Cantandum in Ezkhaton 01/13/19

I hope your week went well. It’s time for installment two of some posts of note in the Reactosphere, along with my own rambling, which I’ll try to keep short. One thing about red-pilling is you start to ask what the purpose of EVERYTHING is.

Something that bothered me this week was the attribution of agency to that which cannot have it. This article discusses how suicide is the biggest killer of men under 50 years of age in the UK. Another, a Bell Canada campaign about mental health  affecting everyone. Suicide does not kill people, people kill themselves. Suicide is the label. Mental health is not some separate agency unto itself. This language is a Marxist way of categorizing things by one characteristic so a central authority can control it. (See Spandrell’s work on bioleninism for how similar thinking is used by the Left to obtain political power.) The problem is that by attributing agency in such a manner, people begin to see such issues as outside themselves. It’s a war against suicide. And where is suicide? Out there somewhere!

But people cannot fight against ‘suicide’ or ‘mental health’. They cannot wage war on ‘poverty’. But you can make appeals to people’s emotions, to donate money and repeat mantras about personal commitments against these non-agents. This is comforting because people feel like they are solving a problem. But not with any actual change or real action in their lives (the only way they ever could actually help out). Whoever leads the campaign gets money, prestige and power to boot. A great deal all around…except for those needing the help. But I digress…on to the Reactosphere.

An appetizer: the left eats the left, because the Dems love POC, unless you are not the right kind of POC.

Anti-Gnostic poses the question: if not its people, then what is a nation?

Porter comments on Yahoo’s reports on the “basket of deplorables” in Singapore.

Talk about sunk cost fallacy: American Sun gives a brief history of ‘Woke Capital’. Porter offers an analysis of the same phenomenon.

A Millennial / Boomer fight breaks out in the comments, under a post about a comment fight, over at PA Blog.

Astute observations from Malcolm on the current Zeitgeist, Bird Box, and blindfolds.

AlfaNL brings the good news so the healing can begin: toxic masculinity is now a psychological disorder. ‘Toxic masculinity’ may be translated into simply ‘masculinity’. It’s about time: all that stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression (which enabled us to survive as a species, built civilizations and makes the ladies swoon) is clearly, in [The Current Year], not creating safe spaces! (Don’t say you did not see this coming. It’s been a work of 14 years.)

Mr. Briggs, Statistician to the Stars, has incontrovertible proof that GLOBAL WARMINGTM is…asinine. He also discusses it in “This Week In Doom – It-Must-Be-Progressed”, where he describes exactly what led me to begin questioning the cult of climate change:

We are reminded, too. About that spurious 97%, this peer-reviewed (and therefore guaranteed in its purity) paper. What interests us is not global warming, but the shrieking method of control, always signaled by the shouting of “there is no debate!” The shouting is necessary, because, of course, there are things not subject to debate that nobody would shout about. These are awfully few in number: for instance, we need not debate the person who says aloud and in earnest “I cannot speak”.

It’s the shouting that indicates the subject which must not be debated rests at best on tenuous grounds, or at worst that it is known to be false but politically desirable. If global warming were not political, nobody except for a handful of unknown scientists would care, say, about eddies in the Pacific. But that it is, we must all care and we must not disagree with the chain that connects any event to global-warming-of-doom, even if that chain is obviously forged of wet crepe paper.

Also, a guest post by Ianto Watt on fun with liars, the MSM, true political polarization, and saving the Empire.

EvolutionistX has some thoughts about why refined sugar is no good for you. I’ve cut sugar out and I must say I don’t miss it. The only time I actually benefit from it is when a migraine is coming (a can of Coke sometimes stops a migraine dead). I suspect that our bodies were not meant to handle constant simple sugar intake. I think we have an insulin-based blood-sugar regulation so that (esp. late summer/fall) when sugar-rich food is around, we can eat it before it rots, storing the calories for the coming winter. Evolutionist X has a more satisfying point of view (with some research, unlike my anechdata.) She also posts Part One of ‘A theory of male and female Sociopathy’. I cannot summarize, but please RTWT.

From Setting the Record Straight, Culture Meet Axe: Game of Thrones. I’ve not watched or read any offerings from the Game of Thrones franchise. The books are long and I’m not sure I want to invest that much time. Friends say both the TV show and the books are worth the time, often citing the brutality. Mr. MacLear’s work is a nice counterbalance to the near monolithic support the franchise seems to get.

But if you’re only going to look at one Mr. MacLear posts, see his thoughts on mate selection and nationality.

