The Binary Mind Of The Left

robot-3010309_1920

I’ve said before that the left in the twenty first century seems to have a curious form of autism, in which groups are essential, and people who belong to groups are interchangeable widgets.

Not only that, but they have the duty of being interchangeable widgets. How else do you explain the left calling someone a race or gender “traitor” for not thinking exactly the thoughts the left assigned them?

This is a great part of their mind reading schtick. If you oppose them, they know that you wish for the exact opposite of what they claim to want, and therefore you must for sure want the opposite.

So, say you say something like “Sure, we should encourage girls, but we can encourage boys too.”  Because — being binary — by “encourage girls” they mean “promote female supremacy” they KNOW that you want to promote male supremacy.

But it goes way beyond that, to the point that one thinks they must be robots thinking in 0s and 1s and nothing else exists in the world.

The same people who keep accusing their opponents of seeing the world in black and white, think “all lives matter” is opposition to “black lives matter” AND is “white supremacy.”

Because in their heads, at the moment, there are only two races (rolls eyes.) and therefore if you say all lives matter, it’s a covert way of saying that only white lives matter. Because obviously you’re opposing black lives matter.

In fact that name for the movement is the perfect trap, if you’re an idiot who thinks there are only two races, and “you’re with us or against us.”

By proclaiming “Black Lives Matter” — a statement that’s akin to “the sky is blue or occasionally shading to grey” or “humans are usually bipedal” to most of us who thinnk HUMAN LIFE MATTERS — when no one has ever said “Black Lives don’t matter” what they’re doing is saying you can’t oppose them. Because if you say anything but what they say you’re denying them.

This would be stupid enough if all the movement were really doing were opposing unwarranted police killings. ALL OF AMERICA opposes unwarranted police killings, no matter what the color of the person killed. Because we know we’re all potentially in the crosshairs.

But in fact the movement has a long list of demands that have absolutely zero to do with that and include a bunch of “collectivist” stuff that white Marxists like.

This is in fact just like Kwanza which was created by Marxists and all the principles attributed to what they claim is an African holiday (hint, Africa is very diverse, as any place which had poor roads till recently is. “African Holiday” is like “Unicorn, purple.”) are Marxist bull excreta.

The Marxists on the left, in search of their revolution, have turned to stoking tribal hatreds and to attributing to people who tan the values they want people who tan to have.  These include “no private property” and similar bullshit which simply doesn’t work for humans, period.

In this they show their roots as a racist movement. Only racists think culture is genetically inherited, or that black people born in America have more in common with black people in Africa than with other Americans.  Also, only racists think the family-sharing that is prevalent in Africa (as is necessary for survival in any stressed society) is the same as their Marxist collectivism.

In fact this dividing people in groups and simplifying every conflict to two sides and “you’re either with us or against us” is racist. And sexist. And anti-human.

Humans aren’t that simple. Society isn’t that simple. The world is that simple.

The leftist compulsion to try to compel you to agree with them by presenting the choice as binary is a fool’s game.

If they keep playing this game, they’re going to regret it. Because they might stop people saying what they think, or even compel them to say what the leftists want to hear.

But ultimately disabling the fire alarm doesn’t mean you’re now safe from fires forever more.  Silence speech and declaring thoughts not merely unsavory but unthinkable? Doesn’t mean we won’t think it.

It didn’t work ever in history.

Claiming there’s only two choices (hey, how about sexes? Oh, wait. Not believing in 57 and a half genders is transphobic, because…. I don’t know. Cheese?  Oh, yeah, because you need the can to match the contents, and we’re either against you or for you. I see.) and that we’re either with you or against you means we’ll be against you.

Because ultimately?  I’m against whoever forces me to choose in a false binary.  No, this doesn’t mean that I’m against black people.  Because that would be stupid. But I’m against any deceptively named movement that implies someone else is saying black lives DON’T matter.  And I’m against any brainwashed, virtue signaling idiot who claims that believing each and every human life matters is the opposite of black lives mattering.

Keep pushing, leftists.

The backlash from this is going to be epic.

And you’ll never see it coming.

 

 

411 thoughts on “The Binary Mind Of The Left

  1. What’s “funny” is that the Left loved that Star Wars line “Only the Sith believe in absolutes” while talking in absolutes themselves. 😆

    Of course, smart people realized that the Star Wars line is an absolute statement. 😉

    1. I watched a couple of videos where Sargon of Akkad – ahem, Carl Benjamin, talks about the whole Star Wars and Jedi thing, casting it into a philosophical discussion. I kind of wish he’d do more Symposium videos, but I also understand that those were an indulgence of his (that his viewers/listeners were keen on) and right now the whole tearing down statues in Britain has his raging mad.

        1. Then Disney set out to make them look better.

          The sad thing if George had someone to ride herd on him, as he did in Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back, there were so good ideas and a good story in the prequels. The Machette order ( watch SW, Empire, Clones, Sith, then Jedi) works really well.

          The warning was in Jedi where he had less constraint and pointed the way to the prequels.

          1. The degree of great movie in Geroge Lucas era Star Wars is directly associated with the degree of Marsha Lucas involvement. By RotJ she was basically no longer involved and it shows in both story and editing.

            When the prequels finally happened George was the Great and Incontrovertible Oracle, so we got the near unwatchable disaster of Ep. 1, with 2 & 3 only marginally improved, mostly due to the fact that he does have an innate talent level that left him only one direction* in moviemaking quality, but we still got looooong stretches of teen angst and greenscreen-induced untethered acting instead of story.

            * Until Ryan Johnson got handed the franchise by Kathleen Kennedy I would have said Ep1 was a bad as studio produced Star Wars could get. I was mistaken in this view.

            1. Ryan Johnson has discovered a new element: Dumbassium. Those ‘Star Wars’ movies are full of it.

              I think it’s somewhere between Administratium and Bureaucratium in the Weirdiotic Table.

        2. What prequels? There are no prequels, nor sequels either. EVERYthing after The Empire Strikes back are Han Solo carbonite nightmares.

            1. Leia in the metal bikini is proof it happened in Han Solo’s dream.

              The Ewoks are proof it was a nightmare.

      1. Like, authoritatively? I don’t know about that.

        I am guessing that it was a riff on Obi-Wan’s “from a certain point of view” excuse for telling Luke his father was dead, back in the OT, but also something like “Somebody thought it sounded cool and profound and maybe it was supposed to be a zing at the concept of absolute morality??? but mostly not super well thought through.”

        ….

        Well. Okay, I think you can also make a decent case for “not super well thought through” from an in-story perspective, but I would be surprised if the authorial intent was “Under severe physical and emotional stress, Obi-Wan tries to win an argument by yelling the first stupid thing that comes to mind.”

      2. I believe it was supposed to be a shot at Bush’s “You’re either with us or with the terrorists” comment, and no one bothered to tell Lucas that it doesn’t really work in a work where good and evil come with clear labels.

        1. That is exactly what it was. Lucas included that line specifically because of GWB’s statement.

          1. Well, they ruined the Battlestarr Gallactica reboot to take shots at Bush and the War on Terror, why not this?

            1. Well, they ruined it so badly with herky-jerky spaz camera work I couldn’t take more than a few minutes of it anyway.

              A great deal of video made after the late 1990s will forever remain inaccessible to me. People who acclimatized to SpazCam(tm) over decades probably don’t even notice it.

        1. Ummm Desert worlds(sans Makers 😦 ) ? Forest Moons? Giant City worlds (can you say Trantor…). Lucas barely had an idea of his own. Even the used future had been done before See Silent Running for gorgeous special effects, but keep a bucket nearby with bizarre green stuff and Joan Baez singing. The first Star Wars film has a definite feel of various serials, heck the scroll at the start is straight from Flash Gordon and Republic Serials. His biggest success is to have characters you can care about and letting the good guys win which Hollywood had stopped doing sometime in the ’60s. Heck I’ll admit I was gob smacked as a 16 year old when it came out (and Carrie Fisher didn’t hurt with the teenage boys, geek or otherwise). As for why the ROTJ and following they fare poorly, part of it is he lost his film editor (wife, divorced her between Empire and ROTJ) and stopped getting decent writers to help. No one reined him in in the prequel trilogy and it shows. Later stuff is slightly more palatable, but quickly descends into SJW madness. And lets not mention the Xmas special (s?).

          1. Well, Lucas’ characters benefited from all his movie industry buddies rewriting all his unintelligible dreck in his early drafts for the first one, but his real success, the thing that really made Star Wars stand out from prior SF movies, was he gave us a lived-in future, with grime in the corners of non-pristine spaceships, and didn’t have characters stand around for hours (like he did in the prequels) explaining the economic basis for this or the political background for that – he just took off and kept running right to the end.

            Note that the characters-standing-around-expositioning is exactly what he did in the prequels when he had total and absolute control, so I generally credit others in the initial productions with Reining George In.

          2. The first Star Wars movie was basically Kurosawa’s Hidden Fortress. Lucas himself acknowledges that.

            1. Contemporary movie reviews when SW came out usually noted the nods to Errol Flynn pirate movies and the serials from the 30s. One of the SF movie critics did a mashup reel of scenes that could have been in SW. Actually worth watching.

              As a shining example of A Movie Critic, the one at the San Jose Murky News (Glenn Lovell) panned RotJ “because he didn’t like the two previous ones”. OTOH, if he liked a movie, it was pretty much like a current Hugo type award winner. If he panned it, it was at least worth researching.

              1. There was a film critic for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in the ’80s and ’90s named Eleanor Ringel whose reviews were best treated precisely the same way.

        2. I would challenge the idea that he was a Good world builder. He was good at recognizing good ‘bits’ and lifting them. When he actually tried to fill in whole worlds, I really felt they made very little sense. And the prequels are where that set in.

          *sigh*

          It didn’t help one bit that the person cast as Anakin wasn’t up to playing the fall to the Dark Side. A whingeing brat does not become Darth Vader.

    2. You know, that line, combined with the Clone Wars trolling thing– it can all be explained if he is a Sith.

      This would also explain the whole only-20-have-left-peacefully thing, and make it so that the “there are only 2” for the Sith makes sense.

