Category Archives: Regress This

On TVO’s The Agenda

The Agenda with Steve Paikin is a taxpayer funded public affairs shown on TVO here in Ontario. It’s good… and it’s not.  The two opposites can be true at the same time.

On the one hand, Paikin is a very professional, calm and informed interviewer. The tenor of the show is generally such that, depending on the topic, putting it in on TV might be a good alternative to Ambien or Lunestra if you’re having trouble falling asleep.  No grenade launching, no shouting; generally a show with polite discourse with a measured likeable moderator.

That’s the good about the show. The bad about the show is its leftist slant.  Paikin is a Liberal, not the small “l” classical liberal we’d all be OK with, no… more the partisan big “L” party apparatchik Liberal.  (His son Zach Paikin actually tried to run for the position of National Policy Chair for the Liberal party and also tried to be nominated to represent the Liberals in the Hamilton West/Ancaster-Dundas riding for the past federal election).

If you were to review the show topics over a cycle of, say a month, you would get a rotation dominated by the following;

  • Climate change! and how it’s an unfathomable existential threat to humanity/the Great Lakes/northern communities;
  • A procession of Ontario Liberal cabinet ministers to brag about how wonderful a job they’re doing and, without any critical line of questioning, who are allowed to promote inane ideas like cap-and-trade, carbon taxes, subsidizing self-driving car studies, HOV lanes on 400 series highways, borrowing $25 billion from children to pay for a reduction of hydro rates…and on and on;
  • Authors of obscure, unread books on Canadian culture, media or social experiences, often decrying the horrors of our racist and sexist country
  • Indigenous leaders and academics… lots and lots of them.  Allowed to moan (again without criticism) about what a racist/colonialist country this is.  (Including a recent episode wherein the academic, a U of Toronto professor no less, was allowed to postulate a conspiracy theory about the Canadian government keeping Indigenous people sick in order to rape their resources that would have made Alex Jones proud)
  • LGBTQ leaders and academics… lots and lots of them.  Allowed to moan (again without criticism) about what a sexist/homophobic country this is.

Again, this is all hosted by a perfectly amiable and intelligent Steve Paikin.  Often he convenes panels to discuss topics on his show but inevitably the ratio of Progressives to Conservatives is usually 4:1, if a Conservative is invited on at all.

But overall a milquetoast, left-leaning news program on a public broadcaster that tries to be a calm forum for the type of babble that only public employed intellectuals would be interested in.  And us.  We listen to the Agenda podcast frankly, not to get any insights but to hear the crap the other side likes to spout.  But honestly 2/3 of the programs are deleted after listening to the first 5 minutes.

So, surely then, the Agenda people and Steve Paikin are horrified to be hearing that a clip of their show, where they had Jordan Peterson on to debate gender pronouns is at the centre of the Lindsay Shepherd controversy at Wilfred Laurier.  That show is central to the whole fiasco that has escalated to international attention.

You’d think then that any “normal” TV news program would then be following up with the main players in this little free speech drama and milk it for a few weeks, use it to become a focal theme for the program in the next month or two.  Maybe a few shows centered around the debate with some of the main players could garner the Agenda a few more than the regular (measly) couple of hundred views an Agenda program seems to get on YouTube currently.

But no, no.  Not this program.  Take for example just the other day… the show decides, let’s instead give an antifa punk time to broadcast his intellectually corrupt ideas of “preemptive defense” and mention white-supremacists fifty times and slur people as racists and fascists – because they might hold an opposing view to him on just about everything.  This, our tax money and our public broadcaster has time for.

The Agenda on TVO is not a very good program.  One has to wonder what the purpose of funding this type of program with public money is in this day and age when – if there truly was a legitimate audience for a program of this nature – it could be migrated to the internet and podcasts and off the backs of taxpayers.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , ,

On Wilfred Laurier and Pronoun Rights

In the whole Lindsay Shepherd and Wilfred Laurier University fiasco it is hard to nail down a root cause for the affair because it sits at the nexus of a lot of issues swirling about in our culture and society today. But the story can be traced as such; Lindsay Shepherd showed a clip of Jordan Peterson in class.  Jordan Peterson is opposed to the concept of the use of gender neutral pronouns being potentially legally enforced under the auspices of bill C-16 and the Ontario Human Rights Code.  Progressives have come to view any opposition to the idea of using gender neutral pronouns is a litmus test for whether a person is “trans-phobic” and thus, whether intentionally or not, an advocate/agent for the Patriarchy.  The Patriarchy is an important idea because life is seen by modern Progressives as a giant series of ongoing power struggles between groups and identities with White Males at the top.  And to get to the top a group must actively be oppressing other groups.  And so, by proxy, Jordan Peterson by opposing the enforced use of gender neutral pronouns has become representative of the Oppressor.  The Oppressor must be resisted.  He must not be provided platforms for disseminating his views.  His views have no validity and any suggestion that they may have some merit is morally wrong because oppression of any type is wrong.  Some common examples of ongoing oppressions in our society;

  • Christianity oppresses free sexual expression
  • Whites oppress blacks and minorities
  • Straights oppress gays and transgendered
  • Capitalism oppresses poor people
  • The West oppresses Islam
  • Jews oppress Palestinians

And thusly Lindsay Shepherd was complicit in perpetuating the ongoing oppression of trans-gender people by providing Jordan Peterson a platform. And this warranted sanction in the eyes of the university… until the recording of the interrogation session became public.

