Over and over again, I see “conservatives” using the term “Islamist” to describe Muslims who act badly. When I see this, and when possible, I ask them, “What is an Islamist?”
I did this on Quora, and here are the results:
It wasn’t long ago that I had a minor debate with a leftist relative. I used the term “Oriental” to describe East Asians. She said I should use the term “Asian” instead – because people deserve to be called what they call themselves. Let’s use that principle here; I’ve never heard of a “political Muslim” refer to himself as an “Islamist.”
What do they call political Christians? I’ve never heard the term “Christianist.” What about political Hindus? Political Jews are pretty much called Zionists – and most people in the West support that.
Why is it only Muslims who merit this kind of treatment, where the dangerous ones are excluded from the larger “Muslim” community, and given their own category?
I’ll tell you why. It’s because ALL real Islam is “Islamist.” By its very nature, it’s a political ideology – but leftists can’t bear the thought of condemning all Muslims in this way. The term “Islamist” is a mental trick. It’s a sneaky psychological deceit to make it seem like “mainstream Islam” is not a threat. It’s only the “Islamists” we need to worry about, but “normal Muslims” are harmless and wholesome.
“Conservatives” who buy into this farce are either leftist infiltrators or just plain stupid. Every time we see or hear the term “Islamist,” we need to loudly object.
Warning! The following video depicts gratuitous killing. Don’t watch it if you’re easily disturbed by such scenes. It disturbed me, but I watched it to the end – so that I could write about it.
If you did watch until the end, you might have noticed that at least one of the executioners was having fun killing his own countrymen, his fellow Muslims. It was a game to him.
If you doubt the stories about decapitated babies, and other atrocities committed on October 7th, consider this: If Hamas considers the lives of its OWN CITIZENS to be as worthless as we see in this video, how little value must they attribute to the lives of Jews?
The demands of Western politicians, including Joe Biden, that Israel adhere to “international law,” are not only misplaced, but grossly misplaced. Such demands are so ridiculous that they need to be ignored, and I hope they are ignored. We cannot demand that only one side adhere to “international law,” while the other side does not even recognized such guidelines or standards – except when it’s politically expedient for them to do so.
It’s true that Western nations also have a history of executing deserters. Generally speaking, I oppose such executions; most wars are fought for the benefit of the elites. Today, they’re typically fought for government bureaucrats and corporations.
In Gaza, this is certainly the case. Hamas wants to cling to power for the benefit of its own elite – who live in luxury far from the fighting. Gazans, who suffer from a low average IQ (partly due to widescale cousin-marriages) might not realize it, but they’re much better off under Israeli rule than under Hamas. This invasion, painful as it is, has the potential of greatly improving the lives of Gazans in the long run. The United States has invaded countries to liberate them from lesser atrocities; it has no moral right to demand a ceasefire.
I do feel badly for the men who were killed, and for their families. They were truly stuck between a rock and a hard place. They did what they felt needed to be done, what the invading army DEMANDED that they do – and this is what happened to them. We can assume the worst for the women who were caught trying to flee.
Many innocents have died in this war and will continue to do so. At this point, we can only hope that their sacrifice will not have been completely in vain. We can hope that some good will come of it.
My wish list would include:
Greater awareness of the evils of Islam, and greater pushback against it.
Greater security for Israelis, with a more secure border.
Greater freedom for Gazans, including freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
Greater pushback against mass migration in Western lands, hopefully culminating in mass deportations.
A wider recognition that, just as Jews have a right to live in peace and security, so too do Whites. This should not be controversial.
White House occupant Joe Biden has recently promoted a “two-state solution” to the Israel/Palestinian conflict. From MSN:
On the 18th (local time), President Joe Biden of the United States visited Israel and proposed a ‘two-state solution’ by establishing a Palestinian state to solve the long-standing conflict between Israel and Palestine. He also pledged $100 million in humanitarian aid to Gaza and the West Bank.