American Sun provides its perspective on Alexandra Ocasio Cortez. Her assent reminds me of the rise of another allegedly attractive leader in Canada. Alexandra comes off as unsophisticated, unbalanced and ignorant, and I suspect she is fed most of her ideas by the ones really in charge. This is probably me just being more concerned about factual precision and less about being morally right. If her experience is anything like Trudeau’s, she’ll be the MSM’s darling…until they can make more money trashing her. Oh well, at least she’s only a Senator, and not in charge of a country (yet), unlike the current ruler of the Liberal Party of Canada:

Kent

“When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”  – Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians 13:11.              He’s not there yet..not at all.

Speaking of the Liberal Party of Canada, here’s a missed entry from last week. Throne, Altar, Liberty is a Canadian blog, written by Gerry T. Neal, concerned about the integrity of his nation and his people. He posts a full disclosure of his positions and prejudices.  A taste:

We had a strong sense of who we were as a country in our national identity based upon our Loyalist history and heritage which served us well in two World Wars. Sadly, much of this has been forgotten by Canadians today. This national amnesia has been actively and aggressively encouraged by the Liberal Party of Canada. For a century the Grits have proclaimed themselves to be the party of Canadian nationalism, while doing everything in their power to make Canadians forget the history and heritage that make us who we are as a country, such as stripping our national symbols of all that would remind us of that history and heritage. This was done because the Liberals see our Loyalist history and heritage as roadblocks standing in the way of their perpetual hold on power. The only consistent value the Liberal Party has ever had is its own power. It is the embodiment of everything I loathe and detest.

I have to agree. I have a laundry list of problems in Canada, and most stem from the Liberal Party and its insistence that, from it’s cathedral in central Canada, it plays a game of cultural chauvinism: central Canadian culture is the best, and the masses in First Nations and the outer provinces WILL be forced to serve it. This attitude justifies depriving people of their livelihoods, wasting countless billions on socialist schemes, and in some cases, taking children from families so they can be properly ‘educated’. They’ve been at it so long they now use the harmful consequences of their ‘woke’ policies from decades ago to justify doubling down on the principles behind those very same policies. They are either stupid or avaricious. They are simply using the current “arc of history bends towards justice” progressivism to obtain power. Enough…back to Gerry.

He also has an excellent piece on the life and martyrdom of William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury during the English Civil War.

Lastly, two MSM pieces. Father Raymond J. De Souza, and his take on the role of church and conservatism in a liberal democratic society. I don’t think he goes far enough in recognizing the outright hostility of progressive societies to faith of any kind (besides, ‘diversity being our strength’) but I am glad to see him stand up for faith and tradition in a society trying to mutilate both. And The Lord Black of Crossharbour, explaining why Trump is good for the United States.

That’s what I’ve got. I hope it’s useful. Enjoy your week.

Señor Blanco.

Advertisements

Mexi-Can / Can’t-ada

I recently visited Mexico for a week. There were some stark contrasts between Mexican and Canadian society which I cannot let lie without comment.

On entry into Mexico, everyone’s bags were x-rayed. I was subject to a random search by Mexican authorities. This included a search of my bag. The officer, dressed in a plain uniform, asked me why I was coming to Mexico, how much money I had with me, was I bringing any agricultural matter with me, and whether I had any goods I was selling while in his country? His questions were part English and part Spanish, and I had to convey my answers sometimes in broken Spanish. He asked me how much currency I had, and when I gave him the amounts in Pesos, US$ and CAD$, his response was that I must tell him in US$. He asked me about the books I was bringing into Mexico, what they were about, if I liked them, and searched them for concealed pockets. His questions were about my purpose and character, and while appearing somewhat indolent, there was no question that if he thought I was a bad person or had bad intentions, there to break his country’s laws, I would be sent home. Once he was satisfied this was not the case, he let me enter. His concern was for the safety of his country.

On my return to Canada, I was also stopped for a random search by Canadian authorities. Only my bag was x-rayed, and everyone else passed through unmolested. The customs officer, in uniform, but sporting sleeve tattoos, confirmed that I had bottles of Tequila which did not exceed my exemption from value added tax. He then did a hand search, admitting it was my black duffel bag which caused the “random” search, information which no doubt people actually doing illegal business could use to prevent the inconvenience of the rule of law. He asked no questions about the books, how much currency I had, and only seemed interested in whether I had meat with me, or had something otherwise subject to value added taxation. I did not. His search of the bag ended quickly and abruptly when he found a loose $5 US dollar bill in it, which seemed to strike the fear of God in him.