      The Jedi are the Sith…..

      1. And we have the macguffin of the “chosen one” that will “restore unity to the Force.”

        If you cast that as “finally end the Sith Civil War” it does work pretty well.

        1. “The Sith are having a civil war.”

          Force Ghost of Henry Kissinger: “It is a shame they cannot both lose.”

  2. Once again, after the overload you’ve recently experienced, you take “pen to paper” and knock it out of the park. <- only slightly mixed metaphor.

    The collectivists keep trying to say A is A, and can't bring off even that simple tautology, a simple identification. They walk around what they want to say because if they say it, they know that many people will simply walk away. The back to work protests are a serious warning to them, but I doubt that they understand the real implications. The protesters include people doing better not working since they're getting more in "benefits" than they were earning. This has even shocked the talking heads on Fox. People would rather feel good about working than lazing.

    The 10 pounds the left are trying to stuff into a 5 pound bag includes so many weird and non-wonderful ideas that even some on the same side shake their heads. Ayn Rand called it package dealing, which described the whole thing, the virtue-signaling, the "for us or against us", the warped combination of "causes."

    The available bandwidth on the internet has limited the ability of the "Elites" to stuff beliefs down our throats. Blogs are the death of collectivism. Communication in un-controlled form destroy the ability of any group to keep everyone in the dark. The light shown on liberty vs. authoritarianism is harsh on the authoritarians. Hypocrisy keeps popping up and the contrast to what the authoritarians are saying is clear to almost everyone.

    It won't end well for them, maybe not quite carts in the streets to Madame, but posts in the courtyard work too. One of the scariest tails I've read in the recent past was Whirlwind by James Clavell. I had relatives, by marriage, in Tehran at the time and reading what really went on vs. what we saw on TV and they would talk about was huge. It's a cautionary tale about the fall of authoritarian regimes. The same occurred in Romania, Libya, even Italy.

    Keep it up!

    1. > Blogs are the death of collectivism.

      You have to go to the blog, and then you have to read it.

      Collectivism, on the other hand, is baked right in – school, TV programs, radio programs, “social media”, magazines, newspapers, textbooks, fiction… “you’re soaking in it.”

      People reading *this* blog are out on the end of the bell curve, out in Looney-Tune-Land. The average person sees collectivism about the way fish see water.

      1. But those that go to work only want collectivism for others, what they earn they want to keep. There’s enough cognitive dissonance already there that the events of the past week will break through and turn many of them against the collectivists. Believing in government providing a safety net is one thing. Government allowing the burning of neighborhoods and nol prossing all those who were arrested for arson, vandalism, & looting is quite another.

      2. That’s not, strictly speaking, true. Many people distribute blog links via social media. That makes blogs “baked right in” at least in a sense.

    2. “Blogs are the death of collectivism.” Unfortunately, a lot of people who otherwise would have been blogging or reading blogs are instead posting on and reading (scrolling through) social media…which *does* have centralized-control aspects, and by its very nature is hostile toward connected thought and rational discussion. Twitter is the worst, Facebook is better but not good. Too bad it ever went beyond its best & highest use, which was sharing cat & dog pictures & such.

      1. Usenet is still out there. Somewhat less controllable than herding cats.

        Unfortunately, freedom means that griefers, trolls, and spammers have pretty much ruined it for everyone.

        1. Now there’s a novel* idea: a serial killer is hunting down and eliminating trolls and spammers … do the detectives stop him (her? read the book!) or help?

          *Or TV series, machts nichts zu mir.

          1. There were plenty of threats to do that, right after Cantor and Seigel.

            [old enough to remember when “unsolicited commercial content” could get your host shut down]

            “Yes, children, there was once a time when there was no advertising on the internet, and email wasn’t bombed with spam, and instead of Facebook, we had alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die…”

            Sounds unlikely from up here in 2020, doesn’t it?

        1. I’m distressed that they are bringing it back. Two reasons. They are bringing back Sophie, but not Nat. That trashes the ending of the first instead of building on it, where Parker would lead a team with Elliot and Haridson and a new cat burglar and grifter.

          The last season also drifted into SJW land more than a few times. I suspect that will be the focus this iteration.

          1. Back? Pfui. Christian Kane already has a series (Almost Paradise) produced by Dean Devlin and he’s going back to Elliot? AP wasn’t renewed by WGN because they’re going to an “All News” prime time format but Devlin was talking about other offers as recently as June 4th.

            “I can’t name the platform yet because the ink isn’t dry on the contract but, this July, all of the original episodes will appear in a new place and that place will be for free so everyone will be able to watch it for free.”

            “And, they have sworn to me that, if we do well enough, if we perform really well in those first couple months, they will pick up season two and continue the show. We will announce at some point where that new platform is,” Devlin said.

            Nor does IMDb (which presumably knows about Leverage 2.0 because they’re supposedly running it) report the show among Kane’s credits.

            Riesgraf was just in a series, Whiskey Tango and, well, let’s just say she no longer looks quite right for the Parker role.

            Yawn.

  3. I noticed some nutters are trying to say that there are Jews of Whiteness and Jews of Color. 1. I don’t remember that being anywhere in the Tanakh. 2. Could someone please show me documentary evidence that a pogrom has been stopped when someone opened the door and the mob went, “Oops, sorry, we didn’t realize that you were a Jew of Whiteness. Our bad. Have a nice evening!” and departed in peace.

    1. … Completely off-topic, but I read that as Jaws of color and found myself wondering about protests against the Great White. I need a vacation…

      1. I misread it same as you and started daydreaming some odd little scene with Dave Freer swimming with a curious Great White juvenile that spent all it’s time watching him check out lobster pots.

        I have no idea where that came from. I should sleep.

        1. Between this and the last post on your blog, should we be worried about you? 😛

          Though I suppose a mind like that can come in handy for writing fiction…

        2. Perhaps not completely unrelated …

          Great white sharks seem to avoid the surface until they grow up
          onjures images of Jaws chomping on surfboards and wreaking havoc on coastal communities. While it’s true that great white shark attacks on humans do happen — and can be incredibly devastating when they do — a new study suggests that for a large chunk of a great white shark’s life, they’d prefer to hang out near the bottom of the ocean rather than the surface.

          As LiveScience reports, researchers studied the stomach contents of dozens of young great white sharks to get a better idea of where they spend their time. Based on their findings, it seems that juvenile great whites are mostly bottom feeders. …

          1. Most shark attacks on swimmers near the beach are by species such as Tiger Sharks, which are very aggressive and tend to venture much closer to shore.

            1. And remember, sharks aren’t really man-eaters. We taste terrible to them.

              Of course, they don’t know that until they’ve had a large bite……..
              (Until then, you’re a very odd seal.)

        3. For some people sleep isn’t really a thing. They just charge along until it’s time to reboot.

    2. Well, I suppose there are, if one focuses on the religion. Sammy Davis Jr. was a convert. And there’s the African Jews from Ethiopia (though afaik, they’ve largely been relocated to Israel). The reason for that, of course, is that “Jew” is both a religious (i.e. cultural) and ethnic identifier, and the two don’t always overlap.

      1. I — and the boys — qualify on the ethnic, but our family (both sides of mine) converted centuries ago. At least mostly converted (these things are complicated.)
        Only one part forced (and it’s also complicated.)
        Hence the term “Jewish enough for Hitler.”
        IOW Those who hate Jews consider us Jews, (And are often uncanny about identifying us.) so we must know and remain alert.

        1. A friend of mine used to joke that he wasn’t Jewish.. he was Jew-ish.

          He was totally non-religious. Raised by parents who were likewise non-religious. But man did he LOOK the part. He had the stereotypical hair and everything. People would see him and assume, which lead to hilarity when (presumably Jewish) people would walk up and wish him well on Jewish holidays, and he had absolutely no idea what they were talking about.

          1. A friend of mine looked like a Plains Indian. As in, people would ask what tribe he was from.

            The amusing thing was that his parents were both Polish immigrants…

            Genes do downright peculiar things.

            1. Right, If you’d put a feather headdress on my maternal grandfather you might mistake him for the Native American with the tear in his eye from the 70’s commercials, particularly if grandpa was tanned. To the best of my knowledge 0% native american, All British Isles, English, Welsh, Scotts/Irish, part of the family chose the wrong side in Revolutionary War and ended up in New Brunswick for 100 years or so.

              1. There are two kinds of people in the world; those that, with regards to what we call ‘races’, they are genetic mongrels…and those that are fooling themselves.

            2. Indeed – one of my good friends in high school had a German mother (IIRC) and a Shoshone great-grandmother on her fathers’ side. She looked like Geronimo got up in drag as a Wagnerian soprano.

            3. I have to admit, that I watched so many spaghetti westerns as a kid, that it didn’t occur to me until I was older that the picture in my head of what an “Indian” (sue me, it was the 70s, that’s what everyone called Native Americans at the time) looked like, was really an Italian.

              1. Unless you get down to looks-like-a-golden-example-of-specific-tribe (like Paiute, they’re still a match for some other tribes– our best cousins are mostly Paiute, they’re the compact fridge with legs guys) there are a lot of Italian actors who look like Indians.
                Not just to folks who aren’t Indian, either, that Crying-Indian guy, Cody something, had several tribes who insisted he was one of theirs. 😀

          2. *snicker”* My younger brother (JP in the family memoir what was my first book, written because the readers of my original blog loved the stories of my weird family) was constantly being mistaken for being Jew-ish. Mostly because he was dark-haired, brown-eyed, and intellectual-appearing. And also because we were raised in the strict old Lutheran mode, which involved three years of weekly catechism classes, in which matters of religious minutia were dissected and discussed down to the molecular level. Which meant that he was fairly well grounded when it came to discussing religious matters. So … to his middle-school peers – he must be Jew-ish.

