Senior educated white male.

Senior educated white male.

Hungary

The first thing to understand about Hungary is that it is manifestly a free place. Anything you read about it in the media is likely to be a lie. Why is this? Because Hungary ranks high in the disfavour of the European Commission bureaucrats who seek to bend Europe to their will. Hungary is not for bending. Defiance is in its nature.

A week of travelling up and down the Danube brought me to various parts of the country, including rural areas and the capital, Budapest, which is one of the great cities of Europe.

The statues tell it all. They are images of martyrdom and defiance. Time and again the statues, plinths, and plaques commemorate hopeless rebellions, successful rebellions, wars of separation, heroes of resistance. This is not to say that Hungarians have always been wise, nor is it to say that they have had much tendency to unite with their neighbours in alliances. They could have done more to ally themselves with friendly powers and to act as better allies, perhaps. But they are not going to roll over and play nice with bureaucrats in Brussels.

The great Hungarian plain to the south of Budapest was under Turkish rule for a century and a half after the defeat of the Hungarian nobility at the First Battle of Mohacs (1526). In that time the Turks managed to depopulate the place. Whether through over-taxation, cruelty, bad management, or religious persecution, Hungarians were reduced to almost nothing in large parts of their country. They walked away, leaving behind a desert. Imagine Saskatchewan being deserted by its citizens, and villages once thriving being abandoned. That was Hungary under Turkish rule.

Today, on post-Communist Hungary, unemployment is 3%. Consumption taxes are high, income taxes are reasonable and taxes on business are low. The place is thriving. But every Hungarian is taught from day one that the survival of the nation is not guaranteed, that Hungary has known oppression , and has fought for, and often failed to obtain, its freedom. Think of the Hungarian revolt against Communism in 1956, the struggle with the Austrian monarchy in the failed revolution of 1848, or the wars against the Turks. People such as this are not going to submit to a bunch of Belgian pansies armed with regulations.

Hungarian Parliament building

Obama’s Communist background

I have known about this for years. I wonder how many other people are aware of these facts. Not rumours, but facts. Obama’s people were red-diaper babies, his mentors were American Communists party members, and why, in a free society, these facts remain largely unknown, is a mystery.

I do not mean Democrats. I mean the CPUSA. And he was a two term President of the United States, and he was as close ideologically to Leonid Brezhnev as George Lincoln Rockwell was to Adolf Hitler. Anytime you think that maybe the decks are stacked against conservatives, think about how Obama was treated as a god among men by the New York Times and the mainstream media, and wonder at how this fraud on the American people – Obama – was perpetuated.

The earthworm crisis

So here is how you write a newspaper article, scientific paper, or any non- fiction. 1) notice that something is happening 2) apply the story line that something is increasing carbon dioxide output 3) wring your hands about it and shout “carbon crisis”.

Today’s example is a story from the National Post that earthworms are gradually moving northward in Canada into boreal forest. Normally this would be a good thing, as the little creatures turn over soil and increase its productivity. Plus, the good news aspect can be readily ignored, which is that the North American continent is slowly recovering from the impoverishment of the most recent glaciation. (I nearly used “ice age”, but that would be wrong; we are still in an ice age, but we call it an interglacial period).

” Native earthworms disappeared from most of northern North America 10,000 years ago, during the ice age. Now invasive earthworm species from southern Europe — survivors of that frozen epoch, and introduced to this continent by European settlers centuries ago — are making their way through northern forests, their spread hastened by roads, timber and petroleum activity, tire treads, boats, anglers and even gardeners.”

At this point you smack both cheeks with you fingers and gasp in horror. Oh yes, do not forget to use the words “invasive species”. That will get them going. Species are supposed to stay where they are, according to the School of Climate Alarm.

There is no phenomenon of nature that cannot be dragged into global warming. I am waiting for the physicists to inform us how loop quantum gravity needs to be funded because it has implications for anthropogenic global warming, or climate change, or something. It is all a funding scam and a cry for attention.

Censorship by any other means

You can censor the Internet just as effectively through privacy or copyright restrictions as you can by over political means. In fact, that is how censorship is being achieved in Europe. Many American sites will not conform to the European Commission’s GDPR. Result: try to get the Drudge Report, Powerline or a host of other sites based in America, as you tour through Europe. You will wait in vain. “The server took too long to respond” is not always a technical response; it can be the result of political decisions.

