Senior educated white male.

Senior educated white male.

UK doctor loses appeal for transgender beliefs

You cannot make this up. Compelled speech once more. This is from CBN News.

“An experienced Christian doctor in the United Kingdom was forced out of his job as a disability benefits assessor for refusing to use transgender pronouns while working for the British government. Now he has lost his lawsuit against the government after refusing, hypothetically, to refer to “a six-foot-tall bearded man” as “madam.”

“The Employment Tribunal he had appealed to ruled that his belief in the Biblical view of what it is to be male and female was “incompatible with human dignity.”

“The 56-year-old physician told the newspaper “I believe gender is defined by biology and genetics. And that, as a Christian, the Bible teaches us that God made humans male or female.”

“The doctor was forced out of his job and he sued the government, arguing he was the victim of religious discrimination and harassment over his beliefs and convictions.

“On Tuesday, the judge overseeing the case ruled against Dr. Mackereth, putting transgender rights ahead of Christian freedoms and, in effect, forcing Christians to use compelled speech in order to not offend those who believe in gender-fluidity, according to the Christian Legal Centre, which represented Mackereth. “

This is grotesque. The Daily Wire reported.

” Mackereth responded to the ruling, asserting, “I am not alone in being deeply concerned by this outcome. Staff in the NHS, even those who do not share my Christian convictions, are also disturbed as they see their own freedom of thought and speech being undermined by the judges’ ruling. No doctor, or researcher, or philosopher, can demonstrate or prove that a person can change sex. Without intellectual and moral integrity, medicine cannot function and my 30 years as a doctor are now considered irrelevant compared to the risk that someone else might be offended.”

It’s just another branch of the culture wars

James Delingpole gets to the climate scare at 21:30, where he says “It’s just another branch of the culture wars”. That is the position I have reached. Above or aside from the science, or the “science”, of climate catastrophism, is a political purpose, which is to destroy capitalism, and have us buy into it, pleading to have shackles placed on our wrists, for our own good. It is very clever and many intelligent people believe it. Like Papal infallibility.

Mr. President, I’m beginning to smell a big fat commie rat!

I told you it was going to get worse

My Washington DC correspondent sent me a one-liner last week: “I told you it was going to get worse.” I confess I had not known what he meant when he said this mid-summer. Then Pelosi unleashed impeachment investigations. I asked for and received this explanation from my well-positioned Washington observer.

“It was clear even then [mid-summer] that the probability that Trump could/would be reelected was high and the Resistance was going to stop at nothing to prevent that. Remember a Trump reelection probably gives him 2 seats on the Supreme Court which would be a permanent shift to conservative principles. 

The Democrats instinctively understand it is nearly impossible to unseat an incumbent president when the economy is humming along and unemployment is a record low levels…and Trump is ending the Forever Wars and has refused to fall into a trap with Iran.

This was confirmed watching the UK use trench warfare over Brexit.

I think this forthcoming book should explain the thesis. I read her stuff all the time.

Impeachment is just the beginning ..it is still going to get worse.  The Democrats are playing a dangerous game but in their view they have nothing to lose. Inadvertently the Democrats have damaged Biden which Trump wants.  Remember the 1972 election.  The Watergate episode was in part to find damaging material on the Democrats in order to engineer the most unpalatable candidate to run against Nixon.  They succeeded.  Ed Muskie was discredited  then this set up George McGovern and Nixon got 60% of the popular vote and 49 states.

In a Trump vs Warren election  (where this is going)  IMHO it looks like a 2016 respin.  Warren cannot take PA, MI, WI, Ohio or Florida and lose the Electoral College .   She will also win the popular vote since CA NY NJ and the liberal coasts will mount a massive effort and the cycle begins again.

The Spawn of the Devil vs the Commie Pinko. 

Elite rebellion: the (attempted) Impeachment of Trump

News that the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has decided to proceed with hearings that would lead to the attempt to impeach Trump, shows the desperation of the Democrats to prevent an election where they would face Trump. We know how this will end. The Senate will not agree to any articles of impeachment, since it is Republican. Hence a crisis is being concocted by the Democrats to prevent there being an election where the Republicans have a viable candidate, namely Trump.

The political elites of the United States and the United Kingdom are in full rebellion against their embattled political leaders, Trump and Boris Johnson, and the electorates that have put them into power.

“Contempt of Parliament used to be a crime; it has now become a moral obligation” – David Starkey.

The contempt of the parliamentary class for the British

In this incisive interview, the historian David Starkey expounds why the current political class of the British isles is utterly contemptuous of the people who constitute the country. Make no mistake: we are witnessing a legal coup by the Establishment against the will of the people. The British Supreme Court and its Parliament is wrecking the constitution of the country.

Starkey is incandescent.

Trudeau in costume

My reaction is: so what? All those opposed to political correctness should see this non-issue for what it is. In a few years people will wonder what an earth made this a “controversial” or embarrassing moment. I especially ask Conservatives to think about what trouble they create for themselves by empowering this kind of retroactive political correctness. Everyone in the past was guilty of something that PC condemns. It is all so 1984.

