2012, I graduated with a Bachelor's degree in economics. In February of 2013, I took a job as a computer engineer. In February of 2016 (with one additional job in between), I am now a guy who makes his living off the Internet, whether it be via my blog, books, web design, or whatever else floats my boat.

I recently reactivated my personal Facebook account after several years, because I'm now living in Eastern Europe (it's huge here). I was missing social opportunities, so despite my usual protests to engaging in any personal social media, I jumped back into the fray.

When I logged back into Facebook for the first time, what do you think I was greeted with?

Profiles of old friends who were kicking ass in life, using their degrees to their fullest potential and maximizing their college investment?


Profiles of old friends were who still meandering in the same jobs they had in college, or had become baristas after realizing that their worthless degree was not even worthless - but actually a negative return on investment for their life as a whole.

If you guessed the first option, then go back to reading your Liberal Arts textbook, I wish you the best.

For those of you who chose the second, allow me to elaborate on my story a bit.


I'm now 24 years old, and as I said, I have a degree in economics but ended up working as a computer engineer. This is the first red flag that the collegiate system in America is broken.

In what world can some 21 year old kid with a degree in economics start working on 1 million dollar+ computer systems as his first job? They say it all comes down to connections, and this was exactly the case for me. I had a great friend and mentor in high school - when I started working in a computer shop at the age of 14, he was the head salesman. We struck up a fast bond and he is still one of my best friends to this day, despite a ten year age gap.

He talked me up to his bosses at the engineering job, and I walked into the interview knowing it was mine provided I didn't come off as a total moron.

Needless to say, I got it.

I never was asked what my degree was in. Not once, in a two hour long interview, with four panelists. The piece of paper that I had invested the last three and a half years of my life (and $100k, give or take - and I went to a public state school!) did not matter one bit.

Yet, my entire life I was indoctrinated to think that it was. I should mention that there is some truth to that - they may have not given me a shot if I didn't have the piece of paper proving that I could take orders and listen. However, the proof is in the pudding. You don't need a degree to start a career - but the real lesson to learn here is that you should never get a worthless degree.

To illustrate that, let's look at a few of my other friends.


Is a very cute, now 24 year old girl. She left the original university where we started college together after a year and a half to return to her hometown, which is a big tourist hotspot. In school, she was studying Journalism and Media Studies.

In her hometown, she took a job at a large hotel as a check-in clerk. She was making $15 an hour, give or take. Five years later, she has finally finished her degree, and still works in the hotel. She now makes $22 an hour, give or take.

Despite her dreams of being a sportscaster and a writer, I can promise you that I write more on a daily basis than she likely has in the last year.


Was a good friend of mine for several years. He was a Marine Biology major, and a pretty good one at that. He had strong grades in all of the hard classes like organic chemistry, physics, etc.

Max started working at Petco during our junior year at school. At 24 years of age, after 5 years of study - he still works at Petco.


Is someone I still keep in pretty consistent touch with. She got a Sociology degree. Right after graduating, she moved back home. She then found a job that paid her about $14 an hour as a social worker. She hated it and said it was "too hard", so she took a job at a coffee shop instead.

It was, in her words, "Less stressful and more fun."

Now, she is engaged to be married and will tie the knot at the end of this year. Most likely, she'll be pregnant within a year and never work another day in her life again (provided her future husband has a degree worth that provides more than a barista job).

This means that she threw away all of her parents money and their Sociology for a job making coffee.


Even those who have strong personalities are not immune to society's shames and methods.

From a young age, it is quite clear to any young person growing up in America that you must go to college. Especially as a man - you are made to believe is the only way you can get a girl, the only way to provide, that you are far less of a man if you lack a college degree.

In reality, having a silly Liberal Arts degree in LGBT Studies makes you less of a man.

I'm not going to preach that you should or shouldn't go to college - but what I will preach is that you should think very carefully about throwing down six figures or more on a piece of paper that won't get you a job beyond making a latte (also remember: a Civil Engineering degree from a random state school is likely more valuable than a LGBT degree from Harvard). In addition to that, even if the job is has some prestige and sex appeal to it, if it only pays $18 an hour - is it really worth it? There are plenty of options out there that pay far, far better, won't require four years of your life, won't require a ransom worth a 20% downpayment on a new home, and won't suck you into the system designed to keep you in debt and working for the rest of your life.

Because it doesn't end after the college degree. Next comes the house, and it best be in a good suburb. Then you need the nice cars to look good in the driveway, even if you only drive down the street to work. Then comes the kids and the private school, then ultimately - their college education.

I started to get sucked into this after I started my first job. I bought a nice car, that, coupled with the insurance payments, cost me $600 a month (plus premium gas!). I considered buying a condo that would have meant a monthly mortgage equivalent to half of my take-home salary.


Because I was told that was just how it was. That this is what it meant to be American.

The best advice I can possibly give to anyone is to think for themselves. Look at me now. I'm now living abroad, writing this from a cafe in Poland. I make my living running my own business. I am my own free man.

And that piece of paper that says "Bachelor's in Economics" has nothing to do with it.

Now that's true freedom.

If all these kids had read Worthless, none of this would have happened....I also want to know if Susan is hot because I have a job for her that pays more than $14 per hour.

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Episode #147 of The Clarey Podcast!

Dirty Harriet and stories from Rapid City
White and Asian males fight diversity at Intel
How diversity hurts us all
What REAL minorities heroes are we missing out on?


In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!

Link to "The Real Lone Ranger" aka "Bass Reeves."