          3. If you grow up around Jewish people you can generally pick them out of a crowd, even if they’re not wearing yarmulkes. But saying you can is considered an admission of bias. About 1/3 of my HS graduating class was Jewish. But it is not 100% reliable. A few days before graduation a young lady I knew the entire 3 years I was in that school asked me if I was going to the graduation service at Temple A. Apparently there’s a special service for graduates… and I cannot recall the name for the life of me. Then she asked me about Temple B and Temple C then asked me which one I was going to. I said none. And when asked why not I said “I’m not Jewish.” She stared at me and asked “What do you mean you’re not Jewish?” I don’t think I actually had an answer for her.

            1. When we moved to our previous neighborhood, and the first 5 years there, our house was the exact division of the Catholic neighborhood and the Jewish neighborhood. (The neighborhood changed while we lived there and grandma’s went into homes, or died)
              My kids, playing on the street were assumed by each grandmother to be “ours”.
              I got more elderly ladies of either kind bringing younger son home with “He was climbing in the dumpster” (He was playing detective, but…) Or “He and his friend were being loud and obnoxious”. Older son was late mid-school so less bratty, but he’d get “Where are you going honey, does mom know you’re out late?” etc.

          4. Our sons say we’re Cathews. The world’s most blessed people.
            “So what’s your religion?” “Cathew.” “Oh, bless you. Now, you were saying?”
            And yeah, my doctors and such always wish me well on Jewish holidays. 😀

    3. The entire point of creating this utterly bogus distinction is so that they can manufacture a justification for persecution of Jews while sparing Jews from the horn of Africa who fled persecution from Jihadists and now reside in Israel. Leftist orthodoxy is that Israel is a colonial state that should never have existed and that “justice” requires that it be replaced by a Jew-free Arab-Muslim state, with presumably “non-white” Jews spared from this genocide (not that the Jihadists actually care about such a distinction and would not hesitate to murder them).

      It is also a way from them to justify their open rabid bigotry towards Jews here, as expressed by such “leaders” as Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, the BLM activist group’s own writings, Antifa’ and OCW’s screeds attacking Jews as the 1% of the 1% that must be destroyed first in order to end “white privilege” and achieve “social justice”.

      The only difference between these anti-Semites and the original Nazi’s is that this version are international socialists rather than national socialists and have graduated from just wanting to eliminate the world’s Jews to eliminating from the world every group they deem to be an “oppressor”. It is no accident that so many leftist college professors and students routinely opine on their social media accounts about how elimination of certain entire groups would make the world a better place

      1. It is all rather reminiscent of the intellectual contortionism engaged in by Medieval “astronomers” determined to retain Terra as center of all motion and orbits as perfectly spherical.

        I grant that it is possible to calculate all motion as Terra-centric (all motion being relative to any given point) but it makes the math devilishly difficult. But when you demand the orbits be perfect spheres you’re warping space sufficiently to invite visitation by the Elder gods.

          1. Yes, that is the recounting I tend to give people to read to have some real context instead of the “religious and medieval people are stupid while I’m so smart” after asking them to explain why, if the Earth moves, there is no parallax to the stars.

            Most people don’t want to accept that they view science as faith in terms of knowing versus believing.

            1. I found it kind of comforting to know the stupid pissing matches and political BS wasn’t new.

              We got this far in spite of People Doing Stupid Stuff.

              1. I picked up some essays by Dorothy Sayers the other day. (The collection titled Unpopular Opinions.) On feminism, she was intriguing and entertaining, with some emphasis on the hazards of being treated (or treating oneself) as part of a Uniform Group. Her comments on the inaccuracy of even trivial reporting were interesting.

                Her commentary on the period between the World Wars was… rattling. On the one hand, it’s a reminder that some of our problems aren’t new; on the other hand… yikes?

              2. Isaac Newton spent most of his life engaged in stupid pissing matches with other academics… brilliance and pettiness seem to often be found together.

            2. There of course is parallax to the stars. With precise measurements you measure it by using the earths orbit at 2 points to get a 186 million mile baseline. The unit is the parsec one second of parallax. This yields a distance of over 3.26 Light years or 1.917 x10^13 miles. You really can’t do these kind of measurements without photographic plates and high quality telescopes so mid 19th century at the earliest. And even then the number of stars that show measurable parallax is small as measurement error bars limit you to stars within about 90 LY. Recently with the Hipparcos satellite we’ve pushed that number out to about 1000Ly and greatly reduced the error bars which really threw some astronomical values into a cocked hat. The numbers are so insanely large that its not surprising the stars were viewed as fixed. even 10,000 miles is an immense number for the renaissance/ early enlightenment period.

                1. Sorry I wasn’t clear that I was basically agreeing with you. Without technology that is 100’s of years in the future there is no perceivable parallax. Given there was no visible parallax Ockham’s razor would argue for fixed stars.

                    1. No problem, no foul. It’s always an issue in online written communication. Flamewars started as soon as people could send E-Mails 🙂

                  1. I remember the WTF of that when I saw the movie, shortly after it came out.

                    Not one of the writers, editors, producers, directors, rush viewers, actors, continuity checkers, or others responsible for that making it to the screen made it past sixth grade science class?

                    Maybe whoever initially put it in there thought it was “cool space talk” and had no idea what it actually meant, but there were a lot of people not doing their jobs to let it stand.

                    1. Quite the reverse: the point was that Han was supposed to be an idiot who didn’t know what he was talking about. Watch the scene and observe Obi-Wan’s reaction.

                      Later on this was retconned.

        1. At least those Medieval astronomers had actual reasons to keep Terra as the center, and not just theological (which are the exact opposite of the theological reasons we are all taught in school, but that is obvious if you have a clue) but scientific ones.

          Specifically, the lack of any discernible parallax on a 2AU baseline (which they had a reasonable estimate of the length) yielded distances that made no sense, even if the stars were as bright as the sun (most visible from earth are brighter).

          And, when other information became overwhelming, specifically the much better measurements of Tycho (whose model gave better numbers that Copernicus and had everything but the Earth orbit the Sun to get there) and Kepler’s introduction of the ellipse as an orbit, those same astronomers agreed it was a better solution.

          Which means they were capable of things moderns leftists don’t even believe are real:evaluating evidence contrary to their position and changing their mind.

        2. It was pretty stable in medieval times. You needed a telescope to really rack on the epicycles.

          As my physics teacher observed in college, it was a Fourier series, which can approximate ANYTHING to any sufficient degree.

      2. The originals also had better hygiene and fashion sense.

        That might not seem important, but if you’re down wind…

        As for encouraging the elimination of groups to make the world better, if you’re in that business you’d best be careful you’re not an identifiable group who makes other miserable.

      3. I think there’s also a good deal of resentment by persons of Jewish heritage who have embraced the Progressive religion against Jews who put the God of their forefathers before The New Order.

        1. Understandably. After all, assimilation worked so well in France and Germany and is showing such promise among the English.

      4. “Leftist orthodoxy is that Israel is a colonial state that should never have existed and…”

        I once had the idea that instead of building the Jewish state in the middle east, maybe they should have carved out a chunk of Germany and put it there. After all, it was the German Nazis that went around killing them in job-lots. But then… that would have put the Jewish state right smack in the middle of place where people hated them… Oh wait…

        1. It would have been a little late – they’d already established settlements i Palestine at the beginning of the 20th Century, taking what was an neglected region of the Ottoman Empire and turning it from wasteland* to thriving communities — so much so that a lot of the regional Arabs settled in the area to make a few bucks off the trade the newcomers brought.

          Amazing what not letting your sheep and goats overgraze, engaging in reasonable soil and water conservation and investing in property will (combined with industriousness and intelligence) will achieve.

          -Wasteland? Read Mark Twain’s travelogue, The Innocents Abroad, or The New Pilgrims’ Progress for description of the place circa 1868.

          1. Oh, yes – Twain’s description of the Holy Land (and the Middle East generally) in Innocents Abroad was of one desert wasteland, inhabited by poor, starving, fly-specked people. At one point, he had to bow out of a side excursion from (Damascus??) because he had caught some illness or other, and he wrote that he had nothing to do but take medicine and throw it up again, which was a dismal occupation but pleasanter than traveling in Syria.

            1. “France is miserable because it’s full of Frenchmen, and Frenchmen are miserable because they live in France.”

              Which seems as applicable today as it was when he wrote it.

      5. So, Semitic Jews, non-Semitic Jews, and non-non-Semitic Jews?

        I think I’ve seen this movie before…

  4. just flip the script on them … say All Black Lives Matter … they can’t say you are against them … and they lose the implied “only” BLM hint … BLM is just an in your face trolling job …

          1. Around here, both groups are despised. One because of the fires they set, and the other because of the fires they don’t put out. (I’ll leave it to the interested student to figure out which BLM is which. Got a coin?)

            I’m pretty sure it was the federal version BLM who managed to kill the term “Controlled Burn” after they managed to burn out Bandelier National Monument and other cluster-fires. It’s now “Prescribed Burn”

            1. Out here it’s now a proscribed burn (had five wildfires yesterday, thanks to the 70 MPH winds. March decided to do an encore.)

      1. Black Lives That Can Be Used To Wave The Bloody Shirt Are Useful is a more accurate, if unwieldy, name for that group.

          1. They’re Christians, the left figures they deserve it.

            And, yes, once black churches in the US are no longer useful rally points for the left, Black Christian Lives in the US won’t matter either.

            Gays and women are already learning they were just pieces and not people.

          2. Christians are the dominant religious group in the US (by which we mostly mean just the largest one.) Therefore they are dominant in the world because only the US counts, and anyway Christianity is a colonial religion, so they can’t claim persecution.

            Or so Leftists would have you believe.

            1. It’s a little funny– the various Christian groups are flipping out because of the “no specific denomination” in surveys, and the various progressive groups flipping out because most people are Christian. *wry*

        1. Black Lives are an asset of the Black Collective and only they have the privilege of disposing of them. Thus the fifty or so Black Lives discarded i Chicago any given month are acceptable while the (in average) one Black Life terminated in conflict with a police officer (all of whom are White by virtue of upholding the Power of The Man) constitutes a form of poaching and is therefore an unlawful taking.

          It is really all quite simple and logical.

          If you are insane.