Failing to build pipelines – that is the issue for which Trudeau the Lesser should be deposed.

Mr. Dress-up

crapper/john/loo/WC/toilet

Words can describe the same thing at various levels of politeness and social acceptability. Moreover, as soon as the euphemism becomes too clear, the word can be changed to something less vulgar. Euphemism piles on euphemism. Thus the place where we void our noxious bodily effusions goes through various evolutions. The incompatibility of shitting with the maintenance of personal dignity causes a continuous slow migration of words to describe the place where the deed is done.

Likewise climate alarmism has changed the terms of the debate whenever it suited them. “Anthropogenic global warming” is a scientific theory. “Global warming” hides the crucial term that attributes human causation to the reality that the world has been warming since 1850. “Climate change” obscures the causal relationship even further. Anything that happens in nature is assumed to be human caused, without that realization ever consciously arising in one’s mind.

The Guardian announced a few months ago that it was changing its terms from “global warming” to “global heating”. They write:

“The Guardian has updated its style guide to introduce terms that more accurately describe the environmental crises facing the world.

“Instead of “climate change” the preferred terms are “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown” and “global heating” is favoured over “global warming”, although the original terms are not banned.”

Not banned you say? How civilized of them!

The Guardian continues:

“Other terms that have been updated, including the use of “wildlife” rather than “biodiversity”, “fish populations” instead of “fish stocks” and “climate science denier” rather than “climate sceptic”. In September, the BBC accepted it gets coverage of climate change “wrong too often” and told staff: “You do not need a ‘denier’ to balance the debate.”

“Updated”? The use of the term “climate science denier” is not an update, it is a slander.

Yes the climate has changed. 11,000 years ago, where I write was under 4,000 feet of ice. I deny nothing, I merely allow for a wider range of facts to impinge on my understanding of climate.

11,000 years ago in North America

Innovation in warfare

Warfare is an area of human endeavour constantly subject to innovation: how to fuck over your enemy at low cost, low risk, and ideally, without him knowing you were responsible. Drones have shown their worth, and I am awaiting the next Pearl Harbour via a force of drones. Why would you ever hit an enemy with an air force when you could almost without cost wipe out the US Pacific Fleet with drones.

The drone attacks on Saudi oil facilities this weekend were a case in point. It leads me to think that a great deal of military equipment, doctrine, training and investment is wasted, not in the sense that all military spending is wasted – of course it is, to a pacifist – but is wasted from a purely military point of view. Much may be useless under modern conditions.

I am reminded, uncomfortably, of a recent article by the always entertaining Fred Reed, in Unz review. The Unz Review is a collection of the most outrageous opinionators on the planet, and I cannot vouch for the sanity of many of them. But Fred Reed is reliably sane.

Says Reed:

” In extended periods of peace, which includes the bombing of peasants, a military tends to assume that no major war will come during the careers of those now in uniform. Commanders consequently do what makes their lives easy, what they must do to get through the day and have reasonable fitness reports. This does not include pointing out inadequacies of training or equipment. Nor does it include recommending large expenditures to remedy deficiencies. Nor does it include recommending very expensive mobilization exercises that would divert money from new weapons….”

” An aircraft carrier is a bladder of jet fuel wrapped around high explosives.The implications are considerable. A plunging hypersonic terminally-guided ballistic missile, piercing the flight deck and exploding in the hangar deck, would require a year in the repair yards. The Russians and Chinese are developing–have developed–missiles specifically to take out carriers. Note that the range of some of these missiles is much greater than the combat radius of the carrier’s aviation. Oops. “

” This happens partly because militaries are overconfident as a job requirement. You can’t tell the Marines that they are at best mediocre light infantry or the Navy that it is essentially a target setl. Instead the American armed forces are always said to be the best equipped, best trained, bravest, most formidable military that the world has ever seen. Except they aren’t. “

I do not think that all those American carrier battle fleets will survive a modern missile attack, and I hope that American admirals are conscious of the problem.

Obsolete? Obsolescent?

Cleverest conversation I have yet heard

Don Hoffman says that consciousness is prior to matter, He undergoes a thorough and logical interrogation by someone who is not of his school of thought. The exchange is a model of how people should speak. Respectful, incisive, and utterly clear, these two go at it, shedding light not heat. What a treat to hear them! Hoffman never gets caught rejecting a proposition unnecessarily. He accepts that his thinking is compatible with several different outcomes, or schools of thought, but is frank about preferring one, and not others. Each person escapes arguing about stupid things and each rapidly exposes the nature and direction of his thought. They are a real pleasure to listen to.

The interlocutor suggests that, instead of there being two classes of being: matter and mind, which is the idea that constitutes dualism, consciousness might be more like a fundamental force of the universe, such as is each of gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force. Consciousness might be, or not be, utterly fundamental. My inclination is to believe that consciousness is utterly fundamental. But my pleasure was in having to deal with someone who could make that sort of vital distinction, and force me to be more clever.