The whole Post-Modernist world view of Oppressors and Victims and eternal power struggles is not something we have the philosophical tools to unpack here. Suffice to say that we should all be scared; university social studies and humanities faculties are filled with professors that believe in the Post-Modernist narrative and are “training” hundreds of thousands of young people who enter life interpreting the world through this prism that discards ideals of merit, rationality, intellectual rigour and cultural stability.

It is interesting though to examine whether being called “xie” or “xer” is a right or if failing to use those artificial words is a violation of transgender rights or an abrogation of one’s responsibilities in the exercise of Free Speech. If it weren’t actually a “right”, or seen to be a violation of accepted limitations on Free Speech, much of this brouhaha would be laughed at as just another peculiarity of politically correct campus life.

Rights should always be discussed in tandem with Responsibilities. There are no rights without the responsibilities that accompany each right.  Libertarians view rights as either “Negative” or “Positive” rights.   For a person to have rights there are responsibilities imposed on their fellow humans.  In the case of Negative Rights our fellow humans need to do nothing and need only abstain from doing anything.  Negative = Abstention.  Positive Rights however ask fellow humans for action in order for that right to be exercised.  Positive = Action.

An example is the Right to Free Speech. It is a Negative Right because in order for me to exercise my right I need you to do nothing, only abstain from any interference.  A Positive Right would be, say, a Right to Education which would by extension mean that someone has to take action to provide you with an education either by actually doing the teaching or funding it.  Libertarians argue that the only natural rights are Negative Rights and that all Positive Rights can only be enforced by contract between individuals; that it is morally wrong for the government to impose Positive Rights on the citizens and the country at large by compelling behaviour as a result of their monopoly on violence.

It’s worth noting that there is some dispute on the validity of Negative vs. Positive rights, the argument being that while say, the Right to Property is a Negative Right, if it’s violated and some thieves steal off with your stuff, it’s everyone’s prerogative to take action and restore your stuff to you as a way of ensuring that your Right to Property is not just some theoretical abstract and actual reality. Taking up the Libertarian idea of a Positive Right requiring contract, arguably by being citizens in a country we have contract with each other to ensure the protection of rights through necessary action.  And this introduces the notion of Reciprocity – a right can only be such a thing if there is reciprocity, an unwritten contract between citizens that if you protect and respect my rights then in turn I will protect and respect your same rights.  It’s a main reason why animals can have no rights like humans have – we can love and respect them and treat them humanely but because they cannot reciprocate our actions they cannot therefore have rights like humans.

But in today’s Western societies we accept that the self is not absolved of any responsibility in the exercise of rights. Going back to my Free Speech as an example, it is a Negative Right that asks you to do nothing, but our society also legally requires me to not use that Free Speech to incite violence, to incite hatred, nor to slander anyone.  Those are my responsibilities.  Unless you are a Free Speech absolutist that rejects government coercion of any behaviour and endorses a position of no restrictions and thusly no legally enforceable personal responsibilities in the matter of Free Speech, it’s generally accepted here in Canada that these are “reasonable” limitations on Free Speech and my responsibilities as a practitioner of that right.

So going back to “xie” and “xir”… if there were any “right” to have your gender pronoun of choice used that would be a Positive Right because it is asking for action by others. Beyond disputing the whole notion of Positive Rights (see the three generations of rights and what an open-ended mess Positive Rights in the 2nd and 3rd generation can become), but what is the reciprocal action from the trans community?  There is none.  And because it is a one-way street it is not a “right” but more appropriately a requested courtesy.  And manners are subjective and cannot be enforced by law.  I can call someone an asshole to their face, and while that may be rude and perhaps I should be socially sanctioned for this behaviour, I should not be thrown in jail or fined for doing so.  The government should never be in the business of compelling manners.

But that’s not the argument the proponents of gender neutral pronouns have taken up because they know it’s an easy loser. Rather they’ve hinged their argument on the idea that my responsibility in the exercise of Free Speech is not to incite violence or hatred as was described and is widely acknowledged.  And by refusing to use gender neutral pronouns I am doing exactly that.  Speech is violence. But that argument cannot stand either.  Better articles have been written by Jonathan Haidt and others about the push to have speech (or silence) interpreted as violence so there is no need to rehash them here.

So, in the end one can conclude that there is no first generation or even second generational “right” to be called by your gender pronoun of choice – at best it’s a Positive 3rd generational (i.e. social aspirational) right that has no evident reciprocity for the vast majority of fellow citizens.  And it’s a dangerous overstretch of the definition of violence to suggest that failure to use these pronouns of choice are in violation of our responsibility not to use Free Speech to incite violence or hatred.  It’s not a right, but virtue signaling and political correctness run amok, a power play and an attempt to create yet another litmus test to measure where you land on the Progressive scale of morality.

