Sunday, May 08, 2016
Thursday, May 05, 2016
Milo Yiannanopolis is best known for mocking politically correct Social Justice Warrior opinion. As he puts it: "I was born conservative and chose to be homosexual".
"Believing that a person’s sex, race and orientation defines the acceptable limits of the opinions they may hold is called 'identity politics.' It’s a bizarre but flourishing cult in America today that makes fools of its supporters by presenting an insultingly reductionist view of human nature."
You will hear a lot more about Milo. And will be told that to be a 'Good Person' who cares about 'social justice' you must hate him. But he's obviously right.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
We now have the great "Transgender Liberation". Up until now if I had seen a person that looked like a man going into a women' bathroom or locker I would have personally gone up to them and told them to get the hell out and if they resisted found enough other men to throw them out. I have no doubt any number of seriously Trans men went in unbeknownst to me and did no harm but if I had seen someone questionable there's no doubt what I would have done. No more. For to do so in today's rights environment would get me punished. Now the Transgender bathroom issue isn't really a big deal for my daughter or her friends - they're upper middle class and live in communities where there are lots of responsible and vigilant civic minded people who will keep the craziness to a minimum. But I keep thinking about those doomed boys. And their sisters in inner city schools where misogyny and sexual violence are already endemic. The doomed boys no doubt will interpret the new regime as giving them another form of 'fun'. And the schools will struggle to fight against it, fearing - as we did - to be brought up on civil rights charges.
So once again we may end up with a situation where middle class, progressive, white society - through its self centered, self righteousness - finds a new way to hate poor boys and girls to death.
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Here are some things Progressives believe that make no sense to me. It could be that my libertarian psyche simply can't conceive of them and so I solicit good Proggos to set me straight. I recognize that there are probably many libertarian/conservative paradoxes as well but the paradox is that the true believer (moi) can't yank the beam out of his own eye, only the others side's. I welcome anyone who wants to outline them for me. Now without further ado: on with the paradox(es?, paradi? hmmm).
1. Progressives hold that the US is a particularly if not uniquely sinful nation - despoiling the environment, looting the third world and funneling the wealth to plutocrats. Yet they consider it axiomatic that the US government is the key to 'fundamentally transforming' America to heal us of our 'sin'. Yet this government is derived from the degraded nation. How can the product of degradation rescue that which has made it?
2. Progressives complain that capitalism concentrates too much wealth and power in the hands of a small elite, fostering Oligopoly and Monopoly. Yet their solution to thousands of independent power centers holding too much power is to take that power and centralize it in a single Government monopoly that includes monopoly on the use of force. How does further concentrating wealth and power at the center "disperse" and "democratize" power?
3. Progressives argue that all cultures are valid and that it is inappropriate to 'privilege' western cultural norms over those of others. They say everyone's culture should be respected and honored as a matter of course. Except for one: Traditional American Christian Culture. Progressives are utterly intolerant of the older, more traditional version of American culture that still has a large, perhaps even majority following. How can Progressives respect cultures that are far more reactionary than traditional American Culture and not do the same for the culture that most of them grew up in?
4. Progressives argue that many private or quasi private services (healthcare, banking, etc.) should be managed and controlled if not owned by the state. But that means that resource allocation and policy choices will be decided by between 30% and 60% of the electorate voting once every two years, most voting as a tribe in utter ignorance. Even worse, this process excludes other critical stakeholders like immigrants and our continental neighbors from having any meaningful input into policies that certainly affect them. Yet the same people that 'swing for the seats' with a few minutes of clueless voting every two years invest hundreds of times more effort and brain power in their shopping behavior giving all of them, including our neighbors and immigrants, multiple opportunities to influence myriad power centers with their economic 'votes' every day. Given the degraded and wholly notional "control" exercised over the US Government, why do Progressives call it "Democratic"? Why isn't the market which gives everyone a say multiple times a day more Democratic and egalitarian?
5. If it is illegal discrimination for a business to deny services and products available to the public to someone based upon race, gender, religion or sexual preference then how do Apple, Paypal and Bruce Springsteen get away with denying everyone in a conservative, Christian, heterosexual culture like North Carolina, or Indiana access to their services or custom?
6. How is it that progressives like Apple and Paypal boycott US states for regularizing toilet rules while they both do massive amounts of business in places like Singapore or India where homosexual and transexual acts are outlawed? How can they despise their co citizens who share their culture and are much closer to them even on issues with which they disagree, while forgiving other cultures of much worse sins?
7. Politically elite Universities are the most 'progressive' places in the country. Yet they explicitly skim off a cognitive elite and facilitate their intermarriage, creating a self sustaining and set apart caste of elites who share their University Experience. How do progressives in these institutions justify the reactionary results of their labors?