Cantandum in Ezkhaton 04/14/19

Applause! Mr. Tucker on leftist immigration hypocrisy:

William Briggs begins the week with Summary Against Modern Thought. Some clarity for Mr. Buttigieg: What exactly has God made? Notes on the beliefs of the intellectual dark web. Intellectual maybe…but certainly not dark, or even dissenting. They’re smart people, but in the face of the lunacy of Progressives, they are calling for a time out. They seem to be thinking that things will go back to normal if everyone calms down. I don’t think that’s coming anytime soon. On woke Teacher/Student evaluations. He asks and answers the question: Why Government & Corporations Grow Bigger? (Spoiler: positive feedback loop, caused by regulation.) A request: please share diversity statements with him.

The Orthosphere on the Primacy of Freedom, in part as an alternate to nihilism. A clarification of high art and its purpose. On Berdyaev: Why God and Personality Must Be the Highest Ideal. Also, From Judgement You Should Not Refrain. I liked this part:

For a man who is perfectly non-judgmental must also be perfectly apathetic. He will have anesthetized his will, and will therefore look upon every eventuality with perfect equanimity and indifference. If a scapegoating mob wishes to stone an adulteress, who is he to judge them? And if this scapegoating mob should turn and brandish its stones in his face, the non-judgmental man can only shrug, for he cannot say that an ignominious and painful death is less desirable than other alternative.

But from judgment you should not refrain. Your Christian duty is to rectify your will, not anesthetize it. Your duty is to judge justly, to temper your judgments with mercy, and to judge your neighbor only after you have judged yourself.

 

4HFh2m5

Gratuitous Finnish Girl Picture

Z Man blog finishes his trip to Finland, and The Journey Home. An analysis of the recent Congressional hearings on White Supremacy. On HBD: A New Ape in the Tree. His weekly podcast: April Grab Bag.

Evolutionist X with Trump, Mueller and concerns. Also, can one reliably distinguish low IQ and insanity (read the comments too). A comment on why desegregation is a bad idea.

Setting the Record Straight with all the Game Advice you’ll ever need.

Alf gives some advice on how to be happy.

Throne, Altar, Liberty looks at the Liberal Party of Canada’s troubles. Schadenfreude results:

The Liberal Party of Canada has, over the years, made itself odious to all sorts of Canadians but most consistently to two distinct groups who despise them for very different reasons. The old Tories of the kind frequently but erroneously called “Red,” (1) i.e., the ones who prize Canada’s British and Loyalist history, traditions, and heritage, her constitutional monarchy, Westminster parliamentary system of government, and Common Law, her ongoing ties to the British Commonwealth and who associate all of this with an older, more organic, more rooted, vision of society than modern, individualistic, commercialism see the Liberals, quite correctly, as a party of rootless, modernizers who can conceive of value in no terms other than those of a price tag and whose goal is to sell out the Dominion and everything for which she once stood to Yankee capitalism for a quick buck. On the other hand, the rugged, rural, inhabitants of the prairie provinces of the Canadian West whom the Liberals and their academic and media fellow travelers dismiss with “redneck” and other, worse, epithets, have long loathed the Grits [old name for Liberals] as being a party of totalitarian socialists who a) tax them to death, b) ignore, or worse, aggravate, their economic difficulties, and c) display the same arrogant contempt towards them that the Obama/Clinton Democrats display towards middle and working class red state Americans. Both of these negative views of the Liberals are entirely valid. (2) Someone like myself, who has belonged to both groups simultaneously for all of his life – a Redneck Tory, would be one way of putting it, I suppose – has particularly good reason to look upon the Liberal Party with utter abhorrence.

Gerry falls a bit short. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, a Liberal, oversaw the creation of Alberta and Saskatchewan from territory the Canadian government already held. He and his fellow Liberals have treated AB and SK as colonies ever since. And engage in plunder and rapine when it suits their ends. We always do better when ignored by Ottawa.

Audacious Epigone on Guess Who Is Interested in White Supremacy?

Filed under “then they came for the for the milquetoast”, Sir Roger Scruton gets sacked as Chair of the Building Beautiful Architecture Commission. He’s one of the few who might be called an actual conservative, but he’s also mostly harmless. His removal shows the fist of progressivism tightening in the UK.

12fe2ccb8b622b131ec94132f0150db8

American Sun on racial IQ differences. Also, on Joseph Biden (it’s brilliant). The false premise under the Benedict option: parallel polis. Ending the week: Five Friday Reads, with extra Lovecraft.

The Big Scene is the Anthropological Basis for Anarchist Ontology, on GA Blog.

Malcolm on creating white nationalism: How to Start a Fire. Also, on selective censorship: Slavery, Abortion, Heresy. Plus, his thoughts on the seasons.

Clarissa on Trump’s Betrayal.

Al fin on Murder Near and Far.

PA Blog with a link to Murdoch Murdoch’s latest: What do you want to be when you grow up? Plus, his thoughts on Songs About the City at Night.

The AntiGnostic asks Why Are We Still In Afghanistan?

Lastly, from Mr. Briggs, a particularly terrifying This Week In Doom – Big Sister’s Hate List Edition.

I’m wondering how long before the sex-reassignment of children is revealed to be based on, well…nothing good. Further, some parents mentioned in the news seem to be finding having a transgender child fashionable.

What are the ‘reassigned’ kids going to do when it turns out they were sold lies? Now, these kids are called “regretters”, because, you know, mutilating them is perfectly normal, so they’re not victims, but simply unhappy with their decision.

In a common law country like Canada, a child is presumed not to have capacity to enter into a contract, and unable to consent to sex before a certain age. A child cannot make an informed decision to change their sex. It appears they are being led down this path by deluded parents and experts.

Future peoples will look back at this era, and in spite of our technology they will say that we were spiraling downward towards savagery, committed to a doomsday cult, sacrificing our children in more and more sadistic ways, all to status-signal. “They had the best lives of any humans that had ever existed”, they will say, “but they wasted it all through some collective derangement.” I understand that a civilization in decline is likely to keep on declining until it is done, in the same ways all the others before it did. But I bet we could at least get a Marcus Aurelius type respite going for several dozen years.

Keep on reactin’

Señor Blanco

Advertisements

Democracy, eh.

The SNC Lavalin affair has led me to think about democracy in Canada. I’m lightweight on this kind of stuff, but this needs to come out.