We’re still waiting for Justin Trudeau to use “xie” or “xer” in a speech. It’s coming.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On Student Narcissism and Lack of Empathy

Mr. Sandor Dosman was having trouble attracting people to apply to be wait staff at his café which is located on the Wilfred Laurier University campus and, ironically it turns out as we go through the story, right next door to the Graduate Students Association (GSA). So Mr. Dosman posts this ad to Facebook in the hopes that being a little off-the-wall and making an attempt at some humour will attract more applicants.

sandor

Now, sadly, while the ad seems to have worked and he got interested students applying for the position, he soon found that he was no longer welcome on the WLU campus because he’d used the word “slave” in his ad.  The GSA noticed the ad and decided to give Mr. Sandor and the Veritas café the boot based on some obscure clause in their leasing agreement over the university’s “principles”. So, Mr. Sandor was given almost zero time to get off the premises, take all of his equipment and inform the eleven students who worked for him that they were out of a job and now he is left scrambling to figure out how to recover from this mistake that he has apologized for.

Forget the idea that using the word “slave” is triggering or offensive or inappropriate is in itself ridiculous. Of course it’s absurd. But when most authoritarian-wanna bes first show up in history a lot of people regard them as absurd initially too.

What’s most striking in this story is the instantaneous expulsion and unwillingness for not only some due process, but also the inability to provide even a small measure of mercy for a man who employs fellow students and on whose livelihood depends on this business. He’s apologized. He’s acknowledged his “sin”. And yet that’s not enough.

There are two things going on her that tell a lot about what is grabbing hold at universities today across the world; narcissism and complete lack of empathy.

It’s a demonstration of narcissism, in that the GSA know it was a joke, they know he’s apologized, they know that their actions are putting fellow students out of work. They know this. And still they go ahead and prosecute their flimsy grievance. But they are so pathologically intent on flexing their muscles, showing everyone what they can do to whomever they judge unworthy, demonstrating their power, they can’t even resist for a moment to show some mercy.

And it’s a complete lack of empathy. It reminds me of the Louis CK bit on Conan O’Brien from a few years ago where he talks about kids texting and emailing each other nasty stuff because “they’re trying it out”, and whereas fifty years ago if a kid called another kid a name to their face, they’d see and hear the reaction and decide that wasn’t what they’d wanted, that didn’t make me feel as good as I thought it would. They built empathy by being actively engaged with other people, face to face. But now we’re faced with a generation of protected snowflakes, narcissists who even when confronted with the evidence of what their harsh reaction to an obvious minor infraction is going to do to real, actual, living people, they are able to dismiss it. They’ve not built the ability to empathize with “others”. And it’s something you see in the crybaby fits about Trump, and the protests against Jordan Peterson and other acts of what looks like immaturity, but it’s worse than that.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

On Explaining Right-Wing Populists

Not everyone is thrilled with Donald Trump being elected. No kidding. And it seems there are some people, young people especially, who are in pain and need to be comforted and made to feel safe. And don’t you dare diminish their pain and anguish by telling them to “suck it up, pussies”, because that’s a hate crime. And it’s rude to point out that half of them didn’t even vote. It’s horrifying according to Stephen Colbert and John Oliver… two millionaire comedians.  These two grown men had a cry and a hug on stage in front of an audience (maybe off-stage… I’m guessing); they were so traumatized by the results of the election – still!

Lena Dunham (our favourite), in a quest to come to terms with what happened, went on a retreat to Sedona, Arizona where she communed with nature and sought guidance from the canyon and listened to the rocks. No, this is not satire. Instead of traveling to the rural Michigan or suburban Pennsylvania and talking with actual real life Trump voters and speak with the “racists”, “sexists” and “bigots” that voted for Trump, she runs to an isolated posh resort where Mother Gaia will provide all the answers to soothe her troubled soul.

The Left is having a crybaby fit. The comparisons to fascism and Hitler are rampant. So, in keeping with that spirit, let’s use Hitler to discuss an aspect about the Left’s inability to take a deep breath and do some self-examination.

It’s been almost twenty years since I read it, but Ron Rosenbaum wrote a book called “Explaining Hitler” wherein he examined the various theories as to why Hitler was who he was and why he may have been motivated to do the things he’d done. But in the book he recounts going to visit an old Jewish Nazi hunter who asked him not to try and explain Hitler. His reasoning was that once you can identify the roots of someone’s evil acts, you are then obligated to forgive them for those actions because inevitably the roots will lie in that person’s humanity – they were abused as a child, suffered from mental illness, were scarred by past experiences, made gross misjudgments etc. And the old Nazi hunter was of the opinion that Hitler was evil. Full stop. We should never diminish this fact. Understanding Hitler was not only unnecessary, it was morally wrong, because we can never forgive what was done.

This is where the Left is today; they are the old Jewish Nazi hunter looking at the Trump election, Brexit, Rob Ford and other swings towards right-wing populism in the West and saying, “We will not try to understand why you voted that way, because we cannot forgive you.”

A long standing problem is that the Right tends to want to discuss government in terms of Effective vs. Ineffective. The Left knows it cannot win those arguments because historical evidence leans in favour of most traditional right-wing positions; free market solutions over government bureaucracies, traditional family stability over libertine lifestyles etc. So the Left want to make everything into a right vs. wrong moral argument. They are on the side of the angels – the Left stand for the Brotherhood of Man ™, Social Peace through Social Equality™ and Harmony with Nature™… these are “good” causes. Who cares if the policies we’re using to pursue these goals are ineffective or actually causing damage, it’s the intent that counts! Good intentions trump (no pun intended) bad policies! It’s the reason we see so much doubling down on bad ideas even when there is evidence they don’t work. Witness the Trudeau government’s recent announcement that they’re going to go further into deficit to fund a raft of “infrastructure” spending in order to stimulate the economy and “invest” in our economy… it doesn’t work. It didn’t last time, and throwing more money at a bad program won’t make it any better. But again, it’s the intentions that count, not the actual outcome.  Double down, double down.