      2. Yep. And the fact that we are all now expected to believe that this Floyd person was a saintly, moral exemplar, martyred by Whiteness, is doubly obscene. David Dorn’s funeral certainly wasn’t broadcast nationwide and at length on TV – and I’d bet anything at all that Dorn was worth more than a hundred Floyds.

    1. Is it not presumptuous to impose identity on others by defining them as “Black”? If people with Y-chromosomes can identify as “women” and people lacking Y-chromosomes can identify as “men” I do not think anyone has standing to declare what shade of skin defines you as Black, White, Brown, Yellow, or Puce.

      It all seems extremely Authoritarian, even (dare we say it) fascistic?

      1. Oh, the Left went full on Fascist a while back. They used to be better at hiding it. They used up most of their propaganda organs’ credibility talking down the War on Terror, then getting Obama elected and maintaining his ‘fro reading for eight years, and finally trying to shove Her Shrillness into the White House. The tatters that are left aren’t enough to cover idiocy like Antifa. So now it shows.

  5. I don’t think they’ve evolved so far as binary.

    They’re unary.

    There is Only One Way and Only The Real People and nothing else exists for them.

    1. Tribal thinking. Only the tribe are People. All others are the Enemy.

      Progressive, isn’t it?

    2. One Way to rule them all, One way to find them; One way to bring them all
      and in the darkness bind them.

      Sounds about right. Always figured SJW’s as minions of Sauron and Morgoth.

      1. Collectivism is the One Ring and they think it can be used for good. Some on the Right make that mistake too.

      2. Probably a better chance that Morgoth or Sauron would leave you be than of the SJW’s doing so.

  6. The current Left, and especially BLM and their ilk, is a cult. It is a religious faith that cannot have any opposition, and it will kill (figuratively, right now) any apostates.

    Keep your powder dry.

      1. The differences between a religion and a cult are precisely the differences between a healthy relationship and an abusive one. “Cutting off contact with exterior sources of support” being one such parallel.

        1. Y’know, I’ve read several books on cults, and while each has tried to address the difference between a religion and a cult, that’s much more concise and I suspect even more accurate than the lengthy handwaving explanations.

          1. Squishy edges make it too dangerous– you have to get into good influence or evil and truth vs falsehood, because the malignant groups they identify as cults* are a deformed aspect of normal human interaction, especially in extremes.

            Or, as many wags have noted: The USMC is either a gang or a cult.

            Then once they get your attention, they can point to the tactics.

            * Catholics use the term “cult” for the activity that started with recovering the bones of the martyrs waaaaaay back when; it’s also a term of art for stuff like asking so and so, who happens to be dead, to pray for you.

            1. Fact – There are two branches of the military: The Army and the Navy. The Air Force is a corporation, and the Corps is a cult. 😀

          2. I once read a list of “signs of a cult” that included “its wealth only benefits those in charge, not the members or society” and “separation from outside sources of support” and realized it was directly parallel to what an abuser does. Crazy beliefs have nothing to do with the definition, just the way they act.

  7. I think there is a science fiction story in that (and black liberation theology where an entire race is either all saved or all damned). Maybe we are like individual cellular creatures trying to comprehend the first multicellular animals. Maybe what to us seems insanity and irrationality is really the first steps of hive minds forming before our eyes. We just haven’t realized what we are seeing so it doesn’t make sense… yet.

    They attack individualist heretics in their unseen (to us) body for the same reason our bodies immune system attacks or expels cancerous cells and germs.

          1. It was originally a short story. It was okay. The book just stretches it out into tedium. Most of Bear’s books could benefit from the services of an editor with a chainsaw.

  8. A well-written, well-argued piece Sarah. Unfortunately, the people who most desperately need to hear this will skim through it, read every fifth word, comprehend every third word of that, and then get to the end and start hissing: “RACISSSSSST!!!”

    1. Even worse; the tech oligarchs and corporations that control platforms, finance, etc., will simply ban anyone who expresses wrongthink or even dares to host or publish someone else’s wrongthink. We are already seeing this accelerate rapidly and the Maoist style purges, struggle sessions and excommunications from society are only just getting starting. Mao’s Cultural Revolution Redux is underway and if Democrats win in 2020 it will be joined by the Great Leap Forward Redux as Democrats impose utterly insane and impossible mandates on energy use and economic activity that will lead to the destitution and deaths of tens of millions of people.

  9. I first recognized or encountered this dichotomy my freshman year in college (1979). I was told that as a woman (I’m so old I remember when there were only two genders), I HAD TO vote for the woman candidate. When I pointed out some of the proposed policies of said candidate (this was at a very local level), I was told that didn’t matter, the town NEEDED a woman in that job. At that point I started paying closer attention (I didn’t act on things at that point…I was in college, I wanted to fit in…it happens). Over the last 25 or so years I’ve gotten seriously ornery when people tell me that my gender, race, or education level require that I vote a certain way.

    Back in 2000 we were living in Rochester, NY and HRC was running for Senate. Her campaign manager said that any woman who didn’t vote for HRC was either stupid or controlled by her husband/boyfriend. I blew up. Sadly, I still see the binary response in many of my friends.

    1. Back in 2000 we were living in Rochester, NY and HRC was running for Senate. Her campaign manager said that any woman who didn’t vote for HRC was either stupid or controlled by her husband/boyfriend. I blew up. Sadly, I still see the binary response in many of my friends.


      I’m old too. My freshman college year started fall ’74.

      The other. Well wasn’t in NY. But my response to “Must vote for HRC because she’s a woman & you are a woman, or you are stupid or controlled by your husband/boyfriend/father/son” was “No one tells me how to F* vote,”, yes went there, I don’t use that word, ever, or didn’t, “not even YOU. Sure and he* not HRAC!!!!”

      Where HRC equaled “her royal ass Clinton”.

      BYW. My give a dang broke. I ignore them.

      1. My step-mother-in-law, who I dearly love, used to sport a bumper sticker that read “Friends Don’t Let Friends Vote Republican”

        For several years, she blew of my objections, until I pointed out that the sentiment was something the KKK would have approved of, circa 1950.

      1. She will officially be “not a real woman”.

        Apparently you can only be an official woman if you support Democrat policies, otherwise you are not officially a woman.

    2. “Her campaign manager said that any woman who didn’t vote for HRC was either stupid or controlled by her husband/boyfriend.”

      Which just shows how weak they think women are. All this “Rah rah, I am woman hear me roar” BS is just for insecure women who need reassurance.

      1. Right?
        It’s not their fault, though. They’ve been taught women are invincible and powerful, and at the same time punished any time they act like women. It’s no surprise women int he 21st century are more neurotic than shaved cats.

    3. An early introduction to the…disconnect…between the words they say, and what they mean, was me taking seriously three different things– truth to power, the youth aren’t to be discounted just for being young, and the bad people are telling you that you have to do ___ because you are ___.
      Yeah, it went over rather badly. No idea if it sunk in to any classmates or not, I was too busy being startled at the teacher being incoherent. (I have mentioned I gave teachers heartburn on accident, right?)

    4. I was in college when The Great 0bama was running for his first term. The prevailing opinion on campus was that the ONLY reason that anyone would POSSIBLY vote against The Anointed One was because they were RAAAAAAAAACIST!

      Never mind the fact that “Hope and Change” is a vague and empty promise, and the few substantial promises he’d made sounded like they’d been pulled from The Communist Manifesto, YOU’RE A RAAAAAAAAACIST!

      1. Yep, and that drew a large number of white voters who took him at short term face value only.
        Fortunately, a large number of those wised up the second time around, just not enough to overcome his incumbency with an idiot for an opponent.

          1. If I recall correctly there were a number of precincts in Philadelphia where vote totals were greater than the number of registered voters in the precincts and EVERY SINGLE ONE of those “voters” voted for Obama.

            I think it is safe to say that similar type of frauds in a slightly less blatant manner were carried out in Democratic Party precincts throughout the country.

            1. In San Diego there are more than 70,000 ‘voters’ that the Registrar is REQUIRED BY STATE LAW to remove from the lists, but have remained there for years. Most of them moved elsewhere but are still registered at their old addresses. If the Democrats manage to ram through fraud vote by mail, how hard will it be to glean those ‘voters’?
              ———————————
              Why do the ‘progressives’ believe their anointed minorities are too stupid to fill out the same simple paperwork as everybody else?

              1. To the extent that opposition to fraud prevention measures has to do with anything other than preserving fraud; they don’t. They believe their anointed minorities are too BONE IDLE to fill out the same paperwork as everybody else. In fact, I’m pretty sure, come to think of it, that a significant number of the Democrats’ fraudsters are convinced that what they are doing is moral because they are just casting the votes of lazy blacks that they can’t motivate to get to the polls.

                No, I don’t like the Democrat Party’s attitude toward Blacks. No I don’t think it has changed much since the Planter Aristocracy defended slavery on the grounds that the Blacks needed to be looked after.

                1. Now I’m wondering how old the tactic of motte and bailey is– the half truth in the idea that the slaves had to have someone looking after them is that people who have been forcibly prevented from building anything don’t have the resources to do what they otherwise could, including just surviving.

                  The lie part being, of course, “so I get to keep their labor.”

                2. If you haven’t ere now, be sure to access Preston Sturgess’ magnificent 1940 film The Great McGinty, which features early on almost exactly that argument:

                  What do you think this is, Hicks Corners? Some people is too lazy to vote, that’s all. They don’t like this kind of weather. Some of ’em is sick in bed and can’t vote. Maybe a couple of ’em croaked recently. That ain’t no reason why Mayor Tillinghast should get cheated out of their support. All we’re doing is getting out the vote.

                  This, along with Yes, Minister and its sequel, ought be required viewing in any PolySci curriculum.

              2. The house I moved to before this one, we started getting voter registration cards. At last count? NINETY. All sorts of names, some obviously made up.
                We called whoever was listed to tell them no such people there, they did nothing. We finally contacted the state GOP and they took care of it.
                The people there before us? Lefty hippies.
                VERY lefty hippies. Politically active.
                Yeah….