We do not have rule by the people in Canada, otherwise called ‘democracy’ ( ‘δεμοσ’ – the people; and ‘κρατια‘ – power, rule.)

Look at any election in Canada. The ‘δεμοσ’ are not calling the shots. Justin Trudeau himself was re-elected as the Member of Parliament for Papineau in [the Current Year], with 51.98% of the votes cast in his riding. This was 26,931 votes, out of 78,515 electors, in a riding with 110,750 people. That means 34.3% of potential voters selected him. Those who did not vote are deemed acquiescent to the decisions of his government. The ones who did vote for him are also deemed to agree with all decisions made by the government. The rest…meh.

Nationwide, [the Current Year] vote was 39.47% for liberals, with a turn out of 58.8%. So, 23.21% percent of voters actually voted Liberal. And for that, everything the Liberals do is now deemed to be what the ‘δεμοσ’ wants. That’s great! They get to do whatever they want and blame it on us. And if they screw up, they get punished by losing power and getting high paying jobs in the private sector. They do not even have to fix their mistakes. Sweet deal.

Further, the decisions made in Ottawa by the bureaucracy are also deemed to be ‘δεμοσ’ endorsed. If you don’t like it, complain all you like. The odds of you voting in politicians who will change what you don’t like is nominal. You’ll likely forget by the next election.

What Canada actually has is rule by an aristocracy. A member of the aristocracy, SNC Lavalin, demands the law be changed and applied in their favour. The ‘δεμοσ’ need not opine.

Justin Trudeau, another aristocrat, happens to have the job of convincing the ‘δεμοσ’ this is what they wanted all along (saving jobs of course…maybe…well, the right kind of jobs…in a province that matters.)

So, democracy is not the right to have your voice heard in politics. Your choice is to vote for who feeds you the propaganda that what was decided in Ottawa (which may be hundreds if not thousands of kilometers away) was actually what you wanted.

All this business about Justice Committee hearings and Minister resignations is not about accountability to the ‘δεμοσ’. It’s about deciding which narrative gets fed to the ‘δεμοσ’ about decisions which are largely made by unelected bureaucrats.

I’d be slightly less grumpy if I could say that Canadian democracy at least gets the aristocracy to play by a set of rules, and to play nice with the common folk. But it does not. It’s about getting the common folk to believe they created rules which make them subservient to the aristocracy. I suppose it’s ‘same old, same old’. And the inevitable conclusion is that nothing about an SNC Lavalin level scandal is going to bring down an aristocrat like Trudeau until the aristocrats want it to.

Cantandum in Ezkhaton 03/03/19

Victor Davis Hanson on the Jussie Smollett hoax and shit-show: a symptom of the times. Heartiste on the frequency of hate hoaxes. The Orthosphere has a quick litmus test for such hoaxes. Audacious Epigone notes it is a ‘peak hoax’, at least for now.

Lord Black of Crossharbour on the hoax of Trump – Russia connections. Also, Audacious Epigone briefly looks at some family tensions around Trump.

WaPo finally admits it got the Covington Smirkgate wrong. When it takes a Statement of Claim to convince you to remove outright lies from circulation, you are following your insurer’s instructions, not the truth. (I’m not linking to the WaPo: if democracy is dying in the darkness…they are the darkness.)

north-american-nations-4-3

Courtesy of JayMan’s Blog

I don’t understand the United States of America as much as I’d like. But I can see from my perch in Alberta that a cultural divide is causing a tonne of friction, and this is playing out in the articles linked above. The primary way in which these cultures are fighting it out is through that very media, although it’s spilling over into actions, which include the hoaxes, but may also get more violent over time.

I’m relying on my limited sense of how things unfolded in the transition from Weimar Republic to Third Reich. But without the technology to record and disseminate what actually happens in these hoaxes, any one of the hoax situations above is a potential Reichstag Fire for the Progressive Left. Indeed, the Left in the US seems to be LOOKING for its Reichstag Fire: confirmation that its twisted narrative can be confirmed by manufacturing reality around an event. If that’s true, will YouTube, the Tweets, blogging and instant posting of video footage be enough to stop it? I hope so.

(You may argue that those events are also potential Reichstag fires for the right as well. Notice any any attempts by the right to reduce the US to totalitarianism as a result of those events? No, I didn’t think so. Notice any by the left? Uh-huh.)

Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at NeoCiceronian Times on why the left cannot meme, and how to use this against them.

Scholar’s Stage talks about the real purpose of your reasoning brain – strength in your position.

Anatoly Karlin on Statecraft at work in Venezuela.

Audacious Epigone on Republican support for Trump.

Dr. Spencer on 99.99997% certainty in Climate ChangeTM meaning nothing, actually.

William Briggs starts off the week with his Summary Against Modern Thought. Followed up with Heaven & Hell Are Real. On the ability of AI to explain religious conflict (spoiler: it’s not). Guest post by Ianto Watt: Orthodoxy’s War Part I. Our Statistician to the Stars agrees: Probability is not as Easy as You Think! A classic post on The Magician and the Cardsharp. Closing the week off: The Week In Doom. Related: British Columbia will help your 14 year old transition for free…whether you like it or not.

p16630coll268-1000

New and improved non-sexist formula!

Now that the draft will apply to women in the US (who are barely into adulthood at the required age), the Orthosphere declares objections to such absurdity. Also, on Werewolves.

Part 2 of the American Sun analysis of the Smirk Seen Round the World:

Slavov Zizek offers a fresher perspective, unlike the usual lazy responses produced by Conservatism™ media people and the “Intellectual” Dark Web liberals. He states that this is not some conspiracy by post-modernists and Marxists to subvert western society. Instead this widely enforced cultural orthodoxy is enforced by liberalism, it is liberalism’s last attempt to legitimize the flattening of all cultures. There is (in actuality) a sophisticated patronization and control of minority subaltern groups by liberalism. It is the dream of a global liberal order that smashed cultures together, destroyed cultural identities among diverse people, and flattened the diverse cultural norms of societies to begin with. In the current politically correct regime, it is not the celebration of difference, but rather a celebration of homogenization in modern liberal societies.

Also from American Sun, threats to the American Empire.  Double quote this week, with the following from Penance as Social Technology:

One of the great benefits the culture of penance provided was protection against destructive status seeking.  In Neo-Reactionary thinking, this is most frequently discussed in terms of “holiness spirals,” which is actually a specific case of a more general phenomenon: a characteristic of Modernity is individuals pursuing religious ideas, religious feelings, and religious beliefs based on their own personal reactions and experience.  Each seeks to outdo the others, asking “am I not also a prophet?”