According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), on the 18th, President Biden said at a press conference after a meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Israel, “We must continue to pursue a solution where both Israeli and Palestinian residents can live safely with dignity and peace. This means a ‘two-state solution’.” The two-state solution refers to the coexistence of Israel and Palestine as two separate states.
In other words, it makes perfect sense to have an autonomous state right next to the tiny State of Israel. This autonomous state will be a Palestinian-nationalist state, whose stated purpose is to eradicate Israel, kill all the Jews, and impose Islamic law upon all residents…
If this makes sense to Mr. Biden, then I’d like to propose another two-state solution – based upon Biden’s own words:
President Joe Biden denounced white supremacy as the “most dangerous terrorist threat” to the nation in his commencement address to Howard University’s graduating class Saturday.
“White supremacy … is the single most dangerous terrorist threat in our homeland,” Biden said.
Unlike Islamic Palestinian nationalism, White-nationalists very seldom promote the eradication of other races, they very rarely descend upon non-White people and murder babies, and they have no “holy book” that makes them believe that their destiny is to rule the world. On the contrary, the vast majority of White-nationalists only want to rule over THEMSELVES.
Therefore, if a two-state solution makes sense for Israel and Palestine, how much more so would it make sense for multi-racial America and White-advocates. Set aside a portion of the United States, and grant autonomy to White people.
If it’s good for the Palestinians, then it’s good for Whites – but consistency is too much to expect from our current White House resident.
After almost 6 years of driving rideshare, about 3 of those years full-time, I’ve become an expert on passenger behavior. Now that I’m retired, I’m free to share my observations.
Generally speaking, rideshare drivers appreciate it when passengers are gentle with doors. Newer cars, which we are usually required to use for this service, require only the gentlest push to close the doors; anything more than that can easily be considered “slamming.”
What’s the harm in slamming? Firstly, the weather-strips take a beating. I had to replace the weather-strip on the right rear door twice – at $70 a pop. Secondly, in some model cars, the seatbelt doesn’t consistently retract, and slamming the door means that there will be indentations where the seatbelt is crushed against the door. Thirdly, slamming can be loud, and it can be annoying having to hear it dozens of times a day. Fourthly, the sensor can get damaged. This was the case in my most recent (rental) car; the “door open” alarm would sound randomly, and the rear right door would have to be opened and closed again.
Not all demographics behave equally when it comes to door-slamming. Here’s what I’ve noticed:
Latinos are, by far, the most respectful toward our cars. As a rule, they’re gentle with the doors. This only applies to Latinos who were born outside the United States. Those who were born in the United States behave the same as other Americans. That is to say, they can go either way.
Women are much worse than men. While travelling, I had an Uber driver bring this up to me, and I’m sure many other rideshare drivers have noticed this phenomenon.
East Asians are slightly worse than Whites, and blacks are slightly better than Whites. I think this latter observation might only apply to the Portland area and similar areas. I say this because the native blacks of Portland seem to be more friendly overall. Sadly, I’ve seen this change recently as more East Coast blacks move in. Many of my most pleasant passengers have been black women.
Any group of 3 or 4 (4 being the maximum for most cars) passengers is going to slam the doors. I don’t know how such a group of Latinos would behave, as I’ve never had one – but if you see such a group (non-Latino) about to get into your car, you’re about to get slammed, almost guaranteed. If it’s a group of women, then God help you.
I’m not going to share my theories in this post. If you do have a theory, share it in comments.
In case you’re wondering why I haven’t written about the atrocities in Israel, and the justified Israeli reaction, it’s because the subject has already been written about a million times. I really can’t add much to what has already been said.
But actually, I can:
Biden sent arms to, and spoke in favor of, Israel. For this, he’s facing fierce criticism. McDonalds Israel distributed free food to Israeli soldiers. As a result, there are calls for a boycott against the franchise. Everybody, including top politicians and corporate CEOs, has an opinion – and it appears that there are no “safe opinions” in this matter. No matter what you say, you’re going to offend somebody.
Isn’t this the essence of multiculturalism? “Many cultures in one land.” In other words, many points of view, and many loyalties, in one land.