            2. Well, it’s not like they were short of money; you have plenty when you disable every pretense that you are checking donor eligibility, Hamas starts running phone banks for you, and your donor list has donors like “$5 from Tyrone Shoelaces, 123 Easy Street, Anytown USA, 12345” which bears absolutely NO relationship to the billing address of the credit card (mine) used for the donation.

              That was for 2008 AND 2012, BTW. And yes, there was an FEC complaint filed…. and ignored.

      2. Bill Clinton ran on “Hope and Change” too. And so did Jimmy Carter… it’s traditional, or something.

        1. “Bill Clinton ran on “Hope and Change” too”

          Yeah, but Hope was the campaign staffer he banged in the the stage, and ‘Change’ was the bus fare he stole out of her purse.

          1. Come on, give ol’ Billy-boy SOME credit for discretion — he banged her backstage, not ON stage.

        1. Younger kid escaped the assembly to watch his inauguration. With all the entries guarded, he somehow got out (he IS all mine, from the top of his horns to the bottom of his hoofkins, which he don’t got.) and called me from a block away. “Mom, I escaped. Come get me.”
          In the car “I might have barfed, and it would look bad.” 😛
          MINE!

          1. Oh, that is too funny! I watched the live stream and am forever grateful I wasn’t there. It was outside, in the freezing rain and faculty were locked *out* of our offices. A bunch of my colleagues got recruited to stand behind Obama holding signs. Damn, did they look miserable. I was in my sweats, sitting at home with a nice hot cup of tea, laughing.

      3. A very few people, who didn’t know what they were getting into, demanded to know what I had against Obama if not racism. I told them, “He’s a Chicago Democrat, which means he’s a crook.”

    5. I have noticed that this Identity Mandated Voting never applies to other identity groups. Nobody ever insisted that Me must vote against Hillary, for example.

      As for your policy disagreements with the woman candidate … those were examples of false consciousness. She had been anointed by The Collective, the Enlightened Women Who Determined What Views Were Female, and your disagreement on those issues and policies was a betrayal of the Collective.

      TL:DR Version: Shut up and get in line! (Okay, that’s pretty much the TL:DR translation of ALL Leftish arguments.)

      1. Yep. The looks I got when I explained what I didn’t like…then she said she thought marriage was between a man and a woman…I got a LOT of mileage out of that one!

      2. Correction: Nobody ever insisted that Men must vote against Hillary, for example.

        Stupid “n” key.

  10. Identified something about “Black Lives Matter” that bugs me, besides the obvious implication that other lives don’t–
    the idea that the lives are the property of the group.
    No. That’s his life, that’s her life, it’s not to be spent by the self-appointed leaders of the “Black” community.

    1. Precisely. Especially irksome when you realize that it is black CRIMINAL lives that matter to the group, not the black victims of those same criminals. They’re not trying to bring attention and funds to the problems of the urban underclass, such as fatherlessness and the structural issues with welfare systems. Nope, just the problems with police, as a way of emphasizing, once again, to the underclass, that they ARE the underclass. That’s why they focus on the borderline cases or good shoots. They want the focus to be on vengeance, not justice.

      1. Story from the Navy:
        Guy got into bootcamp, used his first check to buy momma a pistol because he was scared without him to protect her.

        Less than a week later, she shot dead the guy who was coming through her bedroom window, with a knife, because he knew that the big guy was gone, now.

      2. Not quite true. Even criminal lives don’t matter to them if they are killed by other criminals.

    2. Also you need to be REMINDED that black lives matter, like the feminist must remind men not to rape. The slogan presumes a deadly deficiency in society and it’s members.

  11. I have just been reading Margery Allingham’s nonfiction memoir of England pre- and during WWII, The Oaken Heart. It’s pretty interesting, as you would expect.

    One thing she mentions in passing is that it was really weird to have been a kid during WWI, because when you grew up, the adults were in mourning, and a lot of the generation of kids right ahead of you were dead and gone. So you had more responsibility, but the adults were unsure about what to teach you, and you got lots of freedom and lack of supervision, but in a very depressing England that needed work; and an England that was missing a lot of experienced persons in young middle age.

    So she thought they tended to cling to any idea that was presented, like science or Communism, as their prophet and religion.

    And since a lot of families lost wage-earners and investments in WWI and its aftermath, and then in the Depression, a lot of young people had incentive to cling to the irrational new idea that wealth was bad, because otherwise they would have to face the irrational Victorian idea that virtuous hardworking people always ended up with wealth and never had bad luck.

    I can readily believe some of this, because when I was growing up in the 1970’s, there was apparently a lot of reluctance to teach kids older versions of history and literature (which I got anyway, from books my parents had), and the traditional forms of religion and morality (some of which I got, but which my parents and I didn’t realize had some big lacunae that weren’t filled for years).

    And nowadays, we have it again, because PC has been operating for years and years, as well as a lot of superstitious belief that 9/11 won’t come back if you act nice and say nice things. And meanwhile, people on Twitter are a manyheaded hydra of self-poped popes announcing dogma daily, so kids tend to listen to the strong voice.

    1. The other side of this is that, when a lot of people are absorbed by dangerous ideas that don’t work, anybody sane has more incentive to grab onto good ideas and the people who carry them.

        1. Yup, but I thought it was interesting that she would talk about the just barely post-war generation, instead of the traumatized because served in the war generation.

          1. Also, the memoir is pretty non-mysterious to decode, once you figure out that “Auburn” is Tolleshunt D’Arcy, and “Pontisbright” (also featured in Sweet Danger and other Campion mysteries) is Layer Breton. And then you can tool around on Google Earth and sightsee along with the book, which is awesome. The Allingham entry on Wikipedia decodes some of her other friends’ identities.

            1. Oh thank you for this information.

              I have been doing a number of things to keep myself sane in these increasingly insane times — I lived through 1968 once, and once was enough. One of them is reading through the writings prior to WWII of the queens of the golden age of mystery. Allingham’s Campion has proven to be most delightful as he has developed over time.

    2. The things that scares me about the belief that 9/11 won’t happen again if we just make nice, is not that it won’t work (which it won’t) but the reaction when it doesn’t.

      An attack like 9/11, or bigger, and all the blather in the WORLD from the left isn’t going to keep the United States from going into the Middle East like molten lead poured into an anthill. It ain’t gonna be pretty, and then we’ll be stuck running what’s left.

      *shudder*

      Of course there will be SOME satisfaction in answering the whinge “Why did you destroy Mecca?” with “Because you idiots can’t take a fucking HINT!”.

      Not enough, though.

      1. A credible source told this story: The morning after 9/11, Bush the Younger called up the Saudis and told them, “We know you were behind it. If it happens again, we’ll nuke Mecca.” They believed him, which is why we haven’t had a repeat attempt on that scale.

        But that generation is pushing gone, and the young’uns won’t remember.

      2. When people (they looked like people although I have doubts about their mental processes) were going on about wanting to know “Why don’t they like us” after 9-11 the folks I found worth talking to were focused on “Why don’t they fear us?”

        In this world, being liked is pleasant but being feared is necessary.

      3. Most people seem to forget that Rome was a Republic for five hundred years, before it got so weak and corrupt Gaius Julius set himself up as Emperor.

        France had several republics which reverted back to monarchies.

        Wiemar was a Republic too. Look at what we got when that failed.

        The US republic is hollowed out by termites. The termites always think they can rule, but if they manage to drag what’s left of our government down, it’s not the termites who are going to be running things. A whole bunch of people are disgusted with the whole thing; they know their votes are meaningless, and their “representatives” go feral in DC. Why even bother keeping up the pretense? The Grand Experiment is running off the rails, maybe it wasn’t really viable.

        The lefties snarking about “American Empire”? The ones trying so hard to establish a de facto nobility, who thought the Previous Incumbent was some kind of king, who could unilaterally rule by pen and phone?

        Keep on digging, idiots. If you crash the Republic, it’s not going to be *your* jackboots propped up on the Resolute Desk.

        Government, like fire, is a dangerous master.

        1. The lefties snarking about ‘American Empire’?

          Geeze, they keep going on about “Empire” like it’s a bad thing. They might want to benefit from s little study about the indigenous American tribes and their interactions before arrival of European man, or maybe take a look at the history of the Indian sub-continent before the British arrived.

          I could propose other areas but, really, what’s the point? Their minds are so full of dross there’s no room for facts.

  12. I *really* wish there was a term for when people are taught lies, reject them, and then adopt what the lie said the opposite was.

    “Pendulum” is not correct, as that has to do with oscillating between extremes of an issue. This is where the pendulum is completely off axis. (and probably smashing the structure of the clock around it as a result)

    The most obvious example is the “alt-right” being born from people who rejected the left, but don’t know enough to not simply follow the same lies, inverted.

    “Sith” works, but requires too much description.

    1. Technically, what you’re describing is a “reactionary.” But nobody uses the word in that technical fashion, so we do need another one.

      “Rebellious edgelord”, maybe?

      1. In hindsight it is logical that “reactionary” would have had some sort of definition.

        I’ve never known it to mean anything other than “those we wish to gulag”.

    2. I always think it’s hilarious when Americans get so anti-radical that they decide they are monarchists. Specific monarchists, like Jacobites or Hapsburg supporters. But not for the US — for other countries, or possibly for space colonies.

      American monarchists usually throw nice dinner parties and go on fun trips to Europe, too, and they usually can sing and hang out with real-life nobility. But then they get midlife crises, and that’s not as fun.

      1. Oy. One of my buddies has become *SO* anti-radical that he’s decided that the American Revolution was a mistake and that we should declare fealty to – and beg forgiveness from – HRH Queen Elizabeth II. And he’s dead serious: to hear him tell it, 2016 was absolute proof that the American Experiment is an utter failure – not because Trump won, but because the election was between Trump and Hillary (he hates both equally) – and that we need to go crawling back to our former masters and rejoin the British Empire.

        Fortunately, our mutual friends on both sides of the aisle (from minarchist Libertarians like myself to full-on Bernie Bros) think he’s an idiot.