In Mexico, I am interrogated until officials are satisfied I am there with no malevolence. This occurs because Mexican customs cares about the unity, safety and security of Mexico.

In Canada, I am glad handed until officials have made a significant show that value added tax will be assessed, that the Canada Customs workforce is sufficiently diverse, and that my rights under the Canadian Charter were not infringed, including the right to be questioned in French, a right which probably costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to make available, all so the pretense of collecting $9 in value added tax, should it be owing, is maintained. This occurs because Canada only cares about taking its “fair share” from its citizens to equalize its citizens. Which means to maintain the appearance of being ‘woke’ and ‘sensitive’ to all the possible ways people differ, by language, gender, sex, race, ethnicity, and any other head of difference. All to maintain equality by according unequal treatment to all on the basis of those characteristics, making a custom set of rules for the conduct of each citizen, thereby promoting the disunity of the nation, at the cost of its safety and security.

Speaking of customs officials, they act like family in Mexico. They laughed, argued, flirted with each other, they supported one another, were quick and practical when it came to dealing with travelers, and overall, and made it clear it was them, as a unified force, versus bad people intending to do bad shit in their country.

“Behave yourself, or we all will act against you, extranjero!” says the Mexican. Mexicans care about Mexicans.

In Canada, they all look utterly miserable, frustrated, like a Gulag inmate, who knows that once he moves all the rocks across the road today, he’ll have to move them back where they came from tomorrow. There is no comradery, no caring, no unity among them, and it is no surprise as each asks: “Did I get this job because I’m competent, or due to my race/religion/sex/gender/ethnicity?” I’ve seen enough to know this is because they know they are only preserving the appearance of security in favour of the appearance of diversity.

Further, under the Charter, they know a potential criminal must be treated as innocent until proven guilty, but that their actions, which they undertake to protect the nation, are presumed to be a breach of the perpetrator’s rights until it is shown they were justified. Not to mention, that if they take action against a person of a different race, religion, language, ethnicity, they may be skewered as a racist, sexist, bigot, or other such label for progressive heresy and lose their jobs, their standing, and face a modern equivalent of exile as punishment.

“Please behave yourself, because having to enforce the law means we are criminals, because it means diversity is not our strength and our privileges are not checked, so stranger, please pay the taxes and try to leave the country how you found it…” says the Canadian. Canadians do not care about Canadians, because they may not care about them without guidance from Ottawa and their local Human Rights Board, prescribing which people may be cared about and how, which must always be based on their status as victims based on the characteristics listed in the Charter.

One final point. While in the airport in Mexico waiting to fly home, a boy in one of the bathroom stalls started screaming. Clearly, he was scared and perhaps hurt. He had probably had an accident of some kind: children are children. He was desperately crying for his mother. An attendant went to the stall to see what was wrong, and this frightened the boy who cried and screamed louder, asking for his mother. The attendant told the boy he would be okay, and he would find the boy’s mother. I assume things were worked out from there. The Mexican did this because he cares about people.

In Canada, no such thing would occur. The boy would be left to howl. This is because anyone who cared enough to help him would face potentially being labelled a pedophile for entering a bathroom stall where a boy is using the toilet. There are no attendants, because Canada has forgotten that people use bathrooms and not the other way around. So, it is up to the other users, none of which can act upon compassion because the best they can hope for is indifference, if not condemnation, for their actions by puritans looking for sinners in everything. And so the child, cared for in Mexico, would be left in agony in Canada.

Mexico remembers its humanity, even with all the troubles they have. Mexicans care for Mexico because they care about Mexicans because they care about human beings.

Canada has gone mad, and in the madness replaced human considerations with a cult of progressivism. Canadians care not for Canada because they cannot ‘care’ for Canadians because the only acceptable form of ‘caring’ is a religious rite of progressive affirmation which affirms the cult and not the people. As a result, they do not care about people because caring for people as humans is discouraged and offensive: the only sanctioned way of caring for people must be based on their class as “historically disadvantaged” minorities. This is why an ex-Al Qaeda member who killed a US military medic gets $10.5 million for his time at Gitmo, while veterans who get their limbs blown off in that very same war are told they ask for too much when expecting compensation.