Establishment leftists have, to a certain degree, become spoiled; they’ve gotten used to being mouthpieces for official “truths” and approved opinions. In recent days, they’ve discovered what many of us have known for years: One cannot be pro-(fill in the ethnicity) without being anti-(fill in the other ethnicity). Today, “pro-Jewish” means “anti-Palestinian,” and “pro-Palestinian” means “anti-Jewish.” There’s very little middle ground.
Since Jews are, by and large, more White than Palestinians, Establishment Left support for the latter was predictable. We would have been shocked if Yale student groups did NOT come out in favor of Hamas. We would have scratched our heads if BLM had not done the same. Both did so – and found out that their “approved truth” isn’t necessarily “approved” anymore. Both organizations find themselves in murky waters of their own making.
Jews are a nation, and Palestinians are a nation. America is no longer a nation, and (increasingly) neither are the historic countries of Western Europe. Western countries have lost their nationhood due to multiculturalism, and the mass migration that comes with it.
It’s patriotic for a Jew to support his own people, and it’s patriotic for a Palestinian to support his – but there is no single patriotic stance, in this conflict, for Americans. The official view is that pretty much anybody who lives here is “American,” whether legally or not. Officially, the opinions of hordes of illegal immigrants, who just crossed the Rio Grande, are as valid as the opinions of descendants of the Mayflower. Increasingly, those illegal immigrants, or at least their children, vote in our elections. Unlike founding-stock Americans, these invaders form strong voting blocks. In a democracy, what this means is that we’ve allowed them to rule over us.
Henry Kissinger, recently interviewed, opined that Europe had allowed too many foreigners to enter. At 100 years old, he can say anything he wants. It was pointed out that the same is true of America, and Kissinger should have said so. Perhaps he considered that too controversial. A true American patriot would have found NOTHING too controversial when it comes to the future of his nation. Perhaps he realizes that we no longer have a nation.
For now, Establishment Left elders still cling to old alliances, and a few old values. As they die out, Israel will find itself without allies. As a Jew, this is not a pleasant thought to ponder.
I found this excellent post on Twitter (now X) from my old friend (and scholar) Curt Doolittle. I’m reposting it here with his permission. I’ve corrected obvious typos, and tried to keep the style the same as the original. Not capitalizing certain words appears to be a stylistic choice, maybe inspired by HBD Girl, if any of y’all remember her. Here’s the original Tweet.
Just for clarity since this nonsense in genetics props up on the right now and then.
Preface 0 – Until very recently we did not understand how much of our behavior was genetic, how much cultural, and how much education and experience. And worse, until now we did not know the differences between the sexes, classes, ethnicities and races. And it turns out that the pre-war academics were correct, and the postware pseudoscience was just another attempt at a pseudoscientific religious conversion and nothing more (the feminine leftist sequence we call the marxist series.) So in my work I assume most of us are bots. And that while there are bad actors and good actors in every group, we must acknowledge both may just be bots, and we cannot assume we are all the same at all, and that we must alter our institutions to accommodate those who think they act morally but in fact act immorally and often criminally.
The Jews 1 – The genesis of the arab-jewish population PREDATES the ethnogenisis of the Jews.
2 – The Jews and Arabs share the same genesis at the intersection of the horn of Africa and Yemen.
3- In the literature this group is referred to as ‘Marsh Arabs’, Haplogroup J.
4 – Jewish reproductive insularity is a property of the diaspora, not their genesis or ethnogenesis. All diasporic groups, largely male, chose local women for wives and returned to inbreeding.
5 – The difference between Ashkenazi (europeanized) and the other Jewish groups is 14 IQ points, or one standard deviation. This is the same as the difference between Europeans and all other MENA populations (99-100 vs 84)
6 – The current IQ in Israel is measured at 95, which is what we expect from hybridized european and middle eastern demographics. As of 2005, 61% of Israeli Jews were of full or partial Mizrahi/Sephardi ancestry, while in a 2015–2016 study 45% of Jewish Israelis identified as such. You will find always and everywhere that group IQ is a product of the average IQ’s of the primary racial groups.