American Sun finishes the week with Five Friday Reads.

Clarissa on California’s special effort to separate students from their history. Plus, her very quick summary of Michael Cohen’s testimony before Congress.

Rethink Campaigns on the unknown Winston Smith, still alive and kicking, working for the Ministry of Truth, Oil Sands Division. Also, it’s not enough to stab them, you have to twist the knife too.

Evolutionist X on why child rearing gets easier when you have more children. Does the DSM need to be rewritten? And, Tribalism, for good or ill?

PA Blog discusses Snapshots for a Chinese Century (NSFW, but these days, what is?).

From Razib Khan, who has been pushed too far by snowflakes. I don’t think he’s kidding.

 

ygreck-cartoon

A controversial but apt description of goings on last week in Canada.

In Canuckistan, the Wilson-Raybould / SNC Lavalin scandal blew up. If former Justice Minister Ms. Wilson-Raybould’s testimony is correct, the Liberals engaged in backroom arm twisting to help SNC Lavalin avoid criminal charges of bribing foreign officials, including paying for escorts for Muammar Gaddafi‘s son while in Canada.

Prime Minister Trudeau allegedly pressured Canada’s then Minister of Justice to enter into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) which would see SNC Lavalin avoid criminal charges. She said “no”, and Trudeau, his Cabinet, his staff, and the Clerk of Canada’s Privy Council, ever the raging feminists, thought she meant “try harder”.

Trudeau now actually appears to be nothing more than a cynic, using sunny progressive ways to obtain power, and his staff and government are starting to look like thugs and bullies. Nothing new from the left, and especially from a Prime Minister who loves Castro, and who expressed admiration for China’s dictatorship. Although, Trudeau is also very weak and it’s possible lobbyists for SNC Lavalin simply exploited him. (Something about Occam’s razor and not attributing to malice what is simply stupidity.)

Stefan Molyneaux has a very long but excellent summary here. The only thing I can offer is that this is politics. Canadians may not want to admit it, but I’m sure such political dealings go on all the time. Justin Trudeau held himself out as transparent, woke and progressive, but turned out to be none of those things, playing the very games he accused others of. What is galling is perhaps not that he engaged in these kinds of politics, but that he did it for little to no gain, while throwing his former Justice Minister, his chief advisor, and all his sacred principles, under the bus. His style of leadership reminds me of a toddler in a high chair throwing everything on the ground when he does not get his way. Those of us who were not infected by the latest iteration of Trudeaumania saw this right out of the gate in [The Current Year].

After watching Jody’s testimony, I think she is being sincere. Further, I think she knew early on that the efforts by the Prime Minister to keep SNC Lavalin from prosecution for bribing Libyan officials was not going to end until a DPA was done. I trust her when she says she kept records of all conversations: she is a lawyer and keeping copious records (especially when your client is likely to ignore you and do something illegal) is an inherent self-preservation mechanism.

The Prime Minister’s response was surprising. (Here’s a partisan review of his body language, good for a laugh.) He looks like a guilty little boy with his hand caught in the cookie jar. He’s in trouble and he knows it. It’s nice to see him squirm when all his life he seems to have never had to suffer the consequences of his actions. I watched his father commit economic rapine against my province in the early 1980s. I now see Justin trying the same thing: wreck the livelihoods of millions of Albertans to get some votes in Central Canada (and this time, the Left Coast). Trudeau delenda est.

Keep on reactin’!

Señor Blanco

Cantandum in Ezkhaton 02/10/19

196w1o

“Why?” you ask. Tucker Carlson has your answer. It has something to do with people who matter losing their jobs.

Thoughts on Trump’s State of the Union Address, from Malcolm and at PA BlogJim also takes note. Follow up from Malcolm.

The Superbowl was last weekend. The Patriot’s won, beating the LA Rams.  PA made notes. Scholar’s Stage wrote on football generally, and finding purpose, meaning, and fleeting glory. Also from the Scholar, writing identitarian songs.

This week the polar vortex (allegedly, a Global Warming product brought to you by Climate ChangeTM). At one point, I walked to work in a wind chill of -40 (conveniently, °C or °F, you pick.) If I never have to look at long underwear again. Mr. Brigg’s warms my heart with a new term for climate change fanatics: Climate Liars. Vivian Krause on the millions of USD being spent in Canada to help such liars. But Mr Briggs sees a positive effect: it’s causing more male births.

White shoes lead to Twitter outrage, ‘cuz raycis! We are also officially the stupidest civilization in all of human history. Congrats! Although, if we are that stupid, how will we ever know we’ve proven that there were no dumber civilizations? And to my fellow Canucks who might argue this does not apply to them because they’re from Canada…

1280x720_81130P00-CEZDU

Christina: “Ahem, sir, you’re forgetting something!”…Enrique: “Si, ándale!”

 

Further Eye Catching Goodness

The Neo-Ciceronian Times on the rise of “Social Prosecution” under the increasing cultural power of the Left. Clarissa’s blog on why this is like Stalin’s era, but corporate not State driven, and so much worse.

Aidan MacLear on PUA Is Unnatural. I like where he goes with this.

Also from Mr. Briggs, notes on the Pope’s recent speech, who seems to have problems with the first commandment. The always special This Week in Doom – Diversity Statement Edition. Plus, his continuing Summary Against Modern Thought.

Anatoly Karlin on why the US left the INF treaty (spoiler alert: it’s China) and thoughts on AOC’s Green New Deal.

The Orthosphere on how to tell those actually traumatized versus those ‘triggered‘. Also, on Christian Pessimism. Throne, Altar, Liberty on the Gospel Truths of Christ’s Early Life.

Alf’s FAQ on Jimianity.

Malcolm on crimes against unborn children. Heartiste notes the update to sign language. Related, The Orthosphere on Freedom of Religion and Speech, and the Rise of the Cult of Moloch.

The American Sun was busy this week, with lessons from Irish dissent. Also, use of social media to feign populism. On the Marie Kondo phenomenon (the Netflix star showing tidiness and and discipline are not a disease), and what to do about the monopoly of tech giants? Plus, the five reads for Friday.

Evolutionist X provides her notes on reading E.O. Wilson’s Sociobiology. A links post on evolution, sleep and more. Plus, thoughts on kinship coefficients and the genetic ties that bind.

