The Dems have disgraced themselves in the eyes of normally constituted human minds. We will not forget.
The Dems have disgraced themselves in the eyes of normally constituted human minds. We will not forget.
“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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
For those of you who are fans of John Carpenter’s horror masterpiece The Thing, the transformation of the husky dog that runs into an Antarctic base pursued by apparently crazy Norwegians must be indelibly etched in the mind. In the pound, at night, the dog, amid shrieks and growls, turns into a seething mass of alien protoplasm, absorbing the other dogs into its hellish organism. Approaching the metamorphosing creature, one of the terrified crew stammers, “…I don’t know what it is, b..but it’s weird and pissed off.”
Which brings me, naturally enough, to the Democrat Party. What, ostensibly, is, or was, a political party in the US, has, during the recent Hate-In surrounding the confirmation process of a Supreme Court nominee, exposed its inner nature as a something resembling an alien organism built to consume humans.
Not content with mundane lies, innuendo, smear and character assassination form the modus operandi of the Democrats on the committees. Dredging up some pseudo-psychologist from the distant past, who can produce not even a coherent memory of anything, crying, posturing, whining and self-pity apparently are now evidence for damning a man (only a man, never a woman) and destroying his character.
Further, the ignorant mobs shouting, screaming and disrupting the proceedings, are welcomed and tolerated by the Democrats, indeed, egged on to further mischief. Republican senators are harassed and hounded in public places and restaurants by thugs. A mockery is made of due process.
When this happens, the end of constitutional government is not far off. In a free society it is self-restraint that protects all, not just from the violence of others, but from the violence of government. Even a mob will not tolerate chaos; tyranny will be the result.
What type of people engage in this activity? What types are the left and socialists in general? What is the political protoplasm that forms the ichor of leftism?
Return to the wisdom of Gustave le Bon for an analysis of the leftist personality and the deplorable actions of these people are rendered in all their repugnant clarity. In The Psychology of Socialism over one hundred years ago, le Bon writes of the leaders of socialism and anarchism as demi-savants…
I apply the term demi-savant to those who have no
other knowledge than that contained in books, and who
consequently know absolutely nothing of the realities of
life. They are the product of our schools and universities,
those lamentable factories of degeneration whose disastrous
effects have been exposed by Taine, Paul Bourget,
and many others. A professor, a scholar, or a graduate of
one of our great colleges is always for years, and often all
his life, nothing but a demi-savant.
It is from the ranks of the demi-savant, and notably
from the ranks of unemployed licentiates and bachelors
of the universities, outcasts from society whom the State
has been unable to place, ushers discontented with their
lot, university professors who find their merits overlooked,
that the most dangerous disciples of Socialism are recruited,
and even the worst Anarchists.
And what of the mob on the streets? Who are the leftists, the followers, the street rabble? Mostly, they are…
Social failures, misunderstood geniuses, lawyers without
clients, writers without readers, doctors without
patients, professors ill-paid, graduates without employment,
clerks whose employers disdain them for their
insufficiency, puffed-up university instructors—these are
the natural adepts of Socialism. In reality they care very
little for doctrines. Their dream is to create by violent
means a society in which they will be the masters.
We are seeing this unfold now in the US, and shortly thereafter it will happen in other countries. To stop the descent into anarchy, good men have to stand up and fight it. Watching the sad spectacle of the Democrats going insane on TV, Mrs Rebel Yell added drily, “…they only seem to be motivated by hate, anger and malice.” Need I add more?
One final blast from the great man…
If one were to review the parts played by the various
classes in the dissolution of society among [the Latin]
peoples, one would say that the doctrinaires and malcontents
manufactured by the universities act above all
by attacking ideals, and are, by reason of the intellectual
anarchy they give rise to, one of the most corrosive factors
of destruction ; the middle classes help the downfall by
their indifference, their egotism, their feeble will, and
their absence of initiative or political perception ; the
lower classes act in a revolutionary manner by seeking to
destroy, so soon as it shall be sufficiently undermined,
the edifice which is tottering on its foundations.
Yet again, another illustration that, in politics, there is nothing new under the Sun.
The interview speaks for itself.