Regulatory barriers act as an effective form of political censorship because they do not appear to be overtly political. If you fail to conform to a European law respecting “privacy”, which about the implantation of ‘cookies’, then you disappear. The European Commission can claim that the Americans fail to respect European notions of ‘privacy’, without censoring anything on overtly political grounds.

The net result is what the Democrats like Vint Cerf who run the Internet organizations fear the most: fragmentation of the Internet. Fragmentation can serve the interests of anti-Americans, and does. It can all be accomplished by goody two shoes European bureaucrats.

I will keep you posted on this as I can. This was one of those things I had to experience before it became real. Maybe the servers did take too long to respond, but maybe the cause was technical, not political. I doubt it.

Fatuity

Zuckerberg and Harari – the latter is one of the most over-rated gasbags of the modern world – talk past each other for an hour and a half. Harari is concerned with the implications of Artificial Intelligence, and Zuckerberg with the breakup of the Internet into national jurisdictions. All of which is reasonable from their perspectives.

I am going to say something outrageous here: I do not think these people are all that bright. I invite you to watch the show (I suggest from about 28 minutes into it). Yes I am aware that Harari has three hugely best-selling histories of everything on the market, and he is currently fashionable. And we all know that Zuckerberg is a Master of the Universe with many tens of billions of dollars in his grasp. I have neither the billions nor the best sellers and I could be accused of envy.

Zuckerberg thinks AI is a set of methods that improve processes everywhere. It should not be personified, as Harari does. Perhaps I should not be so harsh on Zuckerberg. He makes a few reasonable points. Nevertheless I find him banal, even if largely right .

Harari thinks the forces of efficiency and morality have split, and this has given a boost to totalitarian regimes. “Some system far away can know me better than my mother”, and that system can be hostile.

This, he says, is a situation we never had to deal with before.

Zuckerberg observes that there is no metric to optimize society. Harari conceives that “free will” is an illusion, and that what people imagine is their own will is an implant, so to speak, of the persuasive arts developed through the Internet.

My understanding of this attitude is shaped by what I heard recently from some left wing academic (I know, a pleonasm). He argues that the “press” needed to become professionalized , that is, turned into a self regulating professional body with powers of certification and disaccreditation, in the manner of lawyers, doctors or occupational therapists. He based his views o the terrible events of recent years, Brexit and the election of Trump.

It is difficult for those of us who look upon Brexit and Trump as perfectly understandable to sympathize with the shock that these two events delivered to the political Left. More even than the fall of Communism in 1989, the fall of Obama/Clinton and their replacement by Trump was their own personal “collapse of Communism”, their god that failed. And Brexit likewise has overturned the rule of the chattering classes in Britain, and they are fighting back as hard as they can to reclaim their accustomed role in ruling opinion.

Harari would argue that the customer is no longer right, because his opinion has been hacked by AI and manipulative algorithms. Zuckerberg, to his credit, demurs. These questions are not new, he says. In that he is perfectly correct. And I also agree with Zuckerberg that that technology has not made this problem more acute now than it has ever been, and thus I think Harari is merely handwringing. But he will not shut up about his concerns. Zuckerberg, by contrast, seems more rooted in the world of practice.

My bubble

Occasionally I am forced to realize that i live in my own opinion bubble. Or if you prefer, sphere. We organize our lives to stay away from strife, and so we live as much as possible in a place where we have filtered out the unwelcome. I do it, you do it, he does it.

Today’s lesson came from members of the NDP (Canada’s lefter that Left opposition party) objecting to an invitation to Jordan Peterson appearing at a parliamentary committee. The National Post stated:

“The NDP is objecting to an invitation Conservative MPs have extended to psychology professor and author Jordan B. Peterson to testify before the House of Commons justice committee, calling it “irresponsible and morally reprehensible.”

“In a statement released Tuesday, NDP MP Tracey Ramsey said the Conservatives are “dangerously pandering to divisive politics instead of standing up for human rights.”

If I were an NDP member of Parliament, I would enjoy having a set-to with Jordan Peterson. What dismays me is the constant effort not to engage other ideas. As the NDP representative on a CBC television show once said, in respect of a mildly controversial topic, “We shouldn’t even be discussing this”. Wrong – we should.

Everything has been settled, in this view. Only we keep finding that the number of topics that have been settled: gay rights, abortion, global warming, keeps expanding, and the zone of the discussable keeps shrinking, all in the name of “inclusion” and “diversity”. Of course as you will know, inclusion means exclusion, and diversity means uniformity, only the Left does not know that, or if it knows it, will not admit it.