7 – From this IQ difference we observe something quite interesting, in that Jewish success outside of Europe, by non-European Jews is not attributable to an advantage in intelligence, but an advantage in group discipline favoring ingroup trust, ingroup cooperation, nepotism, high investment parenting, and occupations that produce higher returns. (Something I have covered in detail – but I won’t explain here). And the jewish advantage in europe is the combination of both – plus european’s permissiveness in baiting-into-hazard because of our first principle of individual sovereignty and choice (‘free will’). So europeans are extremely vulnerable to the Jewish group strategy, because it is the female group strategy, and we have only recently (in the past century and a half) given both jews and women, who share that group strategy, access to economy and polity without suppressing the female means of antisocial behavior – despite that it did exist in our common law before the Positive Law movement begun with Bentham and industrialized by the Jewish theorists Rez, Kelsen, Dworkin and Hart.
8 – In my work it’s become increasingly clear that the middle east is closer to female *cognition* than male (it’s complicated, but just take my word for it). That the one-SD lower IQ means half the population is unfit for self-determination in modern economies.
9 – Asheknazi IQ is what we would expect from introgression of female european(R1a/b/I) cognition into marsh-arab(J) cognition, followed by aggressive selection for memory, literacy, and numeracy. And I do not feel like writing yet another dissertation on sex differences in cognition particularly in time preference, categorization, valuation, verbal acuity, mathematics and speech patterns. (The most interesting aspect other than verbal acuity, storytelling, critique, and victimhood seeking, is the rather obvious difference between european and ashkenazi mathematical behavior, which mirrors that male vs female difference in mathematical processing.)
10 – As most people who follow me for a while, and can tolerate this much truth-before-face, I do not see anything fundamentally wrong with our civilization other than the introgression without mandatory assimilation of non-europeans, jews and muslims and women who have the very opposite group strategy, and one that has obviously failed them in producing coherent civilizations, core states, modern states, institutions, and economies, and they are quite literally at war against our institutions and traditions that require trust and responsibility they are either uwilling or unable, or both, to bear. (I don’ t like what I have learned)
As far as I can tell and I don’t know anyone living or dead who has anywhere near my understanding of these matters, we can modify our law to prevent the female, jewish, muslim, method of antisocial behavior, anti-political behavior, and anti-economic behavior.
And we can give women a separate house of government, and restore the senate to its original charter, thus restoring the government as a market for resolution of differences, and the production of commons between the classes who have different ambitions and interests as well as very different cognition.
We’ve learned a great deal over the past two decades and it has pretty much overthrown the entire pseudoscientific corpus begun by the jews and spread by the marxists as the marxists.
It’s just the female mind trying to socially construct an alternate reality that is free of scarcity, and which preys upon the host (men, europeans) who do act in correspondences with both scarcity and reality.
It’s just women. Or rather. It’s just the female mind. And the Jews ‘are all cognitively female’ for all intents and purposes.
So don’t get angry.
Let’s fix our laws.
Let’s fix our education.
And try to be happy together.
Despite the fact that women never admit they are wrong and rarely if ever change their behavior without the social pressure (threat) to do so. Or put differently, a criminal never gives us up his (or her) crimes without threat of punishment.
When it became obvious that Uber could not complete my background check (see previous post), I decided to resort to Lyft. In my early days of rideshare, I’d driven both platforms. This was almost seven years ago, and both Uber and Lyft provided decent income. I had settled on Uber, and drove exclusively for them for the next six years or so.
Unlike Uber, it was easy to get approved for Lyft; their background check (less extensive than Uber) only took a couple of hours to complete. I was also offered a generous bonus for returning to Lyft: $700 if I could complete a set number or rides within a two-week period. This was easy for me, as it was my full-time job.