But I digress… since the Left reduces everything to a moral argument, the only way to win arguments is to portray the other side as not just wrong on policy but morally wrong. Evil. So this, in combination with a strong narcissistic trend in youth today, may in large part explain the unwillingness to see Trump’s election as legitimate and anything other than a vote affirming racism and sexism. We know it’s more nuanced than that – you can vote for a racist without voting for racism. But they will never acknowledge that because then they’d have to forgive 65 million Americans, 20 million Brits and 500,000 Torontonians. No way are they going to do that.  They are a long long way from considering forgiveness.  They are pissed.  And so they have no intentions trying to explain to each other right-wing populism.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On the Eve of the US Elections

Tomorrow the US will elect a new President. Well, tomorrow is when they’ll vote; in all likelihood we won’t know the official result until December after all the legal challenges are concluded in every state where the margin of victory was a percentage point or two of the popular vote. That is, unless Trump badly underperforms the current polling and loses by a solid margin in Florida, which is the key tipping point state – Trump cannot win the election if he doesn’t win Florida. But right now it looks like he’s even odds to win that state but it won’t be by much, maybe one or two points; in which case expect the recount saga of 2000 repeated all over again if those state’s 29 electoral votes are the difference between either President Trump or President Clinton.

That said, find something else to watch on TV Tuesday night, Clinton will win the election.  She has a better overall organization and Republicans have underperformed the polls the past couple of elections because they don’t have the ground game to get the vote to the polls.   All the Hollywood elites, media, academics and public sector unions, the unelected left-wing cabal that steers the discourse in the West can breathe easier.

The question will then become – how violent is this going to get? What am I talking about?

See this clip from last Friday’s Bill Maher show… he more or less apologizes on behalf of the Left for their demonization of John McCain and Mitt Romney, the latter being a perfectly decent man, a moderate Republican but who was still compared to Hitler. We have our own example here in Canada where a very milquetoast and overly-cautious Stephen Harper was called a “fascist” on a regular basis, and when he was defeated last year the left-wing cabal were almost orgasmic in their celebrations. But Maher and the others in the clip are essentially saying, “All those other times we told you the Republicans were fascists… well we were exaggerating, but this time – this time – it’s true! It really, really is!”

We all know who Lena Dunham is… a talentless Hollywood darling and devoutly evil person who lied about being raped to make a good story for her book. Well, here she is in this clip obnoxiously pushing for her girl Hillary, or how about this clip where she (and her father, a man who made his living painting pictures of women’s breasts) says that white males should be made extinct. Do they say this stuff just to make their peers laugh and score brownie points with their fellow brain-dead leftists, or do they really believe white male babies should be aborted? Do they believe in eugenics? Because that’s evil, or do they not realize that? Oh wait, what are we talking about – they believe in an evil ideology that has produced more suffering than any other ideology in history, of course they realize they’re being evil.

Here is the thing… there is a cycle in our local, provincial/state, national politics… we elect leftists because that’s where our natural, romantic tendencies trend as a people – we all dream of a more inclusive and tolerant world, one that protects the vulnerable and promotes social and natural harmony. But the left think this type of world can be created by fiat and they, after a time, just go too far, their agendas get hijacked by special interests groups and the bills for their plans need to get paid… and then people push the reset button and elect conservatives to clean up the inevitable mess and do what conservatives do – provide balance, stability and rational government.  David Miller was a horrible mayor of Toronto; cue Rob Ford.  Bob Rae, horrible premier of Ontario, bring in Mike Harris.  Paul Martin weak and ineffective Liberal, bring in Stephen Harper.  Jimmy Carter a weak President brings in Ronald Reagan.  It’s going to happen here in Ontario, finally, Wynne out, Brown in.  Give it a few years and Trudeau will be trounced circa 2024 when it becomes abundantly clear that he’s bankrupted Canada.  The pendulum swings back and forth; the left has good intentions but makes a mess of it, conservatives come in and clean up said mess, the left comes back and says we’ve learned our lessons and will be more reasonable this time, left get back into power but forget the lessons soon enough, and on it goes.  Wash, rinse, repeat ad infinitum.

But this time we face a bigger more modern problem in that we are dealing with the crap that the aforementioned unelected cultural leftists are dumping on us; in their recent emboldened moral vanity they now call conservatives stupid and bigoted, they insist on gutting the economy in a futile effort to stop global warming, they want to force you to call people “zie” and suggest white males are a cancer in the world to be cut out, they want a segregated society with different rules for every identity group and apologize for being the West.

Trump is a result of all this. But what people will realize after this election is that what they want is to hit the reset button on the culture, and not necessarily the politics. As the expression goes “politics is downstream of culture”. After Trump is defeated, after Brexit is delayed or quashed by courts in England, after we get a Bill C-16 here in Canada making it illegal to call someone “he” or “her” without their consent or a carbon tax that will slow the economy down during a recession, a large segment of the population in the West is going to start casting their eyes higher, at the culture that produces the unelected leftist cabal.