Sovereign Exceptions on the cost in lives of self-driving cars.

And just under the wire, “Bad” Billy Pratt at Kill to Party on MTV, REM’s Automatic for the People, the rise of AOC and the not-rise of Elizabeth Warren. Mr. Pratt, I loved that album too. It’s beautiful and clever, but there was something about it…like REM’s compass needle starting pointing somewhere else.

Keep on reactin’!

Señor Blanco

Cantandum in Ezkaton 02/03/19

Professor Jones says in Raiders of the Lost Ark that the first step in archaeology is going to the library. The line always stuck with me. My previous career was in an archaic form of IT. When technicians were having trouble with equipment, software or systems, I insisted they look at old trouble tickets and ask other techs if they had similar issues. There were few problems that someone had not solved before, and you could save a lot of time not duplicating the research of others.

Same thing in the Reactosphere. If I’ve got a question about politics, history, or power, there’s a good chance someone in the ‘sphere wrote about it, very often with a good primary source for it. Hence, my delight in being directed to this article on the substitution of religion for economics.

Marxism seems to have evolved to try and place human existence under rigid centralized control, based on plans driven by figures, to maximize production. (An example: James C. Scott’s study of agrarian planning in Seeing Like a State.)

Does this kind of thinking really work, ever? An example:

robert_mcnamara_official_portrait

Robert Strange McNamara – Longest serving Secretary of Defense

It was unwise to have Robert McNamara (who helped the US Air Force with statistics in the fire bombing of Japan) as Secretary of Defense under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson during the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam War. He was intelligent, but he missed simple wisdom on human behaviour in war, which a reading of The Art of War and a year in combat service would provide. Colonel David Hackworth had this to say in an interview with PBS:

Q: Why was body count so important? Or was it?

 

Hackworth: McNamara was a number-cruncher and he wanted to have something to crunch, a number. The overall strategy was attrition, to wear out the enemy. By counting bodies, we would know the impact of the war, its success or failure. That became the standard measurement of success. It was the score, and everyone knew the score.

 

What happened was that body counting completely eroded the honor code of the military, specifically among the officer corps. It taught people to lie. The young lieutenants fresh out of the military academies were taught to lie. The generals, who were pretty proficient liars anyway, pushed the body count. A high body count meant great success. So, in every battle, enemy bodies were counted several times. If there were 200 bodies, suddenly the figure became 650 and it became, to quote Westmoreland, “another great American victory.”

 

It corrupted the officer corps and it appalled the soldiers, who by that time were mostly draftees. They were scurrying around the jungle counting bodies, which was a pretty awesome and terrible thing to do. It had a real boomerang effect on the military because it was like a cancer; it destroyed its soul.

The movie The Fog of War is McNamara showing why he was not suited for the role. I like McNamara, but he is a cautionary tale and an object lesson: Others have dealt with problems before and you need to learn from them. He speaks passionately about his errors because he knows they cost the lives of thousands if not millions.

McNamara is honest, even sympathetic at times, but did not learn until it was too late: There are some very critical decisions you cannot “numbers” your way out of. Sometimes you need to understand the non-quantifiable human aspects of the situation, hence his fallacy.

What Caught My Eye This Week

From Malcolm…fun! Just replace the therapist with the MSM. Much needed humour on North Korea. Also, Moloch needs babies…badly!

moloch-and-his-minions

New York State, circa 2019.

Aidan MacLear sets the record straight on Whores and Actors.

Alf has said goodbye to AlfaNL. I’d been reading for a few years, and always looked forward to his posts. He’ll continue posting at the gardenoftheinternet.com, and the latest is the need for a new religion.

PA comments on what I think can be termed ‘victimization chauvinism‘ (which, I think means, my victimization trumps yours, so your history is what I say it is). Also, thoughts on the Gamma type.

Evolutionist X does an excellent review of Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate. A bit of history: In ancient times, having the neighbours over for dinner meant something else. And her thoughts on Millennials and burnout. Millennials seem to have entered a phase of recognizing there are severe faults in the ‘system’. They are in that ‘doubling down will work’ phase. Hopefully, they’ll learn to find their own way. May I suggest this letter, for starters, my young progressives.

The Covingtion Smirk is not off the radar yet. A special guest post at Statistician to the Stars, eloquently confirming what we already knew: don’t trust the media without a long pause. Part One of American Sun’s study on the event. PA discusses the general trend which lead up to the uproar.

Scholar’s Stage on the history of words as weapons.

Dr. Spencer provides a transcript of Michael Chrichton’s warnings on the Climate ChangeTM “crisis” in 2003. It’s highly recommended. In a few places he is prophetic:

I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.

 

Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

 

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

And also this:

The deterioration of the American media is dire loss for our country. When distinguished institutions like the New York Times can no longer differentiate between factual content and editorial opinion, but rather mix both freely on their front page, then who will hold anyone to a higher standard?

The answer, as we’ve learned the hard way, are zealots in purity spirals with infinite standards.

Dr. Spencer also asks: If cold waves are caused by global warming, why are they decreasing? Also, Climate Audit considers the Pages2K Antarctic temperature data. It’s a highly technical blog, but if you really want to get into the science (whatever that means) behind the global warming industry check it out.

American Sun’s Interview with-a-yellow-vest. Plus, praise for Assad. A RTWT: Vitalist Reaction for Dummies. Also, Five Friday Reads.

William Briggs was busy this week: the next installment of his Summary Against Modern Thought. A Reactionary movie review – When Worlds Collide.  A survey of the Great Mustaches of History, and two This Week in Doom entries: the best one and the even better one. Plus, a guest post explaining how: “We have all lost our national identity. All of us. But ultimately, it doesn’t matter. Why?”

In the Orthosphere, the hierarchy that matters, and Hecate and the fork in the road (Medea, MacBeth and beyond).

Palladium’s take on the Davos Conference.

Faith Goldy Red Ensign

Obligatory girl with Red Ensign picture. Thanks Faith Goldy.

Faith Goldy has a video on Canada’s new laws and taskforce to deal with Wrongthink foreign interference in elections. I thought that would mean stopping things like this, or preventing offering assistance to your favourite DRC candidate, or using federal government funds to donate to her foundation. But no, it’s meant to keep interference by [Select evil party: Russians/Iranians/North Koreans/Basket of Deplorableans/Covington High School Kids] in [the Current Year] at bay. (As if any of those parties care. Trust me, if they want Canada wrecked, they simply need sit on their hands and let the Liberals win.)