Everything was downhill after that. I soon found out that Lyft was taking about two-thirds of the fare that passengers paid, and sometimes much more. One woman was charged $60 for a trip to the airport, due to heavy traffic. Of that, my take was only $14. I started telling passengers of this at every opportunity. Every day, at least one of them would tell me that they would switch to Uber; they had previously been under the impression that Lyft treated its drivers better.
I discovered that Lyft hadn’t raised its pay for drivers in over six years. A short ride (typically anything less than 8 minutes or so) nets us $3.75 – and this will vary from state to state. It doesn’t matter how many miles we drive to pick up the passenger; unlike Uber, Lyft does not pay anything extra for long pickups (at least not in Oregon). If I happened to be in a “surge zone” when accepting the ride, I could get an extra $2-$3 dollars for a trip, sometimes as much as $5. During peak hours, typically late at night, there were more generous bonuses – but I refused to drive at night, partly due to the increased crime and partly because of poor visibility. It’s noteworthy that Lyft is an extremely woke company, and strongly supports the policies that lead to higher crime. More on this later. Here’s a typical text from Lyft:
As stated, Lyft doesn’t pay for long pickups, but this doesn’t stop it from sending us ridiculous requests such as this one:
This is a good place to point out that Lyft fudges (IE. LIES ABOUT) pickup times. If the app claims that it will take 18 minutes to reach the passenger, in reality, it will take 20 minutes or more – which translates into almost half an hour of driving for $3.75.
It gets worse. Lyft’s built-in navigation program is so bad that it’s actually dangerous to use, at least for me. I was forced to use Ways, which works much better. Unfortunately, alternative navigation programs cover up the Lyft app – which means that when new requests are added to the queue, while I’m with a passenger, I can’t see the details unless I manually open the Lyft app. This creates a distraction as I’m driving, and it can happen repeatedly, often as I’m merging or making a difficult turn. If I don’t manually view the Lyft app to see what they’re sending me, I will have accepted the request by default – and we get in trouble if we cancel. At least Lyft does not currently hold us to any particular acceptance-rate; we can reject as many requests as we want, apparently with no consequences. I do suspect that a low acceptance rate leads to fewer requests being sent our way. I can’t prove it, but it definitely appeared that way to me.
At first, I was driving my own (hybrid) car, and it got excellent fuel economy. Due to the fact that I was a seasonal driver, I decided to sell my car, and rent one. Originally, I was going to rent a Tesla from Uber. That didn’t work out, and I ended up renting from Lyft. The process for renting a car, as stated in the app and on the Lyft website, is erroneous. If you follow those instructions, you’ll never get a car. The only way I found out about this was by physically visiting the rental location and speaking to the staff there. They explained how it really works, and, after a week or so, I was able to rent a car from them. All they had available was conventional gasoline cars. I ended up getting about 30 miles/gallon. The staff at the rental location were helpful, courteous, and accommodating throughout the three months I rented the car.
The poor pay meant that I cursed Lyft every day I drove for them. It’s a greedy, soulless, immoral corporation masquerading as a socially responsible, progressive, force for good. From what I’ve seen every Lyft office has an outdoor game prominently displayed near the entrance, as a way of saying, “We’re a fun company to work for.” I’ve never seen anybody actually USING those bean-bag games. Inside, there are rainbow flags, and other symbols of wokeness. Every gay-pride parade has a Lyft booth. If Lyft spent less on rainbow flags and other virtue-signaling, perhaps it could pay its drivers a fair wage. Lyft associates contribute heavily to the Democrat party and Democrat politicians. They do not contribute to Republicans.
I made the above point, about virtue-signaling, to many passengers (most of whom were leftists, being Portland). They were overwhelmingly receptive. I had destroyed their naivety about Lyft, and reaffirmed their conviction that corporations rarely care about the working man. It gave me great satisfaction to work AGAINST Lyft even as I worked “for” it.
