Author: Maitra (Page 2 of 15)

All you need to read about the Google Manifesto

Google’s Diversity Problem – WSJ Editorial.

No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science. – Debra Soh, Globe and Mail, Canada.

The Google Memo: Four Scientists Respond – Jussim, Miller, Schmitt, Soh, in Quillette Magazine.

Google Firing Employee Over Diversity Discussion Is Frighteningly Authoritarian – Maitra, The Federalist.

Google’s War Over the Sexes – Douthat, NYT.

In Defense of the Google Manifesto – Mali, Areo Magazine.

Google’s sexist memo has provided the alt-right with a new martyr – Jones, Guardian.

The Most Common Error in Coverage of the Google Memo – Friedersdorf, Atlantic.

A Googler’s memo shows there is work to be done – FT View Editorial

Googler fired for diversity memo had legit points on gender – Cathy Young, USAToday

It isn’t anti-diversity and it’s not a tirade – Toby Young, Spectator UK

Lena Dunham and Google Demonstrate Why Our Free Speech Culture Is Slipping Away – French, NRO.

Google Can’t Seem to Tolerate Diversity – Ou, Bloomberg.

Hey Mashable, why am I listed as Alt-Right?

So, unsurprisingly, Mashable came out with this dross.

Bizarrely, my semi-viral tweet was listed in the blog post.

Read More

The Sophoclean irony of Google memo

 

By yours truly, in The Federalist. Read the whole piece here.

 

 

Two pathbreaking studies you need to know

First, the US and Western Counter insurgency operations are failure, because frankly, in simple words, we are too good and pussyfooted. We are not brutal enough.

I have previously written why Western strategies fail, and stated that in the last 20 years, only two Counter Insurgency operations succeeded, and that’s in Sri Lanka, and Chechnya. It was brutal, but it brought on stability.

US and Indian officers in a joint COIN training briefing.

Latest research proves, the only way to succeed in a COIN op, is to be insanely heavyhanded.

Read More

Migrants and Crime: Latest Data from Germany

Few days back, I wrote about Dr Cheryl Benard’s excellent article on Afghans unleashed on Europe, and why it’s not a migration, but an invasion. It was accused of xenophobia. Facts are not xenophobic, even though xenophobes often usurp facts to their nefarious purposes. Nonetheless, it is the duty of an academic to seek truth, rather than be subservient to any ideology.

I have previously written about why the argument of Jews fleeing Nazis and Syrian refugees being similar is flawed. I have also written why Europe is undergoing an insurgency, which includes a fifth column within European society. Paper by Thomas Hegghammer supports my view. I have also written in 2015, how it will invite justifiable ethno-nationalist backlash, especially from insular East Europe.

Today, new data, spotted by my fellow blogger Ben Sixsmith, came into sight and the implications are horrifying.

Here are the graphs from Germany. Foreigners (in orange) here mean European Non-Germans, as opposed to Asylum Seekers (in red) who are from Middle East and Africa. 

Read More

The curse of geography

This is not a blog post. More like a record.

Joy Reid, MSNBC host, and prominent “Resistance” leader tweeted this.

When corrected, she doubled down, and made a pig’s breakfast out of it.

Not only is this a colossal mistake, historically and geographically wrong, it’s borderline xenophobic. Only tweeted to her rabidly ignorant followers in a modern version of 2017 red baiting. It doesn’t matter where Trump’s wives are from, but hey ho.

Read More

Call it what it is, an invasion

A recent important essay by Dr Cheryl Benard cannot come at a more appropriate time. She writes for The National Interest in a must read essay, where she highlights something so obvious that it barely needs any debate. Europe is undergoing a categorical invasion, in the form of unarmed, military aged men, looking to destroy the society from within. A few highlights from this essay:

If there’s one thing you need to read, it is this essay.

Dr Benard is no right wing nutty Islamophobe. She’s married to an Afghan American diplomat, Dr Zalmay Khalilzad, and has a stellar record of working with refugees for over a decade, and producing scholarship on the concept of Honour in Islam.

Unfortunately, I have been saying this for quite a while.

Read More

The (Liberal) Empire strikes back

Cathy Young analyses Trump’s pivotal Warsaw speech, and critiques, alongside many others, my Quillette piece.

Here’s my original.

For the sake of balance you should read both, and I applaud Quillete, and my editor Claire for being so balanced, which is rare in these days of hyper-partisanship, and of course Cathy, who I admire, exceptionally passionate as she is, for the spirited response.

This debate is crucial, for the future direction of US (and UK/Western) FP.

And I hope it continues.

 

 

Will Trump and Merkel clash in G20?

Radio Sputnik, Scotland, interviewed me.

Most of you know that I am not very optimistic about a German-led EU in the long run.

That said, it’s more complicated than a simple yes or no answer.

Here are my thoughts, have a listen.

 

Will the real conservative please stand up?

Who is a conservative? Burke or Buckley? Is Bill Kristol a conservative or Victor Davis Hanson? David Cameron or Peter Hitchens? Or are they all conservatives? Will Narendra Modi of India be considered a conservative? Is Vladimir Putin’s vision of a society conservative, or Rodrigo Duterte’s forceful authoritarian law and order imposition against deviant drug addicts a conservative approach? In that case what is conservative? How can it be defined and charted for this new young century?

For those of you paying attention, two of my colleagues recently started this topical and timely debate. Ben Sixsmith, critiquing Noah Rothman’s Commentary piece, stated that #NeverTrumpers are pseudo-conservatives. Mitch Blatt countered that they are indeed conservatives, because there isn’t any fixed definition of conservatism.

For a non-European/non-American reader of politics, the arguments of both sides might seem odd. Both are correct, both are circular and axiomatic. Both, in some ways, logically contradictory. And both, never tries to define what it tries to critique. Without summarising the aforementioned pieces, (readers can read them, in their due time) let me highlight the contradictions.

Read More

Page 2 of 15

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Get the most important and interesting articles right at your inbox. Sign up for B+D periodic emails.