We are producing graduates who have very little idea of the diversity of opinion in the real world.
Peanut allergies are rising because we are not exposing kids to peanuts. The same is occurring with conservative opinions.
You need to experience exclusion and intolerance in order to grow up.
Kids today are never out of sight of adult supervision.
“Bias response teams” are always available to be called in to mediate conflict. “Bubble-wrapped kids”.
What do universities do to promote interaction of different political viewpoints? Nothing. They are suffocating it.
Slurs replace argument. Kids learn to slur, not argue.
The key to the new morality is a method of looking at society as a matter of power and privilege. That is the only perspective they learn. Privilege is bad, victimhood is good. One totalizing perspective. we are actually making students less wise.
Does the Left not know that what they are doing is causing the election of Trump? [That’s Jonathan Haidt asking, not me]
Jonathan Haidt discusses the university political monoculture of leftism, victimhood, and social justice warriors. You gain prestige by invoking the university’s authority to settle your sensitivity issues with professors. Haidt links this tendency to changes in the American parenting style: a parent is always present, and kids never learn to settle things by themselves. He calls it a feminized culture. Liberty and freedom are not talked about; diversity and inclusion are always talked about, and diversity never means diversity of opinion. A gigantic staff of therapists supervizes the playground. “We need to change diversity training”, he says. That is a code for changing the moral education of students.
I need not dilate further on this woman’s virtues of bravery and truth telling. That she remains so free from rancor after her recent experience of the left-wing mob of law professors howling for her head is a testament to her character. And she is right, the university is rendering itself irrelevant, and the question we tax payers must ask is: why are we paying these people?
Why are we paying for universities? What are we getting from them but ill-educated mobs of leftists? Indeed, positively badly educated people, who think they know everything and really know nothing.
I hardly need add anything to the ever-expanding revelations from Hollywood, the greatest source of hypocrisy and lying in the known Universe. Perhaps that is why it was so deeply beholden to Hillary Rodent Clinton, the first, and hopefully last, clinical psychopath to seek the US presidency.
We should all be grateful to Weinstein, despite being the most loathsome, oleaginous reptile in the Hollywood swamp, for exposing the cosmic, interstellar corruption and deceit that powers that bubbling pit of Satan’s refuse. How appropriate that pervy Harvey was one of Rodent Clinton’s most devoted worms and she, one of his most servile orcs.
After the first blast, days of deafening silence from the Obamas, the Clintons, and the tribes of lefty feminist pseuds. From this day forth, no attacks on Trump from the Fake News Media, the Pant-Suit Psychopath, or the Demon-Crat Party, that vile excrescence of the anti-White, anti-culture, post-civilization force of decay and destruction, shall ever be considered relevant to the concerns of ordinary, decent people. Their drones and whores in the New York Times, the Washington Com-Post, and the TV networks, have for ever been exposed as the most poisonous agents of decay that any society can produce. And I mean no insult to whores by comparing them to the Fake News Media.
All the puffery of the liberal mountebanks of Hollywood, for decades, covered the tracks of this creature, and, most of his female victims sacrificed their honor for their careers. Any real man in Hollywood would have confronted the creature decades ago, which tells you how many real men there are in Hollywood. All the Matt Damons, Robert de Niros, all the lefty bores on late-night TV and the rest of that disgraceful ilk, have shown themselves to be beta males with clammy hands and rubber spines.
The great British thinker, Edmund Burke, writing of the French revolution, remarked over 200 years ago, that, no matter what the consitution of any state may be, …”the materials of which it is composed, …is of ten thousand times greater consequence than all the formalities in the world.” The political class of the US has lost all credilbility, lost its way, and the Hollywood tribe are the termites contributing to its demise. This is why the organs of state propaganda, the New York Times and the TV networks, all of whom covered for Weinstein for decades, openly argue against the rights of Americans, against the Second Amendment, against common decency, and in favor of suppressing free speech in the cause of “caring” and “sensitivity”. The American constitution was written by Western men, to conserve their liberty in a constitutional republic. Apart from God-Emperor Trump and a small part of the Republican Party, the political class of the USA has been taken over by the same decrepit refuse that led France from revolution to The Terror—that tribe of inferiors who are …”turbulent, discontented men,…in proportion as they are puffed up with personal pride and arrogance, generally despise their own order.”