          1. The strange thing is that he’s pretty rational when it comes to literally ANYTHING else.

            But the rest of us were caught so off guard when he first began spouting that nonsense – because as far as any of us could tell, it came out of nowhere, with no warning whatsoever – that we thought he was screwing with us. So we “agreed” and then nominated such figures as Palpatine, Ming the Merciless, Cercei Lannister, and The Lord Humungus as our new monarch. We only realized he was serious when said nominations seriously pissed him off because we “weren’t taking him seriously.” Damn right we weren’t.

        1. Aeh, that’s still pretty harmless. It’s sports team monarchism, and Liz is the closest monarch we have to a home team.

          I figure that a little eccentricity is okay. But also, you need to get him to throw parties for UK holidays and invite UK people. More Anglophile, less move to Canada. Make him eat weird UK foods.

          (UK friends come with the added benefit that most UK people living abroad are not nearly as patriotic, or as patriotic in a form recognizable to Americans, as the average American is. It might calm him down a little.)

          1. I had an Anglophile period, and it was fun and educational. (I even managed to make it run concurrently with being a Nipponophile, Hibernophile and Scotophile, which all takes some doing if you like history and are Catholic.)

            But there comes a time when I had to realize that foreign countries are not Magical Lands of Enchantment, and that history doesn’t stand still at the good bits of culture and architecture. I found out that I could like a modern contemporary country, or features of it, without totally drinking the Kool-Aid, or hating my own culture and history.

            So yeah, I think the best way to break romantic delusions is to have lots of experiences, or do a lot of vicarious experience through normal people doing vlogs and blogs. You can’t get all mystical about Japan when you realize how many people are wearing bellywarmer flannel strips because they don’t have central heating.

            There’s a really weird little YouTube channel called “CummingsYourWay” (by a UK guy named Cummings), where the guy just walks around various local places in the UK, and talks about stuff. Sometimes his dad is there. It’s interesting and the camera work is good. It’s also not particularly romantic.

              1. After learning that St. Crispin’s Day was also the anniversary of the Battle of Balacava and the Battle Off Samar as well as Agincourt, I was a little let down to find Crispin was the patron of shoemakers instead of overcoming overwhelming odds.

            1. Well, yes I do, but I usually call it my, and No. 1 Son’s, birthday.

              And I throw in a recitation of the Charge of the Light Brigade, and an explanation of The Battle Off Samar.

              1. No lie, a now-sadly former coworker’s grandfather was on the Gambier Bay when it went down off Samar. She’d had no idea exactly what had happened (he really didn’t talk about it, understandable) and was totally blown away when I told her about Taffy-3.

          1. Not a clue. I’ve taken to tuning him out when he starts on that subject, and he hasn’t given us a good rant about it in the last few months regardless.

            1. That is probably simpler than responding to him that House Windsor is an illegitimate ruling family and the throne ought revert to the Stuarts.

              1. IIRC, one of our mutual friends who is a serious student of history pointed that out. Don’t recall what his response was.

          1. No, because that would just further proof that we should hand power back to HRH Elizabeth II, revert back to absolute monarchies, and do away with democracy altogether.

            And yes, that is his legit opinion.

            1. Heck, if that’s his opinion, he should be asking for the Stuarts to rule us. The Hanoverians, and all their successors like Elizabeth II, were installed by the English Parliament – they’ve never been absolute monarchs, even in theory. The last absolute monarch of Britain was Charles I.

      2. well…..
        Portugal probably needs a monarchy. It has to do with the national character. They don’t obey laws unless they have a personal investment.
        (I never fit in.)

        1. Furriners in furrin places have a right to figure out their own way to do things. I’m okay with that.

          I’m a little less okay with Americans messing around with other peoples’ systems of government, because it just seems meddlesome. But everybody else does it, or tries to, so I guess individual Americans have a right to try. But I have a right to chuckle.

        2. And it’s possible that the “personal stake” is a little bit tribal, or a function of having lots and lots of tiny ancient towns in tiny microclimates, where you go around the mountain and things are totally different. If everybody has different ancient rights and charters and laws and customs, maybe plunking a (relatively weak and libertarian) king on top makes a little bit of sense, just as a referee.

          Because otherwise you get the “big city votes beat everybody else’s vote” problem.

      3. Even Heinlein said the best government is a well-run tyranny.

        The problem is, the potential tyrants who are both benevolent AND competent are vastly outnumbered by the vicious evil idiots, and are the ones least likely to actually wind up on top, or to stay there for very long. We’ve seen many examples of the ones that DO wind up in charge…

        1. The question being, is a well run government desirable? Certainly, the verdict of history is that an efficient government is a menace to life, liberty, and property.

          1. Government should at least be efficient at identifying criminals and removing them from society, preventing foreign invasion or infiltration, enforcing property rights and contracts — essential functions which must be performed if there is to be a society worth living in. Functions which are NOT being performed in those Enlightened Leftist Enclaves that have been the source of all that smoke and noise over the last few days.

            How would it be better if government did those things inefficiently? What entity other than government could do them better? Should courts be run for profit? (Openly, I mean)

            1. Is it really? Efficient at identifying criminals? And the ‘removing them from society’ part has certainly broken down.

              I think half ( or more) of the problem with the police is that we’ve overburdened the justice system. War on Drugs? Makework. Oh, drugs are a problem; but is there any real evidence tha Drug Prohibition is abating it? And the idiot idea that only police need guns. That MIGHT fly if the police were also held accountable for failing to arrive in time to defend the defenseless. But that would require a much bigger police state even than we have now. Better to let the citizens arm themselves, and have the police clean up afterwards.

              Like so many aspects of the Progressive State, the Fascist Left simply wants the police to do the impossible. Hell, Superman and all the Justice League couldn’t do it.

              No. Deliver the mail, defend the borders, enforce contract law. Nearly everything else the State observably does badly.

        2. I used to concur with Heinlein but experience has led me to believe that a well-run tyranny, like a perfect vacuum, is impossible It might, possibly, work okay in a small to middlin’ sized town, but once it entails delegation of more than minor authority the problem of information taint tends to preclude it being well-run.

          Simply put, a tyrant can’t oversee sufficiently to keep things running well. Reporting leans to what the reporter thinks the tyrant wants and away from what the tyrant doesn’t want (but needs) to hear.

    3. Sort of a scorched-brain policy? Also not that good a term, admittedly, but it’s where one runs from the burned bit/burning and flees to what seems to be the farthest distance from that, but that not necessarily an improvement. Fleeing a grass fire into a pine forest.. well, that ignored lake might have been the better choice.

      1. Is your shocked face broken from overuse? Do you know where your eyes are, or have they rolled away? Do you need funding for replacements? Or perhaps a lifeline so you don’t drown in toxic absurdity? Not sure I have one to spare, mine is in use and it’s getting deep out there.

  13. I despise the slogan Black Lives Matter. I hate it.

    Because it assumes we live in a society that does not believe this and must be reminded, when all the statistics clearly proclaim otherwise.

    Telling me “black lives matter” is an insult, akin to the feminist who feels she must remind men not to rape.

    As false a narrative as rape culture, and just as damaging.

    1. The thing that pisses me off is that when they say it it is a lie and I don’t like being lied to let alone being expected to embrace the lie.

      1. It’s not a lie, it’s a truth misused, and to quote Blake: A truth that’s told with bad intent/beats all the lies you can invent.

      1. Not a good comeback: it doesn’t tackle the implied lie of the original slogan: that our society believes black lives do not matter and must be reminded of it. Any effective comeback has to call out the lie and the manipulative nature of the slogan.

        A like: “Yes, tell it to the gangbangers.”

    2. Given many these people’s opinion of both criminals and Planned Parenthood, it’s entirely possible that they need to remind THEMSELVES that black lives matter. There are a lot who don’t act like any black lives matter except in so far as they can be used.

    3. Adding a modifier implies that the default is the opposite. This is intentional, to cast doubt in the minds of normal folk who otherwise wouldn’t consider anything as dense as “only some lives matter”.

      The animal rightists and their pals the ‘rescue’ industry used a similar tactic to demonize dog breeders: the term “responsible breeder” was coined (and even adopted by breeders eager to not be demonized), to imply that the unmodified default means “irresponsible breeder” — which made it a whole lot easier to get dog breeding basically outlawed in much of the U.S. (And since demand continues unabated, who picks up the slack? importers of street dogs that wind up sold by ‘rescues’, an exceedingly profitable business model.)

      1. “Responsible” is a favorite modifier– it means “my way.”

        Don’t get me started on the “Responsible Homeschooling” folks. All you need to know is that they’re involved in that Harvard gaslighting attempt to presumptively ban homeschooling as child abuse for everybody except for movie stars and the quite rich.

      2. importers of street dogs that wind up sold by ‘rescues’, an exceedingly profitable business model.


        Wags hands. They make something at it. At least the Rescue Director, don’t make a lot, but they have to make something or they couldn’t run the rescue. They rely on unpaid volunteers for raising litters, taking care of animals brought in. They supply supplies, food, crates, flea/heartworm, etc. Adopters for their fee, get fully vaccinated spayed/neutered adult dogs. Puppies: spayed/neutered, and all shots for first year (at least locally); must use their vet, some adopters don’t. Plus any medical care is taken care of before adoption (adult or puppy). Adult dog adoption fee runs anywhere from $100 to $150, depending. Which maybe barely cover the expense to vaccinate & spay/neuter. Puppies are higher $300 to $400 depending on demand. Our pup was $400 (her litter-mates lasted two days, she lasted 4 days). The extra for puppies generally makes up for shortfalls on older dogs, and the transport costs of the volunteers picking them from the high kill shelters (California in our area). Don’t know about other places, but locally they have a waiting list of adopters. At least recently. Time stuck at home might be a factor.

        1. This. We just took in a dog that we found straying in our neighborhood last month after a monumental thunderstorm. Turned out he was chipped – yay! Back with his owner in a tick! Alas, no – the animal charity that he was registered with tried for over a week to get in touch with the owner, with his family and references … and nothing. The charity is in Chicago, where they have problems of their own now, in addition to the Chinese Commie Crud. They considered the dog to have been surrendered, and normally would have taken him back, except that it’s a long drive to Chicago, and expensive and dangerous to go by live freight. We solved them a good few expensive/complicated problems by volunteering to take him as ours. They paid for a visit to a local clinic for a physical to make certain he wasn’t abused, and had his shots updated (I paid for a flea treatment), and waived all fees to transfer ownership to me. It does cost to shelter animals, even if a lot of it is volunteer labor and done for love of animals.