A positive outlook would be to say, hey – the “long arc of history” as Obama likes to describe it shows that there is a cycle and things will self-correct.  Bu the more cynical outlook would say there are only three things that affect cultural change; demographics, violent conflict and technology. And two out of the three are largely beyond doing anything about. It’s going to be a rocky road the next few years.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On Alt Right Fundamentalists

I’ve said that I would vote for Donald Trump – not because I’m voting for him (he’s an idiot and not a conservative) nor because I’m voting against Hillary (I don’t buy the Lesser of Two Evils argument – don’t vote for either evil, no one is forcing you to vote). Rather I would vote for him just to piss off the John Olivers, Samantha Bees, Amy Schumers and all the other despicable condescending artistic and media elites, the Virtuous Ones that are always lecturing the rest of us on what defines a good and intelligent person and a proper world view. Anything that ruins their day, their week or their lives has some merit for me personally. Not a good or mature reason to vote for a despicable candidate, but a reason nonetheless.

That said, Donald Trump is an incredibly narcissistic and selfish individual jeopardizing conservatism for decades going forward. He has clearly conceded he’s going to lose the election and is now by saying all sorts of idiotic crap positioning himself for Trump TV post-election, where he can gather all the Alt-Right people from Breitbart and Info Wars and other unprincipled right-wing populist centres and, for a good amount of money, tell them they were screwed out of the election, the election was rigged, the media, Hollywood, everyone is against them. There’s a good amount of anger there to be tapped into. But he’s essentially pouring the gasoline that someone else is going to come along and light.

What is the Alt-Right, Trump’s base of support in this election?

Over the past 50 years the narrative has arisen that conservativism is a white male belief system. It’s not – it’s a belief in limited and rational government, a proper balance between freedom, security and the protection of minority rights, and a belief that only a stable society can be prosperous, hence why traditional institutions such as the family and church/synagogue/mosque and traditional values need to be protected and changed slowly and with great care, otherwise we risk destabilizing vulnerable segments of society. These beliefs have nothing to do with race or ethnicity.

But the western Left over the past 50 years has adopted the embrace of multi-culturalism as one of its Virtues, and as immigration from non-white countries has increased significantly the right has evolved the position that immigration needs to be more controlled if assimilation and the melting-pot ideas are being discarded. The position has legitimate roots in concerns about balance and stability with respect to economic impacts and social integration, but let’s be honest there was and still is a racist component in some resistance to immigration. At one time Italians, Ukrainians and Serbs were the unwanted immigrants, but over time they’ve all assimilated. Now it’s Arabs, Pakistanis and Hispanics. No doubt these are harder groups to integrate into a pluralist secular society and they bring additional questions of compatibility.

But what the Left did by adopting multi-culturalism along with open immigration at a time when demographically white people were having fewer and fewer children was allow them to say, “See those people on the right over there? They believe in certain things. But one thing they don’t believe in is you or your culture. If they’d had their way you may never have been allowed to come here.” And hence the Left successfully made it extremely difficult for conservatives to recruit from minority groups. This failure to recruit minorities only reinforced the idea that conservatives are white (and male). It’s a cycle that is hard to escape from.

This gives rise to the Alt-Right. The Alt-Right is a fundamentalist movement. The Alt-Right has essentially let the Left define them and steered them into an essentially non-conservative belief system – Fine!  If you think that that’s what the right is about, that’s what it will be about !  The future is in our past and a return to a white European ethno-centrist value system that was the basis upon which the West and America was built! Make America Great Again!  It’s not racist per se, they don’t preclude any race or ethnicity from joining the Alt-Right, but what they demand is an acknowledgement that white European ideals created our society and our decline is the result of non-stop attacks on and a dilution of those ideals from leftist traitors and immigrants with incompatible value systems.  There is merit in the argument, but it is a backwards looking world view that is doomed to failure.

Again and again I come back to Steven Pressfield’s description of fundamentalism from the War of Art. It is succinct and brilliantly accurate. Following is from the book (bolding of words is mine);

Fundamentalism is the philosophy of the powerless, the conquered, the displaced and the dispossessed. Its spawning ground is the wreckage of political and military defeat, as Hebrew fundamentalism arose during the Babylonian captivity, as white Christian fundamentalism appeared in the American South during Reconstruction, as the notion of the Master Race evolved in Germany following World War I. In such desperate times, the vanquished race would perish without a doctrine that restored hope and pride. Islamic fundamentalism ascends from the same landscape of despair and possesses the same tremendous and potent appeal.

What exactly is this despair? It is the despair of freedom. The dislocation and emasculation experienced by the individual cut free from the familiar and comforting structures of the tribe and the clan, the village and the family.

It is the state of modern life.

The fundamentalists (or, more accurately, the beleaguered individual who comes to embrace fundamentalism) cannot stand freedom. He cannot find his way into the future, so he retreats to the past. He returns in imagination to the glory days of his race and seeks to reconstitute both of them and himself in their purer, more virtuous light. He gets back to basics. To fundamentals.