The SJW Black List

Looks like Voxday is fighting fire with fire by outing and putting together a list of all the SJW's who like to dox people.

Monday, April 25, 2016

Prom is "Uneconomic"

Provide you useful, helpful SAEG since 2005:

Only Blacks Created Stuff in America

I don't know how long this will last, but I found it interesting that when searching for a mural of American inventors, Bing's search algorithms went ape-shit affirmative-actiony and produced this for an image search.

I took a screen shot for posterity.

At first I thought "Bing was Broken," but then it dawned on me with the universal and omnipresent push to plug diversity, minorities, etc., between academia, the media, and the government, I would not be surprised that the logical search algorithm assumes you are looking for black American inventors and not the traditional American inventors. 

Regardless, touche leftist, multiculturalist, revisionist, marxists.  Touche!

Cappy vs. Feminism on "Crush the Street"

My latest interview with Ken over at Crush the Street.  We talk about feminism, talking past their "victim game" and calling them out for the liars, thieves, parasites and cowards that they are.

Big Oil Redeux

Another little tidbit to bookmark lieutenants and economists. 

Remember when leftists call Exxon and BP "big oil" that those are PRIVATE companies.  They pale in comparison to the GOVERNMENT OWNED OIL COMPANIES of Mexico, Venezuela, and (the largest one) Saudi Arabia's Aramco.  Aramco has a market value of $2 trillion dollars.

By comparison, Exxon only has a market cap of $350 billion.

Now I know "The Maths" are hard for leftists, so don't expect them to understand advanced concepts like "market capitalization," "billion" or the number 3.  But all you have to do next time is print off this here little post, put it in front of them, and then walk away.  You'll have won the debate and can move on with your life.

Saturday, April 23, 2016

Cappys Black Hill Adventure!

Remember, Amy Schumer is Not Intended for You

She is intended for low information people.

Obama and the Constitution

New sponsor ladies and gentlemen.  Daniel Alman has put together a compendium of all of Obama's violations of the constitution, law, and everything else.  I find it a very handy reference book to have in case people say, "OK, name ONE time Obama violated the constitution."  And since there's been many you are at a loss to conjure up just one.

Well no more, here's an entire list you can simply pull out and go through one by one:

Friday, April 22, 2016

Today in Awesomeness

WWI's stuffed penguin flying mascot pulled from wreckage.

The Molyneux Caller "Sigh"

In my latest podcast episode I tiraded against the callers into Stefan Molyneux's show who, when cornered about their hypocrisy or weakness, exhaust the exasperating and patented "sigh" which drives my blood pressure up.

If you listen to this episode of Stefan Molyneux's show you will find exactly what I'm talking about at 1:09:15 (for the next 10 seconds) and the PERFECT example at 2:30:05 (for the next painful wishy washy 20 seconds after that).

Again, I am a big fan of the Stefan Molyneux show, but I just couldn't let this itch go much further without scratching it.

New Blogroll Addition : Director Blue

You will read.
You will visit.
You will enjoy.
Conformance is mandatory.
Compliance is not optional.
You will obey!

Thursday, April 21, 2016

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Who is Candace Owens of Social Autopsy?

Looks like the Honey Badgers are on the case.

Rant of the Year

Though it is only April:

Black Moms Using Black Boys to Rake in a Payday

I'm starting to wonder if these mothers really love their sons or just view them as a vehicle to sue the police when their "dindu nuffin" gangster son (that they failed to raise properly AND without a father) gets in trouble with the cops.

Yeah yeah, remember, we don't need no STIIIINNNNNKING FATHERS!

What About "Big Oil" Now?

I like watching the normies and leftists react to the oil industry because it not only shows how completely clueless and deluded they are about the oil industry, but it belies just how fantastically stupid they are.  Usually, once every 5 years or so, some journalist will crack open Exxon's annual report and decry that it made "$40 billion" in EEEEVIL profits while kids in Durkadurkastan live off of a nickle every five years and eat flies for nourishment.  Naturally the leftists and normies are incensed, and demand something be done about it.  But if we're really lucky, once every 10 years they'll parade their stupidity for all to see and float around that deader-than-a-door-nail idea to "boybott big oil" on "one" day.

However, that's usually when oil prices are high and thus, naturally, when profits are also at all time highs.  But what about when oil goes to all time lows?  Does the left report on the losses or drops in revenue of "Big Oil?"

No, of course not, because that doesn't fit the narrative.  And so to keep the sheeple in line, the media will never report how "Big Oil" is doing today, now that oil is about a 1/3rd of what it used to be.  But I will.

In short it doesn't look good.

Exxon came out "the best" out of the Big Oil companies I looked at.  Their revenues are down about 40% from last year and their profit has been cut in half since 2014.

British Petroleum experienced a similar drop in revenue, but actually posted a loss of $6 billion.

And "hated Halliburton" (which recognized your hate and has since moved their HQ to Dubai, don't worry, you won't be able to tax them soon) also experienced a loss:

Even Baker Hughes (the fracking half brother of "Big Oil") posted a loss for 2015.

I could go on about how this is another example of leftist bias in the media and how Americans are idiotic lemmings sopping up whatever propaganda is put in front of them, but we all know that is pointless.  I merely want you to book mark this post, or perhaps share it with people on the facebook or teh interwebz so the next time oil prices go sky high and "Big Oil" has those hated at vilified "record profits" you can pull up this ole post, shove it in the sheeple's faces and tell them to have a cup of STFU.