          1. Take back


            Yes. That is part of the contract. If you can not keep for whatever reason, then you are required to surrender back to the rescue. No sending to local shelter. No rehoming. They will consider, based on circumstances let you act as a foster, while they rehome.

            Our pup’s chip is registered to us, not the rescue. I negotiated with them to hold off her spay. Was willing to have it done at 6 months, but not at adoption, essentially 6 weeks. She was chipped during her spay. Local rescues work with the local spay & neuter clinic, for those procedures, vaccinations, flea meds, & chip. Way less expensive than a regular veterinarian. OTOH, you have to have a relationship with a regular veterinarian. They don’t do any medical procedures. Don’t have treatment or check for heartworm. If you aren’t taking your pet to a regular veterinarian for the little things, you can’t have a good relationship for the emergency or other medical situations. The veterinarian will try, but they won’t know you or your pet well enough to be good at it.

            That was what was so good about Thump. We’ve had a relationship with our Veterinarian clinic since ’85, even before the primary veterinarian, started there and eventually bought the practice. Because of that she was able to guide us through the appropriate treatment, and quietly advise us through our eventual solution, regardless of how badly no one, not us, not her or the techs, wanted to see it happen.

        2. Very much depends on the “shelter.” It’s a little like the Red Cross– which I shorthand to the gal who lead our local chapter refused to donate to the national branch, and wouldn’t donate to any other local ones until after she’d cross-examined them like there was a tax audit coming. (predators gonna predate, sadly.)

          Main reason I will never take a shelter dog?

          I’m not paying as much as I would for a registered in order to enter the genetic and dispositional lottery on a “puppy” that may be half grown already, and that in addition I do not own, I mere

          I have literally never seen puppies for sale in a pet store.
          Nor a cat.
          I’ve seen a few rabbits, but only fully grown.
          All non-rodent mammal pets are “adoption” only, and don’t get me started on the price for a cat, nevermind a young adult cat they insist on calling a kitten.
          Yet the rhetoric is the same as it was in the commercials when I was a kid.

          1. *sigh*
            Merely feed, care for and house at the sufferance of the shelter. (Ran into two different shelters that weaponized those contracts, too– they took animals back because somebody else wanted to buy them, not because the animal was poorly treated. It got ugly.)

            1. they took animals back because somebody else wanted to buy them, not because the animal was poorly treated. It got ugly.


              Have read stories. Haven’t seen it.

              The other problem we run into is rescues demand a contract with cats that you do not let them roam. Inside or catico access only. Sorry. No. Our current adult cat pretty much is inside only, but she was the only one of the 12 we’ve had. She might go out on the deck and check the backyard, for 10 to 15 minutes. I don’t like them outside, but I only get 1/3 vote. I do get final say on when and how (pouring down rain and snow at over a year). Then there are the two that liked rain and snow. (really! you are cats!) Average age of survival of our cats –> 18 years. Brought down because of the 3 we lost at relatively young ages. One wasn’t even our cat yet (we were feeding but he hadn’t fully adopted us yet). The other two, symptoms showed probable genetic anomalies that hit at 3 and 5, complicated that they were abandoned too young.

              1. It seems to strongly correlate to the entitled rich people demographic– and my home valley has been overrun with Seattle-blob folks for years. (Less than five years since they got the last over-100-breeding-head cow operation to shut down.)

              2. One of these places was the same one where a high level volunteer broke in to someone’s yard (lock cutters were involved) and stole a very expensive registered dog, had it neutered and was trying to get it out of the valley.

                Because she thought it was bored, being outside with toys and room to run.

                Turns out that picking a target that actually has the money to challenge you when you declare their pet was abused, and courts that actually ask for stuff like evidence, makes rural living so unkind…..

                1. Yeow.

                  I don’t know any ill of the local SPCA, but… I also haven’t looked at their contracts. I used to visit because they would let me hang out with the critters even if I wasn’t up to taking one home, and I stopped because work and baby and broken leg and in short, busy.

                    1. I wonder if this one may actually be somewhat less controlling — I can’t find the actual agreement they ask for on the website, but they spend quite a bit of text encouraging people who might be thinking of surrendering a pet to try various strategies for keeping it (if it’s a behavioral issue) or doing their own rehoming. This is mostly on the assumption that you got the pet somewhere else, but they also put significant emphasis on their space limitations, so….

                      ….Well, if we ever get to that point, I’ll remember to try to check all the paperwork before getting too attached to anybody.

                    2. The ones I have seen could be summarized as “if we think the animal would be better off someplace else, we’re taking it back and you’re SOL. Plus, we keep the money.”

                      It was wrapped up in a lot nicer language, though.

                    3. I can’t rule out that they’re hiding something like that in paperwork they don’t link. The public website just has a lot of “Look, please do this instead of trying to give us your pet” wrapped up in nicer language.

                    4. “if we think the animal would be better off someplace else, we’re taking it back and you’re SOL. Plus, we keep the money.”


                      Animals don’t leave our house once they come in the door, short of death. They are ours. You’d better be able to prove abuse & neglect, in court. As part of the court, I will have statements from our veterinarian, from at least 3 trainers, including agility. Not to mention she’s a medical alert dog, short of going out of country, other than Canada, she’s going with us; and we don’t have full passports.

                      If there had been other applications on her, or others had expressed interest, we would have passed. I won’t play that game. It would have been difficult, but could have done it. We weren’t that dialed into the local puppy scene until we got our current dog. The English Toy Spaniel was through our veterinarian clinic; them I trusted.

                      The cat rescues are strict. You can not adopt unless you sign no free roaming, period. (Not sure what the local shelter rules are. ) Fine. Just means we can’t adopt through them. One of the reasons I didn’t expect to find kittens this quickly, especially since we weren’t looking really. OTOH CV19 has made an impact. A veterinarian that my husband golfs with says in 6 months a lot of kittens; which means abandoning unfortunately. The low cost spay & neuter clinic is down until further notice (full open up). Some veterinarians are doing spay/neuter some aren’t … only doing emergency procedures. Stopping kittens from being born isn’t emergency enough, I guess.

                    5. Animals don’t leave our house once they come in the door, short of death. They are ours. You’d better be able to prove abuse & neglect, in court.

                      *Cheers*

                      *******

                      For cats… ours are all indoor cats, unless the toddler leaves a door open then they are out for like ten minutes, and we still refuse.
                      The boundary over-reach is just too much.
                      So since marriage we’ve had three barn cats and one probably-somebody-forgot-auntie’s-cat-when-they-put-her-in-a-home kitten.

                    6. We chose our house based on the safety for the cats. We still could have done better; always. Don’t know if we’ve just been lucky or what. But we haven’t had problems. Ironically had we been more rural, there would be no way we’d let them roam. Owl, Eagle, Coyote, Bear, Cougar, and even Fox, would be the dangers. My sister’s family lost one of their cats. He just disappeared. They have 10 acres way out in the middle of a high end development. Roads are 15 miles an hour, and you do not speed in their section. An animal got him. He slipped out on them, not the first time, but he wasn’t normally outside. I’d personally prefer to keep them indoors only, or provide a safe outdoor enclosure. But, I don’t win that vote.

                      What I do is keep them in as long as possible, well past a year. Then start letting them explore in the nastiest wettest or snowiest weather possible. At minimum it keeps them close to the house and in our yard. At worst, they patrol the yard behind, and currently either side of us. Other yards have big dogs, one each. Place to avoid. Behind us have dogs too, but those miniature poodles apparently do not count as dogs; and they have this really neat Koi kitty video (Koi pond … they can’t get into it, it is proofed against raccoons, so more than proof against cats).

          2. I’m not paying as much as I would for a registered in order to enter the genetic and dispositional lottery on a “puppy” that may be half grown already, and that in addition I do not own, I mere

            I have literally never seen puppies for sale in a pet store.
            Nor a cat.
            I’ve seen a few rabbits, but only fully grown.
            All non-rodent mammal pets are “adoption” only, and don’t get me started on the price for a cat, nevermind a young adult cat they insist on calling a kitten.


            Learned to definitely pay attention to determine if really puppy or not. Last dog wasn’t. Purebred, but rescued through Veterinarian. $150 fee. One of her puppies, had she lived, would have been $6k, each. I know they spent way more than $150 saving her life after the breeder walked away …

            Current dog (she’s 3 now) as a puppy was $400 “donation”. She was actually younger than they stated. Pretty sure because CA shelters take younger than 8 week old surrendered litters & immediately euthanize; backyard breeders tend to exhilarate the litter’s ages, even with rescue is bypassing the shelter to pick them up.

            Kittens. We’ve never had cat have kittens. We’ve never gone to a shelter. We’ve never gone to a rescue. We just find them, have them find us, or have someone show up on our radar that has rescued a mama cat who had kittens & they haven’t given them to the rescues. Thump was the first. Current two (just picked up) were the last. Rescues (IMO) spay/neuter way too small & young, and don’t typically adopt out for 12 weeks. I understand why. Some dog rescues do the same with puppies. Just got lucky with the one we worked with.

            I have seen dogs & cats for sale. But not anymore. Now pet stores that used to do this, support the rescues.

          3. …Also kind of unnerved about the Red Cross thing.

            I have not tried to cross-examine any of them — I don’t even know what I’d ask to be honest — but I have had more trouble giving blood at the nearest one than I ever did at any other location and I genuinely don’t know if it’s me or them. Well, obviously I’m not doing it now, but… if I’m ever to do it again, one or both of us needs to get our act together.

            1. If you’d ever heard Nancy getting a head of steam going, you’d be more than unnerved.

              The stuff you hear about sometimes where the Red Cross is in a disaster area and is destroying donated supplies rather than let anybody have them is not a single rotten apple situation.

              There’s still good ones– a lot of them, I think.

              They just have to be nurtured and a lot of folks aren’t up to the work.