With the rise of Trump, America has shown that the true American spirit still strives, and the death of the Hollywood psyche, the mind-set of the parasite class, may well be coming to an end. The more the Rodent Clinton shrieks, the closer it is. As for the rest of the Rat Brigade in Tinseltown, it’s every worm for himself.
Daily Mail provides a summary of where things stand for center-right in Europe after the Austrian election.
The eurosceptic and anti-immigrant Freedom Party (FPOe) came close to winning the presidency in December, which would have made its leader the European Union’s first far-right president.
One of Europe’s most established nationalist parties, it is forecast to come second or third in this weekend’s vote and could become junior coalition partners to the favourites, the conservative People’s Party (OeVP).
Founded in 1956 by ex-Nazis, the party earned a stunning second place in 1999 elections with nearly 27 percent.
Last year its candidate Norbert Hofer narrowly lost a presidential runoff against Greens-backed economics professor Alexander Van der Bellen.
The openly anti-immigration and Islamophobic Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the third-biggest party in the Bundestag after the September election, a political earthquake for post-war Germany.
The party took nearly 13 percent of the votes, having failed in the 2013 election to make even the five percent required for representation in parliament.
It has more than 90 seats on the benches of the parliament that meets for the first time on October 24.
Marine Le Pen’s National Front (FN), founded by her firebrand father Jean-Marie in 1972, took nearly 34 percent of votes in the May presidential election run-off won by Emmanuel Macron
This was double her father’s 17.8 percent score when he reached the second round in 2002.
In campaigning, Le Pen vowed to abandon the euro, reinstate control of the nation’s borders and curb immigration if she won.
But the party fared badly in June parliamentary elections, taking just eight seats out of 577.
Tensions since then burst into the open when Le Pen’s right-hand man Florian Philippot quit and looks set to go his own way.
The Movement for a Better Hungary, known as Jobbik, is ultra-nationalist and eurosceptic. It is the second largest party in the legislature but has been outflanked by Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s own hardline anti-immigration stance.
The Northern League is a ‘regionalist’ formation that evolved into an anti-euro and anti-immigrant party that secured 18 seats in the 2013 parliamentary election.
The next general election must be held by spring 2018 and the party is hovering at around 14 percent of voter intentions.
The neo-Nazi Golden Dawn finished third in the September 2015 election, with seven percent of the vote and 18 MPs. One later defected and the party is now the fourth biggest in parliament.
The Sweden Democrats party, with roots in the neo-Nazi movement, made a breakthrough in September 2014 to become the country’s third biggest party with 48 of 349 seats and nearly 13 percent of the vote.
The anti-Islam Freedom Party (PVV) of Geert Wilders in March became the second party in parliament, with 20 seats in the 150-member parliament.
The nationalist United Patriots coalition entered government for the first time in May after coming third in a March election. It is the junior party in the governing coalition.
In March 2016 the People’s Party Our Slovakia benefited from Europe’s refugee crisis to enter parliament for the first time, winning 14 seats out of 150.
The Federalist examines how “The radicalization of the Democratic Party is transforming everything that happens in America into another battle in our unending culture war.”
For all their shortcomings, conservatives at least have a limiting principle for politics. Most of them believe, for example, in the principles enshrined in the Constitution and maintain that no matter how bad things are, the Bill of Rights is a necessary bulwark, sometimes the only bulwark, against tyranny and violence. In contrast, here’s Timothy Egan of The New York Timesarguing unabashedly for the repeal of the Second and Fifth Amendments.
The rapid radicalization of Democrats along these lines follows a ruthless logic about the entire premise of the American constitutional order. If you believe, as progressives increasingly do, that America was founded under false pretenses and built on racial oppression, then why bother conserving it? And why bother trying to compromise with those on the other side, especially if they reject progressives’ unifying theory that America is forever cursed by its original sin of slavery, which nothing can expiate?
Before you scoff, understand that this view of race and America is increasingly mainstream on the American Left. To read someone like Ta-Nehisi Coates, whose recent article in The Atlantic is a manifesto of racial identity politics that argues Trump’s presidency is based on white supremacy, is to realize that progressive elites no longer believe they can share a republic with conservatives, or really anyone with whom they disagree.
Coates has attained near god-like status among progressives with his oracular writings on race and politics, which take for granted the immutability of race and racial animus. So it’s deeply disturbing when he writes, as he does in a new collection of essays, that “should white supremacy fall, the means by which that happens might be unthinkable to those of us bound by present realities and politics.”…..
