No, extremely mainstream establishment Americans (Samuel Eliot Morison, personal friend of JFK and one of the most important American historians of the 20th century, The Oxford History of the American People) saw US conduct during Suez as a disaster within a decade and the US provided (and continues to provide) much of the extremely sensitive/secret, expensive, and difficult to develop missile technology underlying Britain's submarine-launched nuclear deterrent in the 60s. No other country has ever gotten anything close to that.
The US also provided critical logistical and intelligence (Britain did not have much of a network in the South Atlantic, US provided satellite images behind the scenes), though not diplomatic (Argentina also being an ally and most of the world supporting them), support to Britain during the Falklands War, more than France.
Not saying you've done this, but many Britposters have concocted a fantasy version of 20th US/UK relations in the 20th century, one in which (for example) repaying Lend Lease, which was a grant that did not need to be repaid and the largest voluntary one-sided resource transfer between nations in history (to say nothing of civilian aid after the war, especially the tech transfer program), bankrupted Britain and the US was responsible for British decolonization (this is somewhat true for the Netherlands, as Congress did not want to fund Dutch reconstruction while the Netherlands was spending money fighting a war to keep Indonesia, not really other major colonial powers).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Since 2009, medical schools have had to prove they sufficiently discriminate against white men ("achieve mission-appropriate diversity outcomes") to get accredited.
White men are now significantly underrepresented among med school students.
Fortunately, competence isn't that important in doctors, so purging white men in favor of "underrepresented minorities" (blacks, LatinX) who can't pass clinical exams shouldn't matter.
European IQ's rising due to natural selection (as measured by PGS) continuing into the modern era whereas it stalled in East Asia could have been predicted from Gregory Clark's genealogical studies in both regions.
Clark found that "survival of the richest" was the rule in England from 1300-1880 or so, with huge differences in surviving offspring by class and this was much weaker in Qing China because higher class women didn't have more kids due to elite polygamy.
(IQ is not the only trait that goes into income or wealth, of course, so selection for wealth is only indirectly selection for IQ and also selects for a package of other traits, some of which are collective goods like IQ and some of which are not.)
The Bancroft Prize (one of the most prestigious history awards, given by a panel of historians for works on diplomacy or the history of the Americas) was given in 2000 to someone claiming guns were really rare in colonial America (he committed fraud by changing quotes).
This should have been obvious nonsense to anyone who knows anything at all about colonial America, of course, and yet a panel of professional historians thought it was work at the pinnacle of the field until some random blogger pointed out all the fraud.
I very strongly appreciate this essay and wish there were a hundred more like it for other orgs. The SPLC is one of the biggest and most important nodes in the closure of the Internet, coordinating debanking and censorship outside the formal state.
Amazon, for example, incorporated SPLC judgements into their pipeline automatically, and this is the norm in the financial industry.
The SPLC coordinated pressure campaigns against the private sector 2017-2022, specifically Internet companies and payment processors. The easy for any individual company to do is knuckle under, especially since most decision-making managers will be sympathetic to begin with.
A common normie folk belief is that AIDS was ignored by The Establishment out of homophobia. The opposite is true; AIDS became the most researched disease in human history within a few years, and gay orgs strenuously fought measures that might have stopped it.
The attitude of gay orgs during the peak of AIDS was: 1) The REAL epidemic is stigma (it was not, it was HIV) 2) You (meaning mainstream society) must do absolutely everything in your power to save us without us having to change our own behavior in any way at all
Gays were eventually bailed out of the consequences of their own behavior by extraordinary amounts of public research (mostly conducted and paid for by non-gays) plus expensive and continuing public funding of medicine for them (PrEP).
My view: the Great Awokening is over, but, by default, will be back even worse in 20 years. This cycle has already happened twice, with the 60s/70s New Left and 90s PC. Each time, some of the worst excesses are undone but nowhere near enough to reverse the previous wave.
What I think causes the ~20 year cycle is the education system; the natural result of paying attention in school is to be an insane leftist.
Every major conflict in US history, and most in world history, is taught as left vs right (sometimes "reformers" vs conservatives"), with the left always winning, always being in the right, and always vindicated by history. It's very simple to extrapolate from that!