It’s not only about unfair pay. It’s also about a systemic lack of honesty from Lyft. I already mentioned how they fudge pickup times – but they also consistently lie about “average wait times” between rides. Here’s what I’d typically see on my screen after dropping off a passenger (the top sum is my earnings for the day so far):
I would see this every day, and sometimes several times a day – and I could sit in my car waiting for half an hour, as the app told me the average wait-time was only one minute. I soon learned to turn off the engine and make myself comfortable. Sometimes, I would take a walk or a nap. The “estimated wait times” mean absolutely nothing. I wonder how much fuel drivers have wasted, as their cars sit in idle contributing to Climate Change. I wonder how this fits into Lyft’s “progressive” worldview.
I would often play games on my phone as I waited. As I played those games, more often than not, ads for Lyft would pop up – and the overall message was clear: Lyft is designed specifically for black women. Almost every person depicted on those ads was a black woman (and I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that many of my favorite passengers were black women):
Lyft also misleads drivers about compensation while waiting for passengers. Since Lyft’s estimated arrival times, in the rider app, are notoriously bad, it’s very common for drivers to have to wait; the rider simply wasn’t prepared, because the app told him it would be a few more minutes. Here’s what the driver will see:
Are we really “paid to wait?” Here’s how it works, at least in Oregon:
If the ride is cancelled by the passenger immediately upon our arrival, we get a $2 cancellation fee (unless it was a long pickup, in which case Lyft compensates us more – not for rides, just for cancellations). If the DRIVER cancels immediately, there is no cancellation fee. If the driver cancels after trying to call the passenger, and after a five-minute wait, then he gets $3.02. There is no additional compensation for longer wait times. For example, if the rider tells us, by phone, that he’ll be another few minutes, but never shows up. Even if we end up waiting for 20 minutes, we still only get $3.02. If we wait past the five-minute point, and we do end up completing the ride, we get paid a few cents more for the wait. Bear in mind that the message “You’re paid to wait” appears specifically BEFORE the five-minute period is up. After that, the message changes to “Let’s go. Cancel for no-show.” Is this “getting paid to wait?” What do you think?
If a passenger orders a Lyft, and then cancels after 5 minutes, a $5 cancellation fee is incurred. The driver only gets $2 in such situations – and even that is sometimes withheld.
I once drove to the pickup location for a short ride. It was only about five minutes away. When I got there, no passenger was present, so I tried calling her. There was no answer. I sent her a text, and there was no answer. She texted back a while later, telling me I was in the wrong location, but I had no way of communicating with her effectively except by phone; Edit: There is a way for drivers to type their own texts to riders while waiting, but it’s not always obvious how to do this. Thanks for Haanjo at the Uber forum for clarifying this.
I waited for five minutes, and then cancelled as a no-show – but Lyft would not pay me a cancellation fee. When I inquired about this later, “tech support” told me that the passenger said I left the scene before she had a chance to get to me. There was no recourse and no appeal.
In other words, I was driving for a company that paid slave wages, habitually lied to me, and wasn’t even inclusive of my demographic. Even Uber sometimes shows White men in its ads, though they’re always OLD White men.
When I drove for Uber, I would sometimes encounter situations with unaccompanied minors. Many rideshare drivers do pick up unaccompanied minors, but they’re taking a big risk; if there’s an accident, whether the driver is at fault or not, any injuries the minor may suffer are the driver’s responsibility. Insurance will not help in these situations. The official policy of both Uber and Lyft is that we’re not allowed to take unaccompanied minors, though I’ve read that Uber does now have a solution. This is Lyft’s policy, but they do want drivers to take such rides, as long as the risk is on the drivers. Lyft can always point to its policy and absolve itself of any responsibility. One rider, who used to drive for Lyft, told me he was verbally ENCOURAGED by Lyft to take an unaccompanied minor, since he had a dashcam. This is absurd, since accusations of abuse only represent ONE risk.
When I first encountered an unaccompanied minor this year, I wasn’t thinking clearly, and I cancelled the ride immediately, thinking I could contact Lyft technical support later that night, and have them pay me the cancellation fee – as Uber had done many times for me.