Finally, the Reactosphere is well aware that any time you see a grassroots movement, there is big money from somewhere backing it up. Vivian Krause, at Rethink Campaigns, originally going after questionable fish farming research, has been tracking the big money behind the activist campaigns against oil sands and fossil-fuel pipelines. She’s even been getting time on the CBC. Canadians are noticing a sea change with the federal and provincial governments who are undermining the oil and gas, using the rhetoric of groups, which Vivian reveals, are funded by sources foreign to Canada.

Energy is vital to any country, and especially Canada, where it’s really bloody cold. And despite the well wishing of enviroactivists and Climate ChangeTM adherents, wind and solar power will not replace oil and gas by using magic spells such as “diversify and change the economy” and “get off fossil fuels“. Those undermining the industry have zero implementable options on what to replace it with (other than, the State needs to make it happen, which a brief review of 20th century history will show always ends badly).

Canada needs hydrocarbons now and for the foreseeable future. Oil and gas is a major source of tax revenue, vital to the economy and trade with other nations, and essential to insure people do not freeze in the dark. But Québec and British Columbia are lauded for not allowing the flow of ‘dirty’ Alberta oil.

Any country whose exercise of sovereignty over its energy industry amounts to a two handed approach of simultaneous dependence and undermining will find someone else holding that sovereignty in their place. This, where Canada finds itself, which Vivian is shedding some much needed light on.

Keep on Reactin’!

Señor Blanco

Cantandum in Ezkaton 01/27/19

nick_sandmann_jan._18__2019_810_500_75_s_c1

In Progressiveland, this offence warrants capital punishment.

I was trying to be objective. I hoped that with the Progressives there was some reasonable or noble goal driving them forward. Maybe there was in the distant past, but that’s over. They’ve been riding a wave of being able to do whatever they want, telling everyone how they should live their lives, playing to our sympathies, and failing that, outright lying.

Don’t like their views on women, abortion, divorce, or marriage? Misogynist! Don’t like their views on men and masculinity? Toxic Masculinity! Don’t like their views on the environment or ClimateChangeTMScience denier! Conspiritard! Don’t like their views on affirmative action and the like? Racist! Don’t like the education system? Child hater! Don’t like non-porous borders? Xenophobe! Bigot! Don’t like minimum wage laws?  Capitalist stooge! Greed monger!

Progressives have done this for as long as I can remember; let’s say 50 years. I have three big gripes about this.

First, Progressive ideas have largely failed. Maybe there has been some progress, but it’s been minimal and probably a fluke. Progressives impose simple top-down solutions to ‘problems’ (often, not a problem at all, and usually without consulting the alleged victims of the problem). Often, it is an attempt to fix things in society or culture which actually require change from the bottom-up. Failure results most of the time, and often, things get worse. But, instead of admitting failure, they double-down on their solutions and use shame to silence dissenting voices. I think they do not want to admit they are wrong, or that the ongoing misery of those they wanted to help is actually, in part, their fault.

Second, they do not have a monopoly on their adopted issues: and other viewpoints might just be better than theirs. But, they are so used to silencing everyone else that today they are offended when you hint you engage in Wrongthink, such as a facial gesture like a smirk.

Third, Progressive attitudes are thinly veiled intolerance, contempt and disdain towards the groups they claim to want to help, and outright hostility to those they see as the route of the ‘problem’ (since they will not look at their own faults). Likely, it is simply about obtaining power: see Spandrell on BioLeninism. Last week was the boiling point, and I sense a sea change, due to the following…

Bang the Drum Slowly

So some Christian high school youths, a group of Black Hebrew Israelites, and some Native American activists went to the Lincoln Memorial. The punchline isn’t all that funny, but comes with a blowjob. It seems to me that people got in each other’s space: the American Indians chanted and banged their drums, the high school kids sang their school songs, and the BHI made some nasty comments. What breaks out in the internet and the media is lunacy.  A good recap of the event was provided by Sargon of Akkad.

The particular Progressive problem was the video of Nick Sandmann and Nathan Phillips (with the drum). Initially, the narrative was the youths had surrounded Mr. Phillips (not what actually happened) and…[trigger warning]…Nick had a smirk on his face!

Progressives lost their shit over a smirk. That’s right…a smirk. I don’t buy that the kid was smirking. He was probably wondering what the hell Mr. Phillips was doing, and what danger he was in. I don’t see any indication from the videos Nick had ANY ill intent at all. (Progressives, however, treat being white itself as ill intent, and call you racist when you disagree.) I don’t think Mr. Phillips is being honest when he says he was trying to defuse the situation: you don’t go drumming right up in someone’s face to calm them down. It probably could have passed without further incident, but Progressives just could not help themselves when a juicy chance to correct thought-criminals was served up. Ezra Levant’s Rebel Media has a good analysis here.

In particular, my grievances are against Progressives, whose members called for the doxing, assault, and murder of the high school kids, based on a ‘smirk’. This, after chiding men for reacting unfavourably to an advertisement which labelled all of them as inherently ‘toxic’. (Showing Toxic Progressivism is the disease we need to worry about. ‘Toxic Masculinity’ is all projection.) After this fine exhibition of dog-whistle outrage by Progressives, I’m assuming everything they accuse someone of is merely projection on their part.

But my greatest ire is for the high school: they threw their kids under the bus with little hesitation. That’s unacceptable. If discipline is necessary, then fine, but one must find out what actually happened first. (They have since recanted. I want to know if they returned the twenty silver pieces they got.)

Nassim Nicholas Taleb once said (I think in The Bed of Procrustes) that the argument “Think of the children!” is a hard argument to fight against, but it is also the last refuge of scoundrels. How stupid one would have to be to:

  • hand this argument to your enemies;
  • through media which are readily tracked, recorded, and duplicated;
  • placing your enemy on the high ground; and
  • leaving YOU looking like the scoundrel.

I did not think Progressives could push their agenda so far as to make The View and Ezra Levant agree…on anything. Yet they do. Congrats, Progressives, you are that fucking stupid.

Anti-Gnostic reminds us this insanity has been going on for some time now. (Here is an explanation of the picture.) Jim takes note. As does PA Blog, here and also here. Evolutionist X notes the moral failings.

Rant Over…the Rest

The NYT takes a mild one on the chin (from David Reich).