But the fundamentalist reserves his greatest creativity for the fashioning of Satan, the image of his foe, in opposition to which he defines and gives meaning to his own life. Like the artist, the fundamentalist experiences Resistance. He experiences it as temptation to sin. Resistance to the fundamentalist is the call of the Evil one, seeking to seduce him from his virtue. The fundamentalist is consumed with Satan, whom he loves as he loves death. Is it coincidence that the suicide bombers of the World Trade Center frequented strip clubs during their training, or that they conceived of their reward as a squadron of virgin brides and the license to ravish them in the fleshpots of heaven?….

To combat the call of sin, i.e., Resistance, plunges either into action or into the study of sacred texts. He loses himself in these, much as the artist does in the process of creation. The difference is that while the one looks forward, hoping to create a better world, the other looks backward, seeking to return to a purer world from which he and all have fallen.

I read so many parallels with the Alt-Right in there. They’ve conceded defeat for conservative ideals and as such, want to retreat to a world that can never exist again. The Republican elites have sold us out. Free trade deals are a failure, we need more protectionism.   All immigration should not only be halted, but millions actually deported from whence they came. Men should be men, and women be women.  You’ve gotten a raw deal. If only we could go back and live in the 1950’s when America was wonderful.

And as such, it is a very dangerous movement. There is a great deal of violence lurking there and we shouldn’t be surprised if it explodes post election. And it will explode if Donald Trump loses (which he will) and he doesn’t tone down his rhetoric in the final weeks.  This should and will be every true conservative’s nightmare; the vilification and demonization of all on the right would accelerate 10-fold as we’d all be lumped in with these Alt-Right people and it would take decades to recover.  We’d probably only recover once there’s been a Great Collapse and liberal failure is laid bare for all to see, and by then it will be too late.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On a Variety of Topics

There’s no essay-length topic rumbling around in the brain to write about, so how about a couple of quick hit items.

The Best and Worst Places for Women in Canada

So this year the best place for women to live in Canada is Victoria, BC and the worst is Windsor, Ontario. This is the same bullshit “study” that last year determined Kitchener-Waterloo was the worst place to live for women largely because to the “wage gap” between women and men despite the fact that women in K-W earned more per capita than women in other cities around the country. But wait – men made even more, therefore the wage gap was larger than average ipso facto K-W was a bad city for women to live in. No accounting for the fact that many women might be married or partnered to some of these higher earning men and thereby experience a higher standard of living than they might enjoy elsewhere.

If you went by this study then the best place for a woman to live in Canada would be a) where all the political representatives/leaders are women, b) where there is no violence against women, c) where women are the top wage earners and in positions of power.

Sounds like Paradise Island ruled by the Amazons with Wonder Woman as their protector.  That’s the goal – a world without men.  If only we could start replicating female humans in a test tube, I’m sure that’d be the feminist dream for the future of the world.

Speaking of Feminists

Again, some clueless person refers to Sophie Gregoire-Trudeau as a “warrior”. We know that all perspective has been lost, but c’mon. The Battle of Verdun in 1916 saw almost 650,000 killed and another million wounded over a nine month period. Men literally drowning in mud holes created by artillery blasts that they couldn’t climb out of.  Corpses everywhere.  Miles and miles of barbed wire with machine gunned bodies stuck on it.  Mustard gas.  Cholera and dysentery.  But those men fought on. What on earth would those souls think about their sacrifices so that two gal-pals can ride around on their Vespa or what they’d think of a generation that holds them up as some sort of ideal?

Stephen Crowder made fun of Emma Watson’s speech to the UN a few months ago. Isn’t it wonderful when a person with so much wealth and fame can lecture us about our “privilege”? I’m sure the roofer, toiling up a ladder three floors high, carrying 2 bundles of shingles to work precariously on a massively sloped roof would love it if you yelled at them, “you lucky privileged bastards!  Stop oppressing Emma Watson!”

PS – where are their helmets? Oh wait, they’re so oppressed that these two attractive women can’t be arsed to wear legally mandated helmets because then people (men) wouldn’t be able to see how beautiful they are.

Watch These Videos and Say WTF

An anti-Jordan Peterson rally at the University of Toronto. Heaven forbid that you ask white cis-males what their opinions on social issues are.

I will contend that 90% of the SJW movement is evil. C’mon, you say, misguided maybe, but evil?  But I’m sure that communists and Nazis didn’t think what they were trying to bring to the world was evil, but now in the fullness of time the great majority of us can look back and say yep, those were evil ideologies, they killed a lot of people and made hundreds of millions of people miserable.   Same thing here – they’re bullies, they’re enemies of free speech, they’re anti-life (abortion, assisted suicide), they’re misandrists, segregationists and against scientific progress and economic prosperity.  If they took over we’d live in a completely miserable world.  That’s evil.

You want proof on what kind of horrible people we’re talking about? See this clip. What a POS.

The New SJW Movement

Wieners Out.

I Couldn’t Have Written It Any Better

A first-rate analysis of how we got where we are with Trump.

Finally

The fantastic Douglas Murray on free speech. Listen to the whole thing and wonder how anyone can disagree that free speech is the first fundamental right of people in a democracy.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On Chyyyaniwynklc

I like ‘Chyyyaniwynklc’ as the new name for British Columbia. Let’s go with it.

Supposedly it means “sea to sky” in Salish and is one of the serious suggestions in a new initiative to rename the province of British Columbia Chyyyaniwynklc. I think it also means “pancake breakfast” in Congolese and means “more boobie please” in baby-talk, but that’s just surplus benefits to the requirement to find a name for the province that doesn’t reflect our evil colonialist history.

