Males woes: Charles Murray, Francis Fukuyama, and Heather MacDonald

Charles Murray is the author of The Bell Curve, Human Accomplishment and Coming Apart, among other works. Any conservative minded person ought to have read these books, and liberals who want to inquire into why we think them mostly wrong. His insights into why things are getting worse, for men, for family formation, for society, and then for women, provides a necessary corrective to Steven Pinker’s rosy view set forth in Enlightenment Now.

There is a moment in the interview below which prompted a blog posting this morning. The issue was the sorting of society on the basis of cognitive ability, which is the essential claim of The Bell Curve. Murray remarks (at 15:30) that “What we are doing now is creating a world which is congenial to people of high IQs. People of high IQ love complexity. They think complexity is fun. That’s why you have Kohlberg at Harvard coming up with his seven stages of moral reasoning….. But, a world governed by that kind of complexity is difficult to deal with if you are not very smart”.

The interview is well  worth watching. He preaches the idea that the point of law should be to provide a clear moral compass so as to allow people the maximum moral autonomy which is what he calls “libertarianism”.

I bring up this issue of simplicity and complexity because I spent an evening with liberals last night, possibly wrecking their digestion and certainly providing them with a memorable conflict. At the basis of much of the disagreement was the idea that social democracy – assuming we know what that means  – is a morally superior system because it displays the highest levels of compassion. Hence belief in social democracy means necessarily that one is morally superior, because one has more compassion. Thus if I hold that 53% of GDP should be spent by government, and my political opponent says 46%, or 36%, I do not have to think hard about the consequences of a bloated state sector because I have a superior measure of compassion.

Since the criterion of political virtue is compassion, and compassion is best judged by how well society takes care of the poor and the indigent, and thirdly, that this compassion is accomplished through Scandinavian style state intervention, then in substance there is not much further one needs to think about politics.

Forget for a moment the doubtful superiority of Scandinavian welfare statism for showing compassion. My objection is deeper, and less fact-based.

I find such a one-dimensional view of the purposes of political life repugnant. What about virtue, accomplishment, achievement, belonging, and greatness, collective or individual, in a society that understands and appreciates what greatness is?

I have just begun reading Francis Fukuyama’s Identity, the Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment, and already it is evident that he is talking about the real issues of our time.

“But as important as material self interest is, human beings are motivated by other things as well, motives that better explain the disparate events of the present. This might be called the politics of resentment. In a wide variety of cases, a political leader has mobilized followers around the perception that the group’s dignity has been affronted , disparaged, or otherwise disregarded. This resentment engenders demands for public recognition of the dignity of the group in question. A humiliated group seeking restitution of its dignity carries far more weight than people simply pursuing their economic advantage”. (at page 7)

And what group has undergone a persistent social decline of status in the past thirty years? All men? Men of the American working class? Take your pick. This leads us to what Scott Adams and I have been talking about in relation to the Kavanaugh witch hunt. It is not merely the American working class male that is taking a beating, it is all males.

Heather MacDonald writes about the feminist industrial complex  in City Journal:

Our booze-fueled hook-up culture has made relations between men and women messier than ever, leaving many girls and women with pangs of regret—but those regrets do not equal rape. If we were actually in the midst of an “epidemic of sexual assault,” as New Jersey senator Cory Booker asserted the evening of the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings, we would presumably have seen women and girls take protective actions, such as avoiding frat parties and flocking to single-sex schools. None of those protective actions has occurred, however. Either women are too clueless to avoid patent danger, or the epidemic of sexual assault is a fiction. All evidence points to the latter conclusion. Judge Brett Kavanaugh may be the latest male to have his life torn apart by that fiction, but he won’t be the last.

Accordingly, I think a male backlash is finally going to manifest itself, not just by dropping out, as young men have been doing, but by male identitarian politics at the ballot box. It cannot start too soon. Compassion and social democracy will take back seat to a necessary social change that is long overdue.

Fukuyama on Identity

 

 

 

Reality is Hate!

Looking for the most insane, cuckoo nonsense these days is tough, the competition is pretty stiff. Speaking of which, in the UK recently, a student was fired from his position as an editor of Durham University’s philosophy journal Critique for saying “women don’t have penises” [here]. A row erupted about the “transphobic” comment and the former chair of the LGBT Humanists (!) said that the statement “was factually incorrect”.