The Orthosphere discusses what you could do to live your best life, and spoiler alert: it’s not your career. Who profits from sexual vices? Also, morality must be for victims.

Spandrell discusses Tucker Carlson’s war against woke capital and the right’s future. A follow-up at Motus Mentis. Also, Malcolm’s thoughts on the ongoing Russian election interference investigation. Also: Eew!

Something for my fellow Canucks: Evolutionist X on the Hamatsa Society and the Potlatch.

jesusmary

Mr. Briggs has had a series of posts: Summary Against Modern Thought. It’s his translation of St Thomas’s Summa Contra Gentiles, and roughly works out to one post per chapter. I’ve read a few and they deal with Christian theology. I was struck by Mr. Brigg’s latest, which deals with the ultimate felicity and man’s purpose as quest for the truth. I have been searching for harmony and flourishing in life. No matter where I looked (Buddha, Confucius, Plato, Marcus Aurelius, Jordan Peterson, No More Mr. Nice Guy), the same thing kept coming up: to live a life, always seek and speak the truth. Mr. Briggs drives this simple idea home through his Christian faith. His post provides the example of Jesus Christ, whose sufferings teach us how to find courage to speak truth in the face of destruction, resting assured that your sacrifice is necessary, so that the world, with you in it, can be redeemed and renewed.

Also: Conservatives Conserve Nothing; A particularly ‘WTF?’ version of The Week in Doom; ‘Equality’ is false; and the sudden push against meat.

Antony Karlin discusses why Eastern Europe may not be a place to escape the poz. Matt Forney’s helpful comments.

Alf’s book is now for sale! Also, relief from information overload.

The American Sun was busy this week. A dissection of the recent defenestration of James Watson. A ‘how-to’ for the minimalist reactionary. Thoughts on Progressive control of ‘masculinity’ and the real reason for the APA ‘Toxic Masculinity’ guidelines. Good work on how maintaining an identity is necessary for participation in politics and morality. Capping it off: Five Friday Reads.

Finally, in Canada this week, Ottawa’s (now former) Ambassador to China, John McCallum, gave a press conference to Chinese media in Canada about the arrest and potential deportation of Huawei Executive Meng Wanzhou. She was arrested last December at the behest of the US in Vancouver, on her way to Argentina. She awaits deportation (while on bail) to the US for allegedly violating sanctions against Iran. During the conference, McCallum suggested several ways for Meng to argue against the extradition. McCallum gave the impression he was pro-China, which is fine for the Prime Minister, but not some underling. Later, McCallum stated he wished the US would just drop its extradition request. Understandable, as China appears ready to execute one Canadian and is holding on to two more, ostensibly in response to Meng’s arrest. Justin Trudeau finally asked for and received McCallum’s resignation yesterday. Conspiracy theories abound. Rex Murphy, with his usual vigour, is not convinced McCallum was just a loose cannon. Antony Karlin provides a Chinese perspective.

Cheers!

Señor Blanco

Cantandum in Ezkaton 01/20/19

donald-trump-looking-smug

My mother once told me: “Son, you lack tact. You need to learn how to tell someone “go fuck yourself” without actually saying “go fuck yourself.” Malcolm provides the best lesson yet, via President Trump.

On to what I spied with my reactionary eye this week…

Problems (Part I and Part II) with recent Climate ChangeTM ocean warming alarms, from Dr. Spencer.

Evolutionist X continues her series on male and female psychopathy, relating to relationships and resources: Part II and Part III. It reminded me in a small way of a poem by Kipling, reproduced at the end.

Reflections on China’s Stalinist legacy, from the Scholar’s Stage.

The Orthosphere on censorship, including the good kind. As well, Taine on frustrated quasi-intellectuals coming (to power) too soon. Long but worthwhile and inspiring works by Thomas Bertonneau on the meaning of Christian politics: Part I and Part II.

Good news at AlfaNL, from Miss Alf. Congratulations to Alf and Mia!

Alf’s thoughts on AOC. Also, and then they came for the capitalists.

USSR Underground poetry circa 1930s, from Antony Karlin. Just in under the wire, 50 ‘oopsy’ corrected or just deleted stories on Russia. Also, Generation Zyklon will not save us.

640px-maccari-cicero

The Neo-Ciceronian Times with an enlightening explanation on how aristocracy preserves freedom.

Lots of goodies from American Sun this week. A review of the works of Christopher Lausch, on narcissism in America. The opening quote alone is worth the visit. Jordan Jacob opines on the New Right, and the need for family values as a way for stable homes and happy families. Also, Five Friday Reads from Mr. Landry, including this article on Z/Acc or Zero Accelerationism. I’m not so sure I got it after one time through, but some excellent thoughts on societal collapse, stagnation, and the romantic need for Armageddon.

Guillaume Durocher on why some countries do better than others, why the others don’t catch up, and how the Marshall Plan may not have saved Europe after all.

Palladium on the rise of Kazakhstan.

If you need a chuckle.

Mr. Briggs on masculinity as an APA diagnosis, and why it’s not just about shaving. Also, on God In Science, on statistics – no way to determine cause, and (in a blast from the past) on the mind as the cause of causation:

The universe is no narrow thing and the order within it is not constrained by any latitude in its conception to repeat what exists in one part in any other part. Even in this world more things exist without our knowledge than with it and the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way. For existence has its own order and that no man’s mind can compass, that mind itself being but a fact among others.1

Lastly, the curious case of Father Anthony Van Hee. He is a Jesuit priest who spent thirty years on Parliament Hill in a personal pro-life vigil. He was arrested last fall under Ontario’s Safe Access to Abortion Services Act, which makes it illegal to protest anywhere within 150 metres of an abortion clinic. His act of protest was to stand across the street from an Ottawa clinic and wear the placard in the image below. He spoke to, harassed or blocked no one. Alberta has its own version of the law here.

father-tony-vanhee

Of note in contrast is Jordan Hunt: if you are pro-abortion, you don’t get arrested until you actually assault someone.

A lawyer from Alberta has agreed to take on Father Van Hee’s case and argue the law should be struck down, on grounds it violates freedom of speech. I shudder at how the Supremes might handle this . They’ve said it is reasonable to say students from a proposed private law school are incompetent to practice law because a community covenant will require them to avoid “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman” while at school.2 It will be a while before we get there, though.