Canada has devolved from a unified nation, to a loose collection who see Canada as an ever-shrinking pie for which they ungratefully must take as much as they can while the getting is good. Hence the reason why Québec’s Premier can, in the face of $13 billion in federal transfers to his province (a net drain on the revenues of the federal coffers), express his gratitude by openly advocating for the extermination of the livelihoods of those who, through taxes, make a net contribution to those same federal coffers, and then without any sense of hypocrisy or irony send one of his Ministers to claim that those he would see impoverished have no cause for offence. This is utter ignorance of the human condition, a disdain for people, a disdain for Canadians, and a disdain for Canada, and it is all sanctioned by Ottawa, who has abdicated its sovereignty and responsibility, preferring to keep up appearances rather than keep the country unified, safe and secure.

On Weakness

burnflag

G20 Protestors, Vancouver, B.C., July 4, 2010. Photo: Stephen Hui.

I see a great deal of discord in western European and North American societies. Canada is leading the way. Something is wrong. There is weakness down to the core. Others are sensing this, and testing to see what they can get away with.

Putin is accused of being brazen enough to have tried to assassinate an enemy on U.K. soil, and when retribution follows, another assassination, right before he faces re-election as President, which he wins. I suggest someone thinks they can get away with this, and Putin is at least complicit because he thinks there will be few consequences. Further, some of his populace sees him as a strong leader, because they sense the U.S., its vassal states, and its sphere of influence are weak, and Putin is exercising power in their midst while they are vulnerable.

The latest news shows something is up:

China surpasses U.S. in Supercomputing.

China allows Xi Jinping to become permanent President of their Republic by removing term limits.

Assassinations are attempted on two former Russian double agents on U.K. soil. Putin then wins another term as President, all while hiring mercenaries to try to weaken the U.S. in Syria. Theresa May expels Russian diplomats as a punitive measure…Putin’s response: “meh, глупый английский.”

Russia develops new nuclear weapons.

These are real attempts with some progress in shoring up power. And these steps will have worldwide repercussions in the years to come. Meanwhile, in progressiveland…

Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, on state business in India, dresses full Bollywood, dines with a man convicted of attempted murder of an Indian Minister, then accuses India of a conspiracy to set the whole thing up just to embarrass him. He discusses the scientific method (it’s just “baby cries, baby gets milk”) with Bill Nye, passes a federal budget using ‘Gender Based Analysis’ (which means he will now take selfies with equal numbers of men and women), then fucks off to Florida on vacation (wasn’t India a vacation? But its all good ‘cuz he cleared it with the Ethics Commissioner.)

He did condemn the attacks on the former Russian spies in the U.K. This coming from the same guy weeping at the loss of Fidel Castro while admiring the Chinese Communist regime because, by Great Leap Forward, “they can turn on a dime” to make changes to their economy. A particularly grand turn-on-a-dime, I might add, as the Communist Party had to get around 18 to 55 million dead bodies in a single bound. I guess what Stalin was attributed to have said about tragedies versus statistics appeals to Le Dauphin. But I digress…

Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer of discontent by this sun of Mount Royal

Meanwhile, Canada’s provinces of British Columbia and Alberta are in a fight because they think Justin Le Premier can be overruled on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion approval, something he and his ‘cuz muh 2015’ cabinet has the legal final word on. This is akin to the Lords or the Dukes ignoring the edicts of the King.

British Columbia (the perfidious) defies him, because Canada is so weak that the positive consequences in voter support outweigh whatever bad may come. They are now removing barriers to allow export by sea of liquefied natural gas produced within B.C., while blocking oil from Alberta from getting to their ports. Alberta prepares to fight back with punitive measures because they have no faith Ottawa actually has any conviction to enforce its own decisions externally, much less internally. Both are right.

Canada is weak against Iran (who has killed and imprisoned Canadian citizens with nary a peep from Ottawa), weak against China (who told Trudeau to pound sand on human rights and sent him packing), weak against the U.S. (where insistence on gender equality being included in a revised North American Free Trade Agreement went over like a World Trade Center joke on September 11th) weak on even the most straight forward diplomatic pleasantries (aforementioned India visit, mostly ignored by the host), weak in front if the entire Pacific Rim (simply unable to keep Trudeau’s schedule straight during Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations); weak, caving in utterly in the face of a $20 million dollar law suit by former Al-Qaeda member Omar Khadr (settling for $10.5 million, “cuz muh human rights” – of the grenade thrower of course, not his victims); and then telling a Canadian veteran who fought and lost a leg against Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan that anything more than token compensation for his sacrifice was more than Canada could give, right now.