But the false god Inclusivism must be served


North American Indians are now a protected class of people. You cannot say rude things about them, even if accurate. I am not defending Lynn Beyak’s taste or discernment, I am opposing the desire to squelch anything that offends this second’s standards of what can be said.

My hero Mark Steyn says it all:

“Without a healthy respect for free speech you have no culture of honest inquiry. Without a culture of honest inquiry you do not have the necessary climate of innovation that a genuinely dynamic business environment needs.

“That very narrow and particular focus tells you that what’s really going on is the substitution of one set of blasphemy laws by another. “

We used to laugh at the ideas of sacred cows, which are a reality in India. Now we have them ourselves, wandering into traffic and blocking streets. Don’t be mean to a panhandler. He or she could belong to a sacred group of humans. You know I am not exaggerating.

Small victories

It is not all doom and gloom.

The Ontario Bar rejects forced confessions (compelled speech) from the legal profession concerning racial awareness and white privilege.h

Prosecution service drops the case against Admiral Norman. Liberals look like political nitwits.

It is obvious that Trump will beat the Democratic nominee in the 2020 election, even to the Guardian.

On the other hand, the Liberals in Canada continue to lay waste to our energy sector with the approval of far too many people.

I am still not persuaded that the federal Liberals will lose power this autumn. I wish more people could be persuaded that Andrew Scheer was worthy of their confidence. I am not saying this conclusion is fair nor am I saying they are right in their assessment. I just do not feel Conservative victory yet. I hope I am wrong.

Why Casper Semenya matters

Image result for caster semenya

Poor Casper Semenya. She is somewhat intersexed, and the levels of testosterone in her body enable her to run much faster than women less masculinized. And this brings up two issues that blow a hole in essential contentions of some Leftists.

First, it is obvious that if men (or former men, however surgically and chemically neutered) are allowed to compete in female sports, they will win. Higher, faster, stronger. The victories of former males in female sports are becoming so obvious that it can no longer be ignored that males have superior strength, speed and endurance. This leads to the realization that all of female sports is a set-aside, which is obvious when you think about it, but this issue causes people to think about it consciously.

To give an example, Canadian female hockey Olympians practice by competing against male junior B hockey players as equals.

The second hole that this fact blows in the brains of the feminist Left is that sex cannot be seen purely as a matter of self-identification. If I cannot self identify as a female to compete in sports, then I cannot identify as a female to use their washrooms.

It will be argued that athletes who have transitioned from male to female do not continue to have physical advantages, but this will be shown to be rubbish soon enough.

What matters is biology, so long denied, denigrated and derided by the political Left. If issues are by their nature biological, in whole or in part, then merely talking about them in a different way will not change facts. Since most of the Left believes that by talking about things differently we can change facts, because “facts” are a construction of white male defence mechanisms to prevent changes of power, the impressive resistance of facts to manipulation by nattering will become more and more apparent.

The ACLU issued the following Tweet:
“Caster Semenya should be able to compete without being subjected to sex stereotypes that have disproportionately harmed Black women for too long. Women with high levels of testosterone are and always will be woman enough. Stop policing women’s bodies.”

You will have observed that the ACLU switches the issue from sex to race, that the magic word “stereotypes” is used and the harm is said to be “disproportionate”. The word “stereotype” is used in debate whenever a fact proves to be inconvenient. Three magic formulae are used in just two sentences

I have observed that lesbians have been the most clear in their rejection of the arguments of the advocates of transexuals to participate in female sports, and more generally to claim the right to be women. They are saying that lesbianism is a biological condition, not merely a question of self-identification. You should watch this video of Leftists lesbians complaining about how their children are manipulated by the medical profession and others to “transition” without parental permission.

They call this a “social contagion”, and I agree with them. If you object to clitoridectomies by Muslims, why would you not object to radical mastectomies for underage girls. All in the name of pursuing your “authentic self”. “People should know that this is Planned Parenthood’s new business”, one of them says. You can transition your sex and still not be old enough to buy alcohol.

But the implications of the re-emergence of biology as a discussable factor in life goes beyond sport, quite obviously. The debate about the role of testosterone in sport is only the beginning of a necessary pushback against the attempt to repress the reality of biology, and biological difference, in the name of inclusivism and equality.