Enjoy your Sunday.
Señor Blanco
1. His post reminds me of this quote from Blood Meridian or The Evening Redness in the West, by Cormac McCarthy.
2. Note how the advocates for LGBQT rights in the article are saying that denying TWU’s potential students access to the practice law is somehow a victory in equality of access to the practice. It has been illegal stop someone from practicing law on the basis of personal characteristics (including religion) since the Charter came into affect over 35 years ago…at least, until now. Some piggies are more equal than others.

The Female of the Species
Rudyard Kipling

 

WHEN the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
He shouts to scare the monster, who will often turn aside.
But the she-bear thus accosted rends the peasant tooth and nail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When Nag the basking cobra hears the careless foot of man,
He will sometimes wriggle sideways and avoid it if he can.
But his mate makes no such motion where she camps beside the trail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When the early Jesuit fathers preached to Hurons and Choctaws,
They prayed to be delivered from the vengeance of the squaws.
‘Twas the women, not the warriors, turned those stark enthusiasts pale.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man’s timid heart is bursting with the things he must not say,
For the Woman that God gave him isn’t his to give away;
But when hunter meets with husbands, each confirms the other’s tale—
The female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man, a bear in most relations—worm and savage otherwise,—
Man propounds negotiations, Man accepts the compromise.
Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.

Fear, or foolishness, impels him, ere he lay the wicked low,
To concede some form of trial even to his fiercest foe.
Mirth obscene diverts his anger—Doubt and Pity oft perplex
Him in dealing with an issue—to the scandal of The Sex!

But the Woman that God gave him, every fibre of her frame
Proves her launched for one sole issue, armed and engined for the same;
And to serve that single issue, lest the generations fail,
The female of the species must be deadlier than the male.

She who faces Death by torture for each life beneath her breast
May not deal in doubt or pity—must not swerve for fact or jest.
These be purely male diversions—not in these her honour dwells—
She the Other Law we live by, is that Law and nothing else.

She can bring no more to living than the powers that make her great
As the Mother of the Infant and the Mistress of the Mate.
And when Babe and Man are lacking and she strides unclaimed to claim
Her right as femme (and baron), her equipment is the same.

She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies!—
He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.

Unprovoked and awful charges—even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons—even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish—like the Jesuit with the squaw!

So it comes that Man, the coward, when he gathers to confer
With his fellow-braves in council, dare not leave a place for her
Where, at war with Life and Conscience, he uplifts his erring hands
To some God of Abstract Justice—which no woman understands.

And Man knows it! Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern—shall enthral but not enslave him.
And She knows, because She warns him, and Her instincts never fail,
That the Female of Her Species is more deadly than the Male.

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.

Climate

My view on climate change: it’s been happening since Earth had a climate, so it’s not just anthropomorphic. Increases in surface, atmospheric and oceanic temperature are likely caused in part by human action (with carbonic gasses being the likeliest cause) and the balance due to solar output and other factors. Our impact on climate is not neutral, but our planet is not the next Venus (need way more volcanoes.) It’s not clear if the net effects will be positive or negative. We should avoid attempts to make our climate static (meaning, no climate variance at all), as this is unachievable and undesirable. Yet, this is exactly what modern climate change ideologues advocate for (but don’t realize it, or don’t care.)

Climate change sophistry is really grinding my gears. The political mantra is that all climate change is caused by humans, and that climate change science is 100% settled and proves this is the case. The ultimate goal: to hold climate static in the same state it was around 1990. Those who do not ‘believe’ this to be true (odd, if the science is settled then they are denying facts, not lacking faith) are scum sucking Nazi alt-right Trump voting basket-of-deplorable science deniers who, by denying science, therefore by default deny gravity exists, and want to see the world consumed in fire. I’m glad they bring up gravity.

Problems

The science behind climate change is not “settled”, because no science is settled. Example: humans have considered gravity since they first fell out of a tree onto the savannah. Aristotle thought gravity was like-elements being attracted towards their natural place, and air and fire to rise to where air and fire go, and earth goes to earth. Galileo had ideas that gravity was related to mass and Newton further developed the idea of attraction between masses in his universal law of gravitation and constant gravitational attraction. Einstein took it up a notch with General Relativity (gravity is not a force over a distance between masses, but curvature in space-time caused by the presence of mass). All of this took thousands of years.

Climate change science has only been pursued with any vigour since the 1990s. If it took thousands of years to get a sufficient (not complete) understanding of gravity, then climate change cannot have been perfected in 30 to 40 years. We still do not understand if gravity is reconcilable with quantum mechanics, whether it has a force carrying boson (graviton), if it is a field (like electricity), or what happens if gravitational fields get really intense at very small scales or high densities. The LIGO results showing gravitational waves caused by merging black holes is exciting news, because gravity is not “settled” science. There is no way climate change science is either. Like every other field we will in 100 years laugh at our ignorance (as opposed to climate change zealots, who want to laugh at “ignorant” people right now, without all the discipline and rigour needed to actually learn something.)

Doubts (Dirty, dirty doubts.)

I did not doubt climate change before, and accepted whatever I was told about it. Then politicians acted as if they understood it, and since they know it, the debate is over. Any time you see a professional self-promoter saying there is no need for further inquiries…start making inquiries.

In Canada, politicians don’t understand climate change. Instead, all subscribe to the dogma that “it’s warmer: blame carbon” and promptly justify taxation (i.e. a protection racket) to address it as a ‘problem.’

Climate change advocates at least usually try to learn about atmospheric/oceanic dynamics before deferring to climate change dogma. Politicians and zealots could not wait and went straight to espousing the climate change liturgy to get votes. They now actively discourage people from learning more about climate change. Their MO: “carbon cause climate change, it bad; solution to bad, more government; people question justification for more government, bad.” Either agree with them, or be slandered, insulted and mocked, even if you just ask questions. This is not about encouraging discussion or education, it’s about using shame to control and maintain a narrative. Whenever you see this generally, it’s a play for power.

Most climate change scientists are honest, forthright about the limitations of their work, and avoid the arrogant intractableness of politicians and science popularizers looking to justify their positions and paychecks. No debate? Settled science? Go look at any serious climate change discussion forum – even people who agree that climate change is real are at each other’s throats because the various climate models do not agree.  They argue about degrees, vectors and causes of climate change like cornered badgers. And I’m glad they fight with each other so vociferously: a phenomenon potentially leading to profound climate changes, being abused by governments to justify more power, control, and revenue taking, is worth having a knock-down fight over. Just don’t look for it where it should be happening: in your legislatures.

Indolence? Opportunism?