It’s like waves off the ocean; they keep coming and coming, eroding the shoreline over time. Except it seems like there’s a storm offshore that never seems to lose energy and give us some pause, rather the waves in recent years are relentless and huge and the erosion is rapid. Social progress some might say.

The problem as I’ve written before is that it’s never enough. The goal line is always moving on us. One might say, OK, I we’ll give you changing ‘All our son’s command’ in the national anthem to ‘All of us command’, because sure, we don’t want to be “exclusive” of the contributions of our daughters to the fabric of our great country. What’s the big deal? We’ll demonstrate accommodation and prove to you we old white men are not the sexists you think we are. Except it’s the old axiom, give them an inch and they’ll take it a mile. It never ends. Is there any doubt that another demand to change some other lyrics in the national anthem is just around the corner?  The insistence to remake and recast society in their neutered vision of the world is a never ending project because it stems from an ideology based on pathological bullying and impulses to control and change others. It has less to do with rectifying injustices of the past than imposing their will on anyone they can.

So what’s to say they’ll be happy to stop at Chyyyaniwynklc? There are other provinces that need renaming;

Newfoundland – who “found” this land? Evil white Vikings? Good grief. This province needs renaming right away. Besides I never understood if it’s NEW-found-land, or new-FOUND-land, and look at the other benefit; we’d be getting rid of that horrible pejorative calling someone a “newfie”.

Nova Scotia – New Scotland? How dare you. That name speaks of conquest. And we all know Scots are obnoxious cheap skates.

New Brunswick – named for the Elector of Hannover? Where the hell is Old Brunswick? I don’t understand this name at all. It wasn’t “new” either to the peoples already living there.

Prince Edward Island – named after a British prince. Did he even ever visit this place?

Alberta – named for the Duchess of Argyll, fourth daughter of Queen Victoria. If “British” Columbia sounds colonialist then there is no question naming a patch of land after the 4th daughter definitely qualifies as colonialist arrogance.

Ontario – I think this is already a native name… but really maybe we could just rename it to “Toronto” since that seems to be the only place that matters in the province. Or the country for that matter.

But wait, what about cities? London? A city in England. Kitchener? An English field general. Windsor? The surname of the British royal family. Hamilton, Edmonton, Victoria, St. John, St. John’s… Vancouver?!? Named after the colonialist British Navy captain?

Let’s do it all.  Let’s rename everything in this country to rid ourselves of reminders of our oppressive past. I propose the renaming of the biggest city on the west coast of Canada as Cthulhu, Chyyyaniwynklc.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

On Voting for the Trump

If I were American, I would vote for Donald Trump.

Yes, he’s scumbag.  I’ve written plenty here about how he’s not a conservative, he’s not a decent or humble person, he’s a rich narcissist and unlikely to solve any of the problems the US has at the moment.  I think his ideas of building a wall, deporting 11 million people, banning all Muslim immigration; canceling free trade deals… they’re all crap ideas.

And no, it’s not a lesser of two evils thing, even though Hillary Clinton is a pretty deplorable character as far as that goes… she’s the very definition of a political “insider”, guilty of corruption and treasonous behavior, enabler to her husband’s many sins and a chronic liar.

No, the reason I would vote for Donald Trump is that this is clearly not an ideological election.  This is not a contest of the ideas of the right vs. the ideas of the left.  Trump is not ideological, nor is Clinton.  They speak to elements of their parties, but they don’t represent either party’s predominant ideology.  Thus, when choosing between the two you need a different reason to pick one or the other.  Character is a wash and neither truly represents a “side” in the political or cultural wars.

So, what I like about Trump is that his enemies are for the most part, people I despise.  That’s pretty much the summation of my reason for voting for him.  An “enemy of my enemy is my friend”, sort of deal.  I don’t really want to see him as POTUS.  I’m not a nihilist that wants to burn it all down and rebuild from the bottom up.  But there is a group of people out there who if Trump wins, their heads would quite literally explode – and I would LOVE to see that.  I would vote for him quite simply because I like the enemies he’s made.  Well done.

Take for example this stupid twat, Jill Soloway, who wins an Emmy award and promptly uses the opportunity to compare Donald Trump to Hitler:

“He’s a complete dangerous monster, and any moment I have to call Trump out to being an inheritor to Hitler, I will,” she said, to applause.

Or how about when Donald Trump has the temerity to call the Chelsea bombing a “bombing” before it was actually declared a bombing.  Horrors, he got it right.  It’s well reported now that CNN and MSNBC edited Hillary Clinton calling it a “bombing” before the police said that was what it was.    That’s the other part of the equation – most people HATE the media.

Then there’s the outrage – OUTRAGE!  That Jimmy Fallon would dare to have Trump on his show and make small talk with the man.  He ruffled his hair!?!  Oh my God, man… would you ask to ruffle the mustache of Hitler?

Then there’s Bono claiming that Donald Trump is possibly America’s “worst idea” ever.  Idiot, stick to your music.   The US has had slavery, civil war, McCarthy-ism, Jim Crowe and so many other bad ideas that nominating Donald Trump for President doesn’t even make the top 20.