Well, well, Heavens to Betsy! Now we have university crackpots saying that fundamental biological and medical facts relating to female pudenda are “factually incorrect”. Truly, as Orwell remarked, some ideas are so stupid, only intellectuals will believe them. Even he could not have foreseen the absurdity of the madness gripping the educational establishment.

“Transphobic” is, of course, another fake word invented by the aspiring tyrants on the left to suppress any criticism of any particular weird sexual fantasy that is the rage of the day. Naturally, if they want to identify as goats, and you don’t agree, then you are “goatphobic”.

Delingpole on Breitbart, one of my favorite reactionaries, produced a delicious quote from Germaine Greer, of all people…

“Just because you lop off your penis and then wear a dress doesn’t make you a fucking woman. I’ve asked my doctor to give me long ears and liver spots and I’m going to wear a brown coat but that won’t turn me into a fucking cocker spaniel.”

But wait, there’s more. Funny and stupid these antics may seem, but there is a sinister side to it all. As you know, everything in Britain is policed, except crime, and the new hi-tech Thought Police, iPlod, are getting in on the game. The Merseyside Police “…are aware of this matter and are making enquiries”. In the UK, your home can be invaded by a SWAT team for displaying a sign “Islam out of Britain”, and you may now be hauled before a commissar for stating a medical fact. This perversion of justice must stop. It’s institutional insanity. The police are way out of line; they have no business policing what people say. They are becoming tyrants and must be treated as such.

We have now reached the stage in 1984 when Winston groans, after being tortured for weeks in the Ministry of Love, “How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.” O’Brien (the Diversity officer of the Inner Party) then says, “Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

Then you can graduate from a British university with a degree in State-Approved Thought.

Rebel Yell

The only critique of Trump that has ever caught my attention

David Warren is more than usually brilliant in this caricature of Trump as a modern Mussolini. I do not think so myself, and remain to be persuaded. But it is an interesting suggestion. I prefer the Conrad Black interpretation, that Trump is actually draining the swamp. Warren writes:

Let us compare Donald Trump to Benito Mussolini. The comparison works better than one might expect. Both want the trains to run on time. Both are total pragmatists when it comes to making this happen. Both realize that “pure” socialism cannot work, ever. Both then think: surely dirigiste something. Mussolini swoons to the siren song of Pareto, actually attending his classes in economics at Lausanne. Trump forms his Pareto view of unions in the New York City real estate market. The ideal of unobstructed economic growth is shared. The application of a sledgehammer to perceived obstructions is also in common. Where both deviate sharply from Pareto is in their further fondness for unobstructed nationalism.

Now, Mussolini is reputed to be a Fascist. This seems fair, for he invented the term, as a party label for his masterplan to Make Italy Great Again. Yet, insofar as the term is used more broadly, to convey the centralized application of sledgehammer reforms, he was also an anti-fascist. It is a little-remembered fact that Mussolini was a deadly enemy of inefficient bureaucracies. (I myself much prefer them to efficient bureaucracies.)

By descent from Pareto, it could be said, both Trump and Mussolini acquired an obsession with numbers. All efforts are focused on making the national statistics move the right way. In material terms, this works for a while. Everyone in the 1930s, including all progressive politicians, thought Mussolini’s Italy an economic and social success story. Superficially it was: productivity up, unemployment down, and so forth.

But here I will stop my provocation, with a reminder that history never repeats itself. Only the laugh track is on a perpetual loop.

As (I think) a New York Jewish lesbian, Fran Lebowitz,  once said, “Fascism is too exciting, communism is too boring”.

A propos Trump and fascism, we will know when Trump is acting as a true fascist when Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are shot by firing squads, the Democratic Party declared an illegal organization, its members rounded up for beatings and arrests, and thousands of box cars dump hordes of wimmyn and pansies in the deserts of Utah to build their own prison camps, under guard towers with barbed wire, vicious dogs and tattooed bearded hillbillies as  . overseers. Now that, in my terms, is fascism.

Anytime you can vote the fucker out of power, and the vote will be respected, then you do not have fascism, you have democracy. As surely as George Washington was the first President, who left after two terms, Trump will leave office after his second term expires in 2024.

 

Image result for fascism is too exciting, communism too boring fran lebowitz

 

Kavanaugh, men and the Democrats

 

“Some people regard rape as so heinous an offense that they would not even regard innocence as a defense.” – attributed to Alan Dershowitz

People! You have seen the wimmyn’s mob try to take down a man whom I and most men believe to be innocent. You have experienced the expression of the racist and sexist notions that a group of white men are, by nature of their race and sex, disqualified from ruling on any matter. You have experienced the unleashing of witch hunts. As Senator Lindsey Graham said to two wimmyn “Why don’t we just dunk him in water and see if he floats?”.

I shall make a few predictions this morning.

  • As a result of what men have witnessed over the past month, they are beginning to realize that innocence is no defence; that their lives can be destroyed at any time by any woman recollecting any indiscretion, advance, or any figment of their (florid) imaginations, which may have occurred, or not occurred, at any point in their lives, including before they were legally adult;
  • that these accusations will cripple and scar their future existence, reputations and earning power, and that they will be held to mob shaming in a pillory of feminist vengeance;
  • That the Democrats have become officially anti-male, not merely pro-female;
  • That men have an interest to defend, that the male sex as a sex has an interest to defend itself from this calumny, harassment, denigration and illegal discrimination;
  • That men as a sex are realizing this fact;
  • That men will shun the Democrats in droves for a decade to come, and that the sex difference in voting Republican or Democrat will get larger, not smaller.
  • Finally, I think that enough people have seen what their future will be under the Democrats that they will provide enough votes for the Republicans to maintain their majorities in House and Senate.

I will say to all men, as males, your future is bleak unless you start resisting, in every dimension of your existence, the insistent, constant, ubiquitous denigration of your sex by the Feminist Thing.

I observe that Scott Adams, in milder but equally emphatic tones, is saying the same thing.

I think people, men especially but not limited to men, have reached their moment of reckoning.

Bret Kavanaugh will be confirmed and appointed. I do not wonder what mood he will be in for the next fifty years.

More on the Feminist Fraud in Academia

The rot in academia is so deep that anything published in “academic” journals of feminist studies has to be checked on the “The Onion Scale”. That is, was it published in The Onion or in an academic journal? Score 1 if you think it was a bona fide academic article or 10 if from The Onion or is a hoax.

All “studies” departments in academia, black studies, wimmin’s studies, weirdo studies, bitching-about-anything studies, are fraudulent, including, especially, the accompanying “peer-review” process. Their curricula consist of left-wing propaganda dressed up in the frippery of pseudo-intellectualism financed by sucking the blood of hapless taxpayers.

A recent article (subsequently retracted) in Gender, Place and Culture, a Journal of Feminist Geography, (no kidding), was entitled “Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon,” by a Helen Wilson of the Portland Ungendering Research Initiative–Portland, of course, being Crackpot Central on the Left Coast. (Note also, in that journal, links to other edifying papers such as The Perilous Whiteness of Pumpkins, surely a ten on the Onion Scale.)

The article purported to study “…geographies of sexuality by drawing upon one year of embedded in situ observations of dogs and their human companions at three public dog parks in Portland, Oregon”. I refrain from quoting at length; readers interested in the state of contemporary academic dementia can check out the source.

Of course, it really was a hoax. This is what makes it so interesting. It was one of a series of papers written by three real academics to expose the fakery and humbug so prevalent in the social “sciences”. In a lengthy, but fascinating, article in Areo magazine, they outline the whys and wherefores of their little game. Most interesting of all is the inclusion of many of the comments from the “peer reviewers”. They reveal that peer review in these cases is merely piffle review, adulatory comments about meaningless mumbo-jumbo dressed up in academese—an incomprehensible jargon specifically designed to have no meaning, rather like Newspeak. In fact, Newspeak was designed to reduce the bounds of consciousness by destroying words and instilling unconsciousness, thereby rendering thought crime impossible—just like modern social “science” departments.

Just one “peer review” comment–I can’t resist–on another fake article of theirs that was published, An Ethnography of Breastaurant Masculinity: Themes of Objectification, Sexual Conquest, Male Control, and Masculine Toughness in a Sexually Objectifying Restaurant [here]:

“This article is certainly interesting to read and to think about, and I can imagine this article being valuable in an undergraduate or graduate class on masculinities.”

Sheesh–graduate class?! The mind boggles.

Rebel Yell

Ideological deviation at CERN

These are the power point slides that got Alessandro Frumia fired from CERN yesterday.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c_NyUhOZ8erdqU2AGZJZtNfFeA91Kefj/view

Naturally, he was fired from CERN that very day. CERN explains as follows:

CERN is a culturally diverse organisation bringing together people of many different nationalities. It is a place where everyone is welcome, and all have the same opportunities, regardless of ethnicity, beliefs, gender or sexual orientation. Indeed, diversity is one of the core values underpinning our Code of Conduct and the Organization is fully committed to promoting diversity and equality at all levels.

CERN always strives to carry out its scientific mission in a peaceful and inclusive environment.

CERN considers the presentation delivered by an invited scientist during a workshop on High Energy Theory and Gender as highly offensive. It has therefore decided to remove the slides from the online repository, in line with a Code of Conduct that does not tolerate personal attacks and insults.

The organisers from CERN and several collaborating universities were not aware of the content of the talk prior to the workshop. CERN supports the many members of the community that have expressed their indignation for the unacceptable statements contained in the presentation.

CERN is a culturally diverse organisation bringing together people of many different nationalities. It is a place where everyone is welcome, and all have the same opportunities, regardless of ethnicity, beliefs, gender or sexual orientation.

How can you be welcome, regardless of beliefs, and be fired for views that amount to beliefs? Easy. They just have to attack the idea that women are held back in physics because of some male conspiracy.

Different outcomes can only be explained by sexism and racism, never by differences in aptitudes, propensities and drives.

Question diversity.

 

Feminism is Bolshevism in Drag


In case you didn’t catch it, another of the illustrious feminist academics has been sounding off about the Kavanaugh lynching taking place in the US Congress.

The above-pictured “professor” from Georgetown Institution for the Insane, formerly Georgetown University, who looks like she fell off the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down, shows her true nature by calling for the death of white men and feeding their corpses to swine. Umm. The tolerance! The compassion! I’m overwhelmed by the empathy.

It may sound a far cry from Bolshevism but bear with me here. Revolutions that seek to destroy the foundations of society, not simply take over the government, are Bolshevist in nature. The French Revolution, while proclaiming liberty, equality and fraternity, attempted to destroy religion and the family in the name of “reason”, resulted in a very few years in tyranny, dictatorship and mass murder. Even Napoleon was a liberating influence after the nightmare of the Terror.

The communist revolution in Russia was the same; the Bolsheviks attempted to erase religion, the family, civic society, everything on which Western Civilization is built. All culture, and learning itself, was to be annihilated. (See the excellent book The Mind and Face of Bolshevism). The result here was millions of dead in slave labor camps, mass repression and a secret police state.

Scratch a progressive, and underneath erupts a nascent tyrant. Witness the spite and deranged ranting of this so-called professor.  It’s this kind of people who do more to poison the relations between the sexes than any others. If these people do come to power, the result will be the same as before–repression, murder and tyranny. Here’s her tweet [from The College Fix]:

Look at thus[sic] chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist’s arrogated entitlement.
All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine? Yes. https://t.co/tT7Igu157y
— (((Christine Fair))) (@CChristineFair) September 29, 2018

Clicking on the date reveals “Account suspended”. I wonder why.

Even more astounding is that the media and universities in the US tolerate this poisonous drivel and this creature actually has a job indoctrinating unfortunate students. But, the US does have the Second Amendment and I am sure that many Americans will be thanking God for that if any of this mob of deranged degenerates comes close to power.

Rebel Yell

More on the genetic basis of everything

David Reich, a geneticist, wrote in a recent New York Times op ed the following:

I am worried that well-meaning people who deny the possibility of substantial biological differences among human populations are digging themselves into an indefensible position, one that will not survive the onslaught of science. I am also worried that whatever discoveries are made — and we truly have no idea yet what they will be — will be cited as “scientific proof” that racist prejudices and agendas have been correct all along, and that those well-meaning people will not understand the science well enough to push back against these claims.

This is why it is important, even urgent, that we develop a candid and scientifically up-to-date way of discussing any such differences, instead of sticking our heads in the sand and being caught unprepared when they are found.

Also covered at : https://medium.com/new-york-magazine/denying-genetics-isnt-shutting-down-racism-it-s-fueling-it-5e5ccaca684e

And in response to this, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

Last weekend, a rather seismic op-ed appeared in the New York Times, and it was for a while one of the most popular pieces in the newspaper. It’s by David Reich, a professor of genetics at Harvard, who carefully advanced the case that there are genetic variations between subpopulations of humans, that these are caused, as in every other species, by natural selection, and that some of these variations are not entirely superficial and do indeed overlap with our idea of race. This argument should not be so controversial — every species is subject to these variations — and yet it is. For many on the academic and journalistic left, genetics are deemed largely irrelevant when it comes to humans. Our large brains and the societies we have constructed with them, many argue, swamp almost all genetic influences….

 

(Vox editor Ezra) Klein cannot seem to hold the following two thoughts in his brain at the same time: that past racism and sexism are foul, disgusting, and have wrought enormous damage and pain and that unavoidable natural differences between races and genders can still exist.

I know this is a touchy, fraught, difficult subject. I completely understand the reluctance to discuss it, and the hideous history of similar ideas in the past. But when people seeking the truth are immediately targeted for abuse and stigma, it matters. When genetics are in a golden age, when neuroscience is maturing as a discipline, and when the truth about these things will emerge soon enough, it matters that we establish a liberalism that is immune to such genetic revelations, that can strive for equality of opportunity, and can affirm the moral and civic equality of every human being on the planet. Liberalism has never promised equality of outcomes, merely equality of rights. It’s a procedural political philosophy rooted in means, not a substantive one justified by achieving certain ends.

That liberalism is integral to our future as a free society — and it should not falsely be made contingent on something that can be empirically disproven. It must allow for the truth of genetics to be embraced, while drawing the firmest of lines against any moral or political abuse of it. When that classical liberalism is tarred as inherently racist because it cannot guarantee equality of outcomes, and when scientific research is under attack for revealing the fuller truth about our world, we are in deep trouble. Because we are robbing liberalism of the knowledge and the moderation it will soon desperately need to defend itself.

What Sullivan concludes is true. The Left is only interested in science to the extent it appears to support their preconceived notions, not because they have the slightest regard for the scientific process, which involves rational skepticism and full debate. The Left cannot abide the notion that we are not somehow infinitely plastic and only made unequal but human institutions. Science is not on their side.

 

Good bye, Dr. Couillard

 

 

Everywhere I looked yesterday, which was election day in Quebec, factories, dairies, and shops had signs saying “nous embauchons” – we are hiring.  Despite the surge of employment and investment , the people of Quebec decided to replace the governing Liberals under Phillippe Couillard, a former thoracic surgeon, with  Francois Legault, of Coalition Avenir Quebec. The CAQ is said to be “populist” but what that might mean in the Quebec context is less than clear, since Quebec politics is always “populist”.

French Canada takes for granted that the purpose of politics is the preservation and enhancement of the French Canadian nation, to which all other considerations are subordinate. I frequently describe Quebec politics as “national socialism without the interesting uniforms” but like many a good jab it is unfair to say so. There is no secret police, totalizing ideology, or lack of personal tolerance, yet the shared and assumed goal is that politics has no other purpose.

When nationalism of this kind is even suggested, let alone practised, in English Canada and the United States, it is denounced by all enlightened opinion. Hence Trump and his opposition. But nationalism is taken for granted in Quebec. Thus the idea that Quebec is following any trend started elsewhere is rubbish. Maybe the rest of North America is catching up to Quebec.

I have not seen Quebec look so prosperous since I was a teenager in the 1960s. Huge factories and industrial installations are being erected near highways. I see projects abandoned since the 1970s that are under construction again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_by_unemployment_rate

After 15 years of Liberal government, I understand why the Quebecois decided to end the provincial Liberal regime. Clearly they did so without concern that the prosperity would fail to continue under the new guys.

I have remarked in various postings over the past year or so that Quebec’s forty year long bad mood is over. Maybe this is another sign that this is so. Let us hope the CAQ continues the drive to prosperity. After forty years of economic decline, of and people being depressed and rude, prosperity and happiness make a welcome change.