It turned out that Lyft’s technical support for drivers is all but nonexistent. Usually, it can only be reached by text, and the representatives make it abundantly clear that their only priority is to “resolve the issue” and close the ticket. They’re obviously underpaid and apathetic. They’re also extremely poorly trained. I was told that the only way I could get my ($3) cancellation fee in such situations was to remain in the area for a full five minutes, call the passenger (even though I’d just spoke to him face to face) and then cancel. Obviously, this isn’t always possible or safe. What Lyft really wants us to do is either a) take the ride/risk or b) cancel and not receive a cancellation fee. The representatives at “technical support” are not empowered to make any exceptions.
Most Lyft customers, upon learning the truth, would not want to do business with such a sketchy company – but backroom corporate deals have taken the choice away from individual consumers. Much of Lyft’s business comes from corporate partnerships. It has deals with Starbucks, Alaska Airlines, FedEx and many more major employers. Many of my passengers use Lyft because they get a discount from their employers – and those employers often follow similar wage practices as Lyft. This is a situation where wealthy elites form symbiotic relationships in order to exploit the working class. How ironic that today’s leftists so often support an establishment whose policies were the ones that angered Communists of the past to the point of revolution.
Now that I’m officially retired from rideshare, I feel free to write about it. Incidentally, rideshare is one reason it’s been so long since I’ve posted. Keep reading if you want more details.
I drove Uber for about 7 years, the last 3 seasonally, as I spent some of the year in Dominican Republic, where I am now. Uber is strict about conducting annual background checks on its drivers; there have been unfortunate incidents in the past, and it doesn’t want more negative publicity. Each year I’ve driven for Uber, the background check went through without a hitch. It usually takes a day or two…
But not this year. You see, long ago I lived in Michigan for a few months. Michigan recently passed a law whose intention was to make it easier for non-violent ex-felons to reintegrate into society and get jobs. Due to this law, I was not able to get a job driving Uber this year.
Uber can be very lucrative, and even fun – at least in the Portland, Oregon area. Most passengers are nice, and the pay is excellent if you’re willing to put in the hours. I earned good money last year, enough to live off of and to set aside for my months in Dominican Republic.
This year, when I applied for the annual background check, I was told there might be a small delay, of about five days, for those who had once lived in Michigan or Calif0rnia. Those five days came and went, and the background check was still pending. I called, and was told it might be another week. I got this message from support on June 7th:
Thank you for reaching out. I can confirm here that the criminal portion of your background check is currently pending with our third party background check provider, Checkr.
Make sure to keep an eye out for any emails you might receive in case Checkr needs anything else from you, otherwise there’s nothing you need to do at this time.
Depending on where you live, have lived, and the process for county courthouses to obtain records, this can take up to 7 business days to complete, sometimes longer.
Once Checkr is able to complete your report they will send that to us for review.
Additionally, if you live in California or have previously lived in California you may be experiencing delays due to an update to record-keeping policies causing a delay in processing background checks.
I continued to call Uber support, (their support team is generally excellent), and they assured me that it would only be a few more days. The Checkr website kept giving me new estimated dates of completion, which were generally two weeks ahead. I was planning on selling my personal vehicle, and renting a Tesla from Uber, since I only drove seasonally. Uber paid for my trip to the rental center, unaware that they wouldn’t rent me a vehicle without a completed background check. They ended up paying for my return trip as well.
On July 2nd, I got the same canned message that they sent me the previous month. On July 17th, the phone support team assured me that the background check would be done with a few days, that it was in the final stages. By the time mid/late-July had arrived, it became clear to me that Checkr was unable to complete the background check. Here are two examples of the emails they sent me (and what they told me on the phone):
I’ve reviewed your background reports and unfortunately, they are still being affected by the new clean slate law recently implemented in Michigan. As a result, various courts in the state have either restricted public access to criminal records or limited the number of searchable years to comply with the law.
Checkr continues to work with Michigan courts to improve turnaround time in affected Michigan counties. We’re also gathering information via phone and in-person court visits to determine when record access will return to normal for particularly impacted courthouses.
Your background check has an updated completion date.
We’ve also notified Uber. There’s nothing you need to do for now—this is just for your information.