It’s to the point where I am reminded of this interview several years back Michael Coren (before he went traitor to the cause) and the wonderful Melanie Phillips. She starts at the 2:00 mark discussing how conservative thinking is demonized, but what he says at 4:40ish is also what Ross Douthat is getting at in this column; approximately 35-40% of the population sit at home and are beaten over the head, day after day, and told that what they believe is wrong. What they believe is not just wrong – it’s evil. They are mocked as being racist, bigoted and stupid. So, one of two things can be the outcome when a large chunk of the population is dismissed as “deplorables”; either these people surrender and “convert” or they go underground but find different ways to vent when the opportunity comes. Like the Brexit vote. Like Donald Trump. These are not votes for something. Rather these are votes to stick it to the elites that have been belittling them.

I don’t know if Donald Trump can win.  It doesn’t look likely.  Conceivably he could get more of the popular vote than Hillary Clinton and still lose because she’s got the black and suburban soccer mom votes sewed up in the key states.  But imagine if he did.  No, no – don’t imagine the nukes on North Korea or billions spent on a ridiculous second coming of the Great Wall.  Worry about that later.  Instead, just imagine John Oliver, Samantha Bee, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, 99% of Hollywood and the mainstream press… imagine them staring aghast at the TV screen as the results roll in.   That might be reason enough for me.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On Spin and the Lesser of Two Evils

If I were ever to be elected to provincial office, I would shut down TVO my first day in office.  I’m so glad that basically no one watches this tax-payer funded network for Liberal propaganda… except for me obviously.

Note the “balance” on this episode – if you include the host, the conservative is outnumbered 5:1, and the conservative is a poor feeble minded old man who acts as a Wynne apologist to boot.  That’s the Left’s idea of “balance”.

Once upon a time, I thought Steve Paikin was a reasonable, professional journalist who hid his leftist bias. But on this episode he opens with talking points straight from the Premier’s office and actually wonders aloud why, oh why, is Kathleen Wynne’s personal approval rating at 16%.

Unemployment is down under Wynne?  The manufacturing sector in this province is absolutely and totally gutted.  Take a drive through the wasteland of southwestern Ontario. As a result there are literally thousands upon thousands of men and women who have given up looking for work – once you stop looking for work you stop being counted as one of the “unemployed”.  Add to that the literally thousands upon thousands of young men and women, recently graduated from school with zero job prospects and are either sitting at home playing video games or padding their resumes with volunteer and intern positions. That accounts for a large drop in the unemployment figures. Private sector employment has fallen, government sector increased. On whose backs are those jobs being paid for?

Oh, but the budget will be balanced… firstly, says who?  The Liberals?  3% growth is THEIR projection.  They keep projecting tax revenues to go up.  Intuitively we know that is bullshit in this economy.

And they claim the budget will be balanced next year… but only after McGuinty/Wynne have DOUBLED the provincial debt.  We are the most indebted sub-national government IN THE WORLD.  And how have they balanced the budget?  But levying all sorts of bullshit taxes, health premiums and selling our stakes in Hydro One a one-time balance sheet mark-up.

Paikin totally blows past the idea that the Liberals are the subject of five ongoing OPP investigations, have blown billions on eHealth, ORNG, cancelled gas plants, cancelled ORPP, MARS and we pay the highest hydro rates in the western world.  Our hydro rates have doubled in the past two years and now they want to levy a carbon tax on our gas because they, the wonderful Liberals, are combatting climate change single handedly.  Now they promise to help us with our hydro costs by removing the HST on our hydro, a move that will cost the Ontario government $1 billion.  NO – wrong.  It won’t COST the government shit – BECAUSE THAT’S OUR MONEY, NOT THE GOVERNMENTS.  We make the money and government taxes us, but if you follow typical Leftist logic it’s all their money first and they allow us to keep some to live on.  Every tax cut or rebate is portrayed as COSTING the government, but taxes and charges never seem to cost the taxpayers jack squat.

All this and yet I have zero faith that Wynne will be defeated in the next Ontario provincial election. We have entered the era of “lesser of two evils” when it comes to our politics and as Ben Shapiro so accurately writes about the US election;

We’ve been told since the end of the primaries that we must choose one candidate or the other. It’s a binary decision: pick Hillary, or pick Trump. Now, aside from the fact that a vote for neither is not a vote for either, the underlying logic seems to be that in any one-on-one electoral competition, the obligation to choose a candidate trumps any moral obligation to eschew bad candidates entirely. This leads to a lowest-common-denominator politics that can excuse any and all bad behavior by any and all candidates. If Matthew 7:3 enjoins people not to “look at the speck in your brother’s eye but fail to notice the beam in your own eye,” lesser-of-two-evils politics tells us that we ought to ignore both the motes and beams in our own eyes, because after all, our opponents have motes and beams in their eyes.

So the problem becomes that Wynne and the Ontario Families Coalition only have to paint the Ontario PCs as some unpalatable collection of evil bigots/deniers/anti-union rural rednecks and make it a contest of lesser evils – wouldn’t you feel BAD about yourself voting for those people? You may not feel all that good voting for us, but hey! We’re not close-minded right wingers. And boom… 40% of the population buys the idea that, despite your corruption and incompetence, you represent the lesser evil and you’re back in.

I hope I’m wrong.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
%d bloggers like this: