Category Archives: Affirmative Action

James Damore Confronts The Hags of High Tech (& Loses)

Affirmative Action, Business, Feminism, Gender, Political Correctness, Technology

NEW COLUMN: “James Damore Confronts The Hags of High Tech (& Loses)” is the current column, now on Townhall.com. An excerpt:

Of the many men who toil in high-tech, few are as heroic as James Damore, the young man who penned the manifesto “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” In it, Damore calmly and logically exposed the tyrannical ideological edifice erected to perpetuate the myth that, in aggregate, women and men are identical in aptitude and interests, and that “all disparities in representation are due to oppression.”

 …

… In high-tech, almost nothing is as politically precious as a woman with some aptitude. There’s no end to which companies will go to procure women and help them succeed, often to the detriment of technically competent men and women who must do double duty. Their procurement being at a premium, concepts such as “sucking it up” and soldiering on are often anathema to coddled distaff.

A woman in high-technology can carp constantly about … being a woman in high-tech. Her gender—more so than her capabilities—is what defines her and endears her to her higher-ups, for whom she’s a notch in the belt.

While male engineers—and, indubitably, some exceptional women—are hired to be hard at work designing and shipping tangible products; women in high tech, in the aggregate, are free to branch out; to hone a niche as a voice for their gender.

Arisen online and beyond is a niche-market of nudniks (nags): Women talking, blogging, vlogging, writing and publishing about women in high-technology or their absence therefrom; women beating the tom-tom about discrimination and stereotyping, but saying absolutely nothing about the technology they presumably love and help create.

Young women, in particular, are pioneers of this new, intangible, but lethal field of meta-technology: kvetching (complaining) about their absence in technology with nary a mention of their achievements in technology.

The hashtag “MicrosoftWomen” speaks to the solipsistic universe created by females in high-tech and maintained by the house-broken males entrusted with supporting the menacing matriarchy. Are these ladies posting about the products they’ve partaken in designing and shipping? Not often. Women in high-tech are more likely to be tweeting out about … being women in high-tech. Theirs is a self-reverential and self-referential universe. …

… Read the Rest. The complete column, “James Damore Confronts The Hags of High Tech (& Loses),” is now on Townhall.com.

This column can be read also on Unz ReviewDaily Caller, American Thinker, and others, where The Mercer Column usually appears. And it’s always posted, eventually, on IlanaMercer.com, under Articles. Please share.

Black Man Makes Anti-Semitic Threats Over Breakup With #Whitegirl

Affirmative Action, Anti-Semitism, Education, Judaism & Jews, Race, Racism

A lot of the recent anti-semitism came from a black man, enraged over a breakup.

Thankfully he, Juan Thompson, didn’t call her “bitch.” While making “at least eight of the hoax bomb threats against Jewish American institutions,” Thompson of Missouri (who had worked for The Intercept, no less), tweeted out missives like this one:

“Know any good lawyers? Need to stop this nasty/racist #whitegirl I dated who sent a bomb threat in my name & wants me to be raped in jail.”

Inciting racial hatred against whites is just par for the course, reflexive (imbibed in schools, with the aid of soviet-style doctrinal teachers and teaching aids. “Systemic racism” is one).

As Into The Cannibal’s Pot documents in detail, honky is not the repository of the white hot hate that kills. Colin Flaherty’s “White Girl Bleed A Lot” does the same.

Having implicated Donald Trump in creating atmospheric conditions conducive to anti-semitism, the repugnant Anti-Defamation League has remained unapologetic:

Evan Bernstein, the New York regional director at the Anti-Defamation League, said that Jewish “communities are hurting”.
“There are many more JCC bomb threats that have not been solved,” Mr Bernstein told journalists on Friday.
“We hope all law enforcement will continue to be diligent.”

You don’t represent this Jew!

What About Donald Trump’s Security Detail? Has IT Been Infiltrated?

Affirmative Action, Donald Trump, Homeland Security, Islam, Middle East, Terrorism

The shooter who assassinated the Russian envoy to Turkey, Andrey G. Karlov, is “described by Turkish officials as a 22-year-old off-duty police officer.”

Off duty or on duty, does the security detail of President-elect Donald Trump include Muslims who may be similarly “awakened”? These budding Jihadis are being flooded with images of Syrians dying in a civil war between the American-backed ISIS rebels, as against Bashar Assad and Vladimir Putin. Eric Margolis:

[T]he US has long aided ISIS and still sees it as a potent weapon against the Assad government. Why else would it take the US and its Arab and Kurdish foot soldiers so long to move against ISIS strongholds at Raqqa and Mosul– which are, as this writer knows, only a taxi-ride away? ISIS is a rag-tag bunch of 20-something amateur Rambos, not the Wehrmacht.
One likely answer is that imperial Washington is totally confused over whom to support and how to do it. The bewildering fracas between Sunnis, Shia, Kurds, Arabs, Yazidis, assorted Christians, ISIS wildmen, egged on the US, Israel, Turkey, Russia, France, Britain, Lebanon, Jordan, the oil Arabs is just too much for Washington’s ill-educated, or often downright dim policy makers. …

Backing ISIS.


Be careful.


No place for Prince of Peace.


BHO goes a golfing:


Merkel must go.


Be a good dhimmi:


Fake News?


RELATED: Islamic Infiltration: How Deep, How Wide?

Poor Whites Will Be Further Disenfranchised Under Hillary

Affirmative Action, Constitution, Hillary Clinton, IMMIGRATION, Race, Racism

Disenfranchisement Of Poor Whites Under Hillary” is the new column, now on  Townhall.com America’s “top source for conservative commentary.” An excerpt:

“Strengthening families” is big in Hillary Clinton’s immigration platform—not American families, but families of undocumented Democrats. To that end—and “within her first 100 days in office”—Hillary has vowed to “introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship.” These newly minted Democrats will be speedily naturalized (likely in time for Hillary’s second term). “All families” will be granted “affordable health care,” a privilege very many Americans are without.

Yet another political grant of privilege Americans don’t have, unless pigmentally endowed, is affirmative action. The throngs of immigrants and refugees—whose entry into the US Mrs. Clinton will accelerate, and whose numbers she’ll increase, should she become the next president—will benefit from affirmative action.  

Although the federal bureaucratic behemoth acts otherwise, the American Constitution “gave the government no license to set quotas for hiring personnel by private enterprise or admitting students to institutions of higher learning,” remarked Richard Pipes in “Property and Freedom: The Story of How Through The Centuries Private Ownership has Promoted Liberty and the Rule of Law” (2000). The institutionalized American quota culture has been imposed by administrative fiat, courtesy of “The Power Elite” and the engorged administrative state under which Americans labor.  

For the purposes of conferring affirmative-action privileges, civil servants have compiled over the decades an ever-accreting list of protected groups, “as distinct from whites.” In addition to blacks, the list entails mainly minorities such as Hispanics—Chileans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Dominicans, and Mexicans—Pacific Islanders, American Indians, Asian/Indians, Filipinos, Vietnamese and Cambodians.  

Affirmative action was ostensibly crafted to correct “the injustices endured by black Americans at the hands of their own government … not only during the period of slavery but also in the Jim Crow era that followed.” The policy took a very different turn, starting in 1965, “when new immigration laws dramatically altered the demographic makeup of the U.S.” In short, the policies of racial redress were extended to all “people of color,” shifting “from remediation toward discrimination, this time against whites.” 

It goes without saying that “those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs,” averred Senator Jim Webb, in a 2010 Wall Street Journal article, titled “Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege.” “The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.”  …

… Read the rest. Disenfranchisement Of Poor Whites Under Hillary” is  now on Townhall.com