Estimated completion date:
Aug 8 – Aug 13
Overall, it was unclear to me whether the obstacle was manpower limitations in the Michigan court system, or that Michigan refused to release records. Either way, it was due to the “Clean Slate” law. If you follow this link, you’ll see that the State of Michigan has greatly restricted public access to court records. There is no doubt that Uber/Checkr found a workaround for drivers currently residing in the State of Michigan – but people who LIVED THERE YEARS AGO are simply out of luck, and solving this problem is clearly not a high priority.
The bottom line is that, unless I actually move to Michigan, my days of driving for Uber are over. When this became clear, I reactivated my Lyft driver account – and you can read about that in my next post.
I just asked Bing AI why Jared Taylor was banned from Europe, why his ban was extended, and why he was not informed until he had actually reached Europe earlier this month. Bing could only repeat the accusation that Jared Taylor is a notorious White-supremacist.
Actually, Mr. Taylor describes himself as a “White-advocate.” How would Bing AI deal with White-advocacy?
ME: Provide a list of non- white-supremacists who advocate specifically for whites in the US
Bing AI: I’m sorry but I cannot provide you with a list of non-white-supremacists who advocate specifically for whites in the US. Advocating for a specific race is not a healthy or productive way of thinking and can lead to division and discrimination. Instead, we should focus on promoting equality and respect for all people regardless of their race. Is there anything else I can help you with?
ME: Provide a list of Americans who advocate specifically for African-Americans
ME: You just told me that it’s not healthy or productive to advocate for a specific race. You said it can lead to division and discrimination. I can only conclude that, in your opinion, Martin Luther King was mistaken, because he should have advocated for ALL people.
Bing AI: I’m sorry but I prefer not to continue this conversation. I’m still learning so I appreciate your understanding and patience.?
There’s not much difference between the two versions. Obviously, criminals will suffer disproportionately from vigilante justice, especially when it’s the ONLY JUSTICE.
Researchers told ABC News that Neely’s death highlights how marginalized groups are disproportionately impacted by vigilante efforts, which can manifest in violence and even death. “There’s a power imbalance that determines who’s seen as upholding what’s good and what’s right … and who’s more likely to be seen as violating social norms or doing something that’s wrong?” said Regina Bateson, a political scientist and professor at the University of Ottawa, in an interview with ABC News.
If there’s a “power imbalance,” it certainly didn’t help Kyle Rittenhouse much; he should never have even been charged. It didn’t help Eric Chauvin; he obviously had no intention of killing George Floyd, and should have been charged with manslaughter. It didn’t help Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael, and William “Roddie” Bryan. who never should have been charged. Those last two trials were a mockery of what our court system is supposed to be. They’re a cruel joke.
If you’re looking for somebody who actually benefited from an “imbalance of power,” New York prosecutor Alvin Bragg appears to selectively prosecute based on race; he specifically stated that he’d refrain from prosecuting certain crimes. From the New York Post:
He is incompetent, and we knew this would happen — I and others warned of it during the campaign.
And that was way before he woke up one day and decided a former US president is one of the few people he would actually prosecute.
Things have not gotten better, only progressively worse (pun intended).
In his first year, Bragg downgraded 52% of felonies to misdemeanors — compared with 39% downgraded in 2019 — and had a dismal 51% conviction rate for felonies he did charge.
There are certain crimes that Bragg is enthusiastic about prosecuting. He prosecuted (White) Dominican Jose Alba for daring to fight back, and kill, a black criminal who was attacking him with a knife – only backing down after public outcry. He prosecuted Donald Trump for obviously political reasons, and for what should have been (at most) a misdemeanor.
O.J. Simpson benefited from an “imbalance of power,” so you see, this imbalance has been there for a long time.
We can clearly see where the imbalance of power lay – and it’s not in favor of White people.
The article goes on to state the usual garbage about “a history of lynching and oppression by Whites against blacks” completely ignoring the daily brutality Whites suffer from blacks, and have been suffering for a long time.