Legislatures lying down on this issue are a rot in Canada. Ottawa wants mandatory carbon tax implementation across Canada. They say to the provinces: “either implement your own carbon tax, or we’ll tax your populace ourselves.” The only difference: if the province does it, they keep the money; if Ottawa does it, they get the money, and then it just disappears. The taxpayer’s opinion on all this is unheeded. Therefore a provincial carbon tax is necessary as the money will be taken anyway, so best to keep the $$$ close to home (where it can be used to bribe local voters, instead.) This amounts to hostage taking by taxation by Canada, and Stockholm syndrome for the provinces.

I think I see the solution: remove miscreants from Ottawa who propose a tax by legislative gunpoint, and kick out any provincial government that acquiesces. I don’t negotiate with those using taxation in service of an ideology, and I don’t negotiate with those who negotiate with those people, either! Besides, implementing the tax on a provincial level does not oblige Ottawa to not implement a federal carbon tax later.

I expect my provincial government to protect its jurisdiction and its authority, and to tell Ottawa ‘No’ when it tries usurpation by ideology of ignorance. Laying down and acquiescing, burning your economy in effigy, are all unacceptable. If Ottawa does not take the hint, then it’s time to split.

Victimization

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

We worry a lot in Canada about sorting out victims. First Nations, women, LGBQTA2S+, Muslims, francophones, immigrants and many others are all under the political spotlight because of their status as victims. Victims of immigration policy, economics, religious and racial phobias, residential schooling, colonization, internment, oppression, government policies and decisions, microagressions, misogyny, man-spreading and -splaining, and sometimes just plain bad luck. The ways to be victimized are now justification for Canadian governments to splinter our society into victim classes. I don’t like it. Victim means a perpetrator acted, and so, grievances to be redressed against such a perpetrator. Victim status is not neutral, as Liberals like to pretend.

(And often, where harms were suffered, the perpetrator turns out to have the same ideological background as those now parsing the victims, perpetuating the harm, not addressing it: I digress.)

When I encounter, work, or hang out with people, I am not interested in their victim status. Tell me your plans, loves, families, hardships, accomplishments, relationships, hobbies, trials and tribulations: a sense of your experience in life. Treating with someone based on their victim status dehumanizes and diminishes them, removes their agency (in your mind, but an insult to boot when acted upon), and reduces the ‘victim’ in stature so the sympathizing party feels superior. It’s awful stereotyping of a conscious and deliberate kind, whether against an individual or a group.

Canadian progressive political parties (all political parties in Canada, only varying in degree) have lately campaigned on this kind of disrespect. If they looked at it, they’d see they are doing nothing different than what’s already been done for the last 50 years of progressive politics (just the jargon changes) which at best might be neutral, but likely has caused more conflict. It’s a failing in our democracy and our constitution.

Canada got near universal suffrage in 1960. I’d tell you about the various groups granted suffrage at various stages…but that’s just creating victim classes for others to use. People under 18 don’t vote in Canada, and that’s the way it should be. Most brains don’t completely develop until they age 20+ years, and so one should not vote any earlier.

Universal suffrage encourages politicians to buy classes of votes through class bribery. It’s not a willful or malicious purchase, but rather, just how a system running on victimization tends to push decision making by perverse incentives. “Hmmm,” I think to myself. “As a politician, I can’t campaign on complex issues that impact people’s lives, because most people are not well informed, and they want sound bites, not sound policy.” After all, it’s Canada, and you don’t need a majority of the vote. Just appeal to enough voters in densely populated areas to get first past the post and get a majority of seats in Parliament (or a provincial legislature). If you convince a class of voters that you’ll give them more government benefits (bribes in any other context), you increase the odds they’ll vote for you. Such class bribery was identified in 1896 by William Lecky, although I suspect that if I read back further, Maine, de Tocqueville and Burke saw this coming too.

Except in Canada, governments cannot bribe classes of people, because they may not discriminate against people in favour of others. So sayeth the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (part of our constitution, and so the supreme law of the land). Note section 15:

  1. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

The Charter applies to governments and government actors, meaning even the decisions of university and hospital boards are subject to it.  So far, you cannot bribe particular classes because that would be discrimination, challengeable in court and vulnerable to be struck down. Provide to all, or provide to none, it seems. But wait, let’s read a little further…

(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

The Supreme Court of Canada (the supreme arbiter of the supreme law of the land) has ruled that subsection (2) also includes “other analogous grounds.” If the group to bribe has a personal characteristic that is “immutable, difficult to change, or changeable only at unacceptable personal cost”, then you may bribe them as well. Citizenship was the first ground identified by such judicial fiat.

So, to bribe: identify the target class as “disadvantaged” because of distinguishing characteristics or analogous grounds. What classes can I bribe this way? Almost any, as long as I identify them as disadvantaged (victimized) and my bribes as amelioration for those disadvantages.

Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms was effective as of April 17, 1982. It has run 36 years. Perhaps it would not be abused if our politicians were not professional self-promoters, but had some other backgrounds, such as business, education, academics, health care, or dare I say…the clergy! But they do not.

Politicians are professionals making a living not for doing a good job of, but mostly for attaining, their offices. If the easy path to attain office is to bribe to classes of voters, then some will try it, and section 15 gives the rules: bribe only those classes who are victims.

If I’m a smart politician I play to groups already identified as victims, saying I’ll give them benefits in order to garner their votes. If I’m smarter, I identify new classes of “victims” with no voice in government (meaning, no politician pretends to represent their interests) and campaign on bringing them ‘justice’ for their victimization.

And here’s the nasty part: I’ll argue the only way to deal with any grievances, real or perceived, is through electing me and my use of the machinations of state, not by encouraging individuals to make their own lives better – hence, the diminishment and theft of agency of the individuals within a group.

Once in power, I must work even harder to maintain the victim status of my preferred groups, or else, all those bribes could be challenged and struck down. Thus, a perverse incentive to continue to keep groups victimized (if they are no longer ‘victims’, no benefits, no votes), and to establish that only I, through government action, can redress those grievances. Governments spend a lot of money affirming victim status these days: what else could an Office for the Status of Women, or a Motion M103, for example, be about.

After almost four decades of this kind of perverse incentive, it’s no wonder so much of politics divides society by victim class. Perhaps the better question is why it took so long, or why it surprises us. We placed victim status in our highest law, and so victimization became high status. Hence, the obsession with victim sorting.