My remonstration has a purpose: where you demonstrate you are weak, have no spine, take nothing seriously or demonstrate you have no principles which you’ll stick to where even a minimal amount of discomfort is involved, you invite others to ignore you, surpass you (while you are distracted by waaaay more important issues like the “wage gap”), if not outright attack you. British Columbia is doing it internally in Canada, which is akin to what Putin is doing externally with the U.K. They see weakness, and they exploit it. Putin benefits from some assassination attempts, B.C. kills billions of dollars in oil sales to garner votes (and prevent the fall of their government, which relies on support from the local Green Party.) Heaven help Canada if Putin realizes we’re a good place to play power games, although our proximity to the U.S. hopefully makes us unappetizing to predators.

What is making us weak? I suggest it is our current political arrangement of progressive statism which never reflected reality.

First, while most people go around unconscious of the assumptions, prejudices and underlying philosophy of the state, society and culture they live under, nonetheless, every country has these things. These underpinnings determine not only how problems might be solved, they determine what is ‘a problem.’ Everything not falling into what is identified or solvable under these paradigms is usually ignored. It is possible that how the Canadian state is structured causes it to have blind spots on certain problems. By this, I mean the society and government do not respond to these problems because they simply lie beyond the ability of the system to identify. This is not a case of burying your head in the sand (which we otherwise do in spades.) You simply cannot see it at all. I think such blind spots do exist, and problems may be lurking in them. However, I don’t think it’s the issue with current weakness in Canada.

Rather, with Canada, our current societal and governmental organization will not deal with certain problems realistically because they will not allow deviations from an orthodoxy, will not allow discussion of opinions contrary to the orthodoxy, and will vigorously attempt to supress facts and knowledge which threaten that orthodoxy. The current ‘Orthodoxy’ in Canada looks something like this:

 

English have always been at war with French

Men have always been at war with women

Europeans have always been at war with aboriginals

Heterosexuals have always been at war with non-heterosexuals

 “Rich” have always been at war with “poor”

Parents have always been at war with their children

Rationality has always been at war with Religion

 

Diversity is Strength

Freedom is Taxation

Self-Reliance is Dependence

Success is Victimization

Community is Self

Equality is Character

 

There was no Prime Minister before Pierre Elliot Trudeau

Big Brother is People are watching you

 

The only true statement is the last. And in Canada, you are not allowed to even suggest anything else is true but the above. And this makes for big blind spots, which means Canada cannot solve problems, because the facts underlying those problems, and the possible solutions, cannot be uttered or considered without being railed against and labelled as ‘unorthodoxy’. This makes us weak.

In Canada there is a minority in power which requires that the Orthodoxy must be true for the nation, for which Justin Trudeau is virtue signalling his way to becoming Pope (practicing the dog-whistles of the Cathedral.) However, it is not truth, it is an attempt to hammer rounded society into the square holes of the Orthodoxy. “The Orthodoxy is the truth. But Canada is not actually like that. Solution: force Canada to fit the Orthodoxy. Thanks Procrustes!”

The current Liberal government therefore finds itself trying to force society into a mold it cannot fit into, requiring the subjugation of all our peoples, our natures, and all that made us strong and virtuous, in service of an ideology. Our citizens sense this problem and are responding in one of two ways: double-down on Orthodoxy, or denounce it and try to find something better. (I find those dependent on government funding tend to double-down, and outnumber the denouncers. It’s inevitable, given how many in Canada have one or more levels of government funding as their primary source of income. I think people make a lot of sunk-cost errors too: when you pay 40%-50% of your income to governments, you cannot admit it’s a bad investment, so you justify it any way you can.)

The current battles in our society highlight this conflict. We are having very visible and divisive disagreements everyday on issues like race, religion, gender relations, immigration, taxation, economics, foreign affairs, education, health care and government regulation. Such discourse is always present, but lately, it has gone beyond discourteous, subjective, and inflammatory, to be outright insular, hostile and in the case of university campuses, the Orthodoxy is enforced with violence.

The tenets of the statist socialist Orthodoxy were never intended to deal with reality, but rather, were idealistic visions of what someone thought we should be forced to accept as the truth. To sell this, they painted a picture of reality which said such a vision was possible and also necessary (to deal with the Orthodoxy’s identified states of perpetual war.) It was never true.

Reality and what is possible in reality, and the Orthodoxy, have been incongruous and creating tension for over 50 years, and its starting to boil over, as reality can no longer be ignored or dismissed. This internal conflict signals to the rest of the world that we are weak. Those with ambitions and convictions feel no need to respect, negotiate or compromise with us when our own house is in chaos.