For a sincere progressive, almost everything that happened in the past is a crime against the present, and the only greatness America can attain is by repudiating its past and shaming—or silencing, if possible—all those who believe preserving our constitutional order is the best way for all of us to get along.
Seen in that light, the radicalization of Democrats is something qualitatively different, and much more dangerous, than the radicalization of Republicans. It means, among other things, that the culture war is now going to encompass everything, and that it will never end.
Several exit poll studies after the 2016 US election pointed out that some counties in the Rust Belt underwent a 30-point vote swing. Lot of those who voted for Obama in 2012 switched their vote to Trump in 2016. Did all of them suddenly become racist as the leftist press asserts?
George Soros wanted an answer to the same question and funded a study.
“The three researchers who conducted the study are Stacy Harwood, a professor urban and regional planning at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign; Harris Beider, a visiting professor in Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs; and Kusminder Chahal, a researcher at Coventry University in England.
While the study’s primary stated goal is to provide a deeper understanding of the white working class, an unstated goal of the study is to help the American left and the Democratic Party recapture some meaningful chunk of the white working-class voting bloc.”
The study made the following observations.
White working-class voters are sick and tired of political correctness and identity politics
“We can’t even say what we feel,” says a Tacoma interviewee who voted for Trump because “he’s actually saying this stuff that many people across America are thinking.”
Trump-supporting members of the white working class also despise identity politics and they perceive the Democratic Party “as the party of identity politics.”
“Some in our study had grown up in staunch Democrat families and had previously supported Democrat candidates,” the researchers explain. “Yet the view is that politicians are more interested in looking after communities of color than white working-class communities.”
White working-class voters think ‘white privilege’ is a bunch of idiotic claptrap
The study participants describe “white privilege” as nonsense.
“Participants felt they were struggling because they lived paycheck to paycheck, had two or three jobs, and worked hard to put food on the table,” the researchers say. “Their limited economic means and lack of upward mobility did not seem like white privilege.”
“The working class has been abandoned or exiled by the Democrats”
“The working class has been abandoned or exiled by the Democrats,” the study flatly concludes.
the industry that makes money mocking Christianity, hating Catholicism, and degrading morality and ordinary American beliefs, now loses its moral cover.
Of the things most to be hoped for, it is the destruction of the influence of these savagely immoral nihilists in Hollywood. Another pillar of the American Democratic Party is collapsing. Wall Street took a hit in 2007, but still stands, as rich and as disgraced as ever. I can only hope that Black Lives Matter and Anti-Fa are next, and that their dooms will be final.
It is an agreeable event when all one’s prejudices about a corrupt institution are confirmed.
Trump may be a raving loon – I still think not -but there are many and considerable benefits to his having taken power. Do you think it is merely accidental that Weinstein is being exposed now, when the Democrats are out of power in Washington? And there will soon be no Vanity Fair soon to applaud the ogre, as the mouthpiece of fashionable Democratic show-biz political twaddle will soon go through a massive downsizing, the prospect of which caused its editor, Graydon Carter, to resign before he had to chop his friends from jobs.
[Trump] has touched—embraced!—every third rail in American politics. He has offended (and I apologize if I’ve left some group out): African-Americans, Native Americans, Mexicans, Jews, Muslims, war heroes—war heroes!—families of war heroes, the disabled, women, and babies. Babies! Through word or action, Trump has promoted gun violence, bigotry, ignorance, intolerance, lying, and just about everything else that can be wrong with a society. And yet he marches on, playing to a constituency that just doesn’t seem to care. The thing is, this ramshackle campaign, following a ramshackle business career, has exposed his flaws and failures to the world and, more importantly, to the people he will brush up against for the rest of his life. To them he is now officially a joke. I suspect he knows this. And if his thin skin on minor matters is any indication, he will be lashing out with even more vitriol. He is a mad jumble of a man, with a slapdash of a campaign and talking points dredged from the dark corners at the bottom of the Internet. I don’t think he will get to the White House, but just the fact that his carny act has gotten so far along the road will leave the path with a permanent orange stain. Trump, more than even the most craven politicians or entertainers, is a bottomless reservoir of need and desire for attention. He lives off crowd approval. And at a certain point that will dim, as it always does to people like him, and the cameras will turn to some other American novelty. When that attention wanes, he will be left with his press clippings, his dyed hair, his fake tan, and those tiny, tiny fingers.
It gives me a measure of satisfaction to observe that Harvey Weinstein is now disgraced, Graydon carter is out, and Trump is still President. I grant you, my standards are low, but they have to be in this disgusting era.
Published on May 18, 2017, and still relevant. Trump, says Taleb, is trying to do the right things. He is trying to get rid of the metastasizing growth of bureaucracy caused by tax codes and ecological fantasies of clean energy. Trump has never had a boss in his entire life. Second point, does Trump gain from stress and turmoil? Essay question: Is Trump an anti-fragile President?
Like all market people, they overemphasize the role of the stock market, but that is their professional deformation. But on the main issues, Taleb has pointed out the essential features of Trump’s nature and program.
“The rise of the bromance “is very, very good for men,” said one of its authors, Professor Adam White . It offers young men the opportunity for, as the research found, “elevated emotional stability, enhanced emotional disclosure, social fulfilment and better conflict resolution, compared to the emotional lives they shared with girlfriends.”
“But it’s not necessarily benefiting women, and in fact it may well be disadvantaging them,” White said.
“What happens in 50 years, say, if these bromantic relationships really take off and men decide, ‘Hang on, we really enjoy these. These are much better. We can gain more emotionality from it. We’re less regulated, we’re less policed,’” White said. “And therefore women actually just become the sexual fulfillers of men and nothing else. That’s the worrying aspect.”
Men will withdraw until their price goes up. Women who figure out that a man is a relatively scarce phenomenon first will prosper. And then watch the pendulum swing.
But just look at how this piece of sociology is constructed.
Would you base your important social findings on 30 interviews about the “bromantic” lives of male undergrads? In short it appears that the authors sought young hetero men who were living with other young hetero men. Thirty interviews now constitutes real science, or sociology, at least.
For the past forty years we have been inundated in feminist blather – you know the line: over-privileged and frequently over-promoted middle class achieving women whining about the arduous nature of their sex’s role, the fact that everything that goes wrong in their lives is either the fault of men or biology, the patriarchy and anything but their characters and talents. Men growing up in the period since 1970 have heard nothing else.
It has always been true that the emotional lives of both sexes have been principally with their own sex, and that the relations between the two sexes were economic, sexual, and pro-genitive – they were purpose-driven, when the primary point of existence was progenitive (child-productive) marriage. The notion that the primary emotional bonds of men are exclusively with women, and women with men, is about as old as Betty Friedan.
I overheard in a bar last week a mannish woman and a feminine man strongly agreeing that:
women were shortly to be earning more than men
men would be relegated to second-class status
this would in some real sense be a desirable state of affairs
Young women were calling each other sluts as a term of approval, and not without reason.
So, let us review the state of affairs in the contemporary western world:
carping women with a deep sense of both grievance and entitlement;
people who cannot control their emotions (principally young sheltered women) insisting that other people then must control their own behaviour;
males who find that their freedom of expression and action is severely curtailed by their girlfriends;
declining male participation in overtly feminized educational (read ideological training) institutions;
An ideological environment in which the moral superiority of the female is endlessly proclaimed;
people talking about “campus rape culture” as if such as things existed outside the fevered brains of the lesbian thought police;
women seeking casual sex, and getting it, while complaining about men’s lack of commitment;
lack of family formation
I would say the problem is self-solving. And no, I do not think this is a sustainable state of affairs. It is sheer moral, social and cultural decadence.
But if a few straight guys want to live together and experience fraternity for a few years, that is “bad for women”. Let me be clear: what women want is men who are not going to kow-tow to feminist crap. Men will not argue the point, they will simply exemplify being men. Women may not say so, but leadership must come from the male. Males have done so for as long as there have been humans and men will continue to do so, despite anything you read.
Those men in need of strong remedial therapy from feminine domination are invited to explore a Sterling Men’s Weekend. More traditional methods of getting out of the house for respectable masculine company of a civilized sort are invited to enquire about the Masons. Masonic Lodges are active in every provincial, state, and local jurisdiction in every place formerly a part of the British, Romanoff and Hapsburg empires from Chile to Canada, and Russia to Australia.
The word “bromance” and articles like this suggest the Matriarchy is starting to be worried. They should be. Men have always gotten along. Now it appears to be quasi-revolutionary.