    4. claims of racism are the only way the idjits pushing this can stay relevant. The racist assholes like Sharpton et al would wither and die off if the truth was seen to be the case.
      The truth is a leftoid person was killed by someone who (might or might not been a leftoid) was protected by a leftoid union, and remained in their job because a leftoid prosecutor multiple times decided to not do much about it in a leftoid run city in a leftoid run state using a leftoid pushed crime act to justify actions taken by the leftoid run police department.
      Approximately twice the number of whites are killed by police every year compared to the number of blacks (2400+ vs 1200+ in the last 5 years).
      Blacks are over half the criminals breaking the law (used to be 80%!), so a white person is far more likely to be killed by police than a black person, if one wants to play the stats game more accurately.
      That’s why they gotta go with the killed per capita route. The truth doesn’t hold. And to get the lie to hold it must be shouted loud and often with everyone repeating it Ad Nauseam.

  14. If I had a tinfoil hat, I’d say that sounds planned.

    Tinfoil hat off, stupidity and refusal to think through consequences of “solutions” by those nominally in charge would account for overlap.

    1. Column A, Column B.

      The Irish dude who does the Computing Forever YouTube channel has brought up some interesting things. There are all these dumb “one world” plans floating around that were dispensed by various expensive conferences, and a lot of the response to WuFlu, riots, et al, does seem to adhere to these conceptual playbooks.

      (Mostly because all these Five Year Plans love to include whatever is faddishly popular with lefties, and whatever wish fulfillment ideas they currently have. But lefties also love to have Five Year Plans and check off the boxes, so I’m sure some people and clubs are really trying to push these plans.)

      1. They’re more like the gremlin in the old Looney Tune “Falling Hare” whacking a bomb. it isn’t going to be pretty

    2. It’s because the Left seizes on every new crisis as an excuse to push for the things they know the general public would normally object to. They’ve wanted to do all these things for years, but they knew even with their near-total media control that some people would fight back. Now with lockdowns and riots, they can push all the insanity they feel like. After all, if you object to tearing down historical statues, abolishing the police, or wanting to live normally again, you’re an evil racist who wants people to die.

    1. Am I a horrible person for wanting to drop off several cases of SPAM?

      Probably for the best that I live on the opposite side of the country.

      1. Horrible? Only in the sense of being excessively generous.

        I lean towards sealing it off so they can better achieve True Communism, while having a massive cookout outside.

        1. Addendum:

          Give them a way to leave, if they wish. Since this is a different country if they wish to leave and come to America they have to take the citizenship oath.

          Choice between death by starvation, or death by spontaneous combustion.

          1. Apparently Insley claimed ignorance of what was going on in Seattle when asked about whether the State of Washington had any plans to do anything about the proclaimed “autonomous zone”. In response President Trump warned that if Seattle and Washington don’t take action, the Federal Government will.

            1. Part says, “please, please, please, bring the regulars in”.

              The other part worries that if that happens it would lead to a Trump defeat in Nov.

          2. Oh, and they have to go through regular immigration channels. Aside from the usual delays, since by definition they have a record of criminal behavior, this might be a trifle difficult.

          3. You seem to forget that THEY built the WALL. If THEY want a gate let THEM put one in.

      2. No, you’re not. I like the idea about parking a great big competition sized smoker upwind of the area and getting some brisket and ribs going (6 hrs for a rack of ribs, 12 hours for a 12-15 lb brisket. Yes, I have done this before).

      3. You guys are right. Horrible would be packaging the SPAM inside cases of Soylent or Tofurkey or Vegan Beef Jerky or some other disgusting soy-based “food.”

      1. The scary thing is that they have all this shadowy organization that gives them stuff for free, and they forgot to requisition the food part. (Although the homeless guys make it even better. Power to the homeless people, who at least know the basics of life!)

        1. Just wait til the toilets back up… I hear they’ve been coercing bathroom rights from the folks normally resident in that area, which no doubt is gonna get old real quick.

          1. You missed that advertising pissing match?

            Some brand of beer made a big deal about how their stuff is certified 100% pure of corn syrup.

            Which hurt them in Iowa; another brand responded by putting corn themes on their boxes and doing “we support farmers!”

      1. These folks should have read Larry Nivens “Cloak of Anarchy”. To steal from a Niven/Pournelle collaboration, “Think of it as evolution in action”

    2. I’m looking forward to the day when someone figures out how to shut off power and water to the area presently controlled by the insurrection. Siege tactics anyone?
      ===
      18 U.S. Code § 2383. Rebellion or insurrection
      Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
      ===
      Ya know, this may be an efficient way of ensuring none of these c*nts wind up in Federal office (at least if it’s enforced). More insurrection, please!!

    3. I saw that just as I was leaving work yesterday. I laughed long and hard. Anarchists really dislike actual anarchy. I say give them exactly what they ask for (not what they think they are asking for). Shoot them out of hand. It’ll save them needing the “food”.

      1. We should give them what they ask for. Clear out some already sparsely-populated area and let them all move there, and do whatever they want. They can set up their Socialist Workers Paradise without any interference from us Evil Capitalists.

        Even if we CALLED it Coventry, I doubt any of them would get the point.
        ———————————
        There is no shortage of people convinced they can create the perfect world. Trouble is, they always start out by fucking up this one.

        1. But should we send in “Fader” McGee to keep an eye on them ? Coventry cane to my mind too. Let the idiots self identify and let them go. Then don’t let them back.

  15. The leftist compulsion to try to compel you to agree with them by presenting the choice as binary is a fool’s game.

    Well, they are fools.

    But it does tend to simplify things marvelously to create a binary reality sorted into Good (Us & What We want) and Evil (You, and Your refusal to accede to Our Desires).

  16. Keep pushing, leftists.

    The backlash from this is going to be epic.

    I hope you are right.

    From where I sit, it looks like I’m watching a repeat of the rise of the Nazis with the added twist of a significant fraction of Jews leading the demonization of Jews. That does seem like a farcical elements, so if this is a repeat of the rise of the Nazis perhaps it will fulfill that history repeating as tragedy and farce saying.

    As for the backlash, I think it is coming and the past two weeks may have pushed us past the “settled with the Republic intact” point to the “settled by an American Franco” point, that is we are now past “you want more Trump, because this is how you get more Trump” to “if you didn’t like Trump, you’re going to hate what comes after Trump and beg for Trump back”. Why? Because the current trajectory will give a lot of people no choice but to sign up for racial identity as survival.

    And no, leftist, that isn’t “just what blacks survive every day in the US”. They are not excluded from buying food because of their race and only able to buy it from black grocers, otherwise there wouldn’t be a target or a Wendy’s in their neighborhood to burn. They are not excluded from getting drugs and only able to buy from black pharmacists or there would be no CVS in their neighborhood.

    You leftists think you can put white people in that bind to get them to follow your rules thinking that you’ll both be able to exempt yourself because you’re in the party (never having read Orwell, you don’t realize the Outer Party had less freedom than the Proles excluded from the party) and that there will be no consequences when you do that to the majority of the country.

    Sometimes I think leftists are as uneducated about population stats as the people we talked about yesterday leaving urban areas and wondering where all the black people are. Given their urban focus, they just might be.

    1. It’s the rise of the NSDP except the brown shirts haven’t coalesced yet. Same sort of street unrest was the bread and butter of the communist front groups in Germany. But also of the Russian Revolution IIRC. And I still feel we’re closer to that route given the absolute hatred from the rulers and their absolute willingness to destroy us subjects.

    2. If life is so terrible for blacks in the U.S., why don’t they all pack up and move to Wakanda?

      When I become dictator, I shall invoke this policy: Anyone who claims to be a Hyphenated-American and bitches about how bad America is compared to their pet Hyphen… shall immediately have their citizenship revoked and will be summarily exiled to Hyphen-Land, never to return.

      1. That’s a lot like my idea for reparation.

        Calculate the price of 40 acres of prime agricultural land and a mule in 1865 in gold. Offer that value in gold to anyone who claims they are impacted the legacy of slavery today in the US (anyone, no skin color, DNA, or genealogy checks).

        Signing the check is also the signing of a revocation of US citizenship. You are issued a 2 year legal residency to find a new nation (the State department will negotiate with various nations to take former citizens impacted by slavery if they cannot find their own) to which you will be deported at 2 years if you haven’t left yet.

        You are thereafter excluded from legal entry to the US for any reason.

        Yes, lots of grifters with no connection to slavery would take it, but that’s a benefit IMHO.

          1. I’m sure it’s racist.

            At least one black commentor at Insty thought I said he should go back to Africa. I hope not, because based on his comments I like having him around. He didn’t seem to grasp he could stay and Talcum X could go under my proposal.

            1. I fail to see why it’s racist. I want to offer anyone who wants to voluntarily leave the US that deal. PERIOD. Not reparations, just a deal. BUT they and their children and grandchildren are excluded from citizenship. FOREVER.
              The exception is if their children or grandchildren bring back the initial renouncer’s head and proof they killed him/her.
              So, you see, I’m much worse than you.

  17. Kinda strange. If someone argues against the statement, “All Lives Matter”, doesn’t that automatically mean they are discriminating and racist?

  18. I know of decent people who are starting to fall in line with the “Black Lives Matter” mantra and who get irritated (or worse) at the rejoinder “All lives matter” because they feel that blacks have a special plight and need special attention. I think I’m going to start going with, “In that case, All Black Lives Matter”. Because it isn’t the police that kill most blacks, it’s mostly black criminals, and because it is black babies that are aborted at higher than average rates. It’s not skin color that causes either of these.
    I’ve rarely (at most) seen a case where sloganeering really solves a problem. It’s usually intended to polarize positions and has a distressing tendency to shut down intelligent thought.

    1. I suspect that many of these people are falling into repeating the required orthodoxy by rote for fear of being “reported” and thus losing their jobs, etc. There are simply too many examples of people being unpersoned for thought-crime.

    2. I’ve rarely (at most) seen a case where sloganeering really solves a problem. It’s usually intended to polarize positions and has a distressing tendency to shut down intelligent thought.


      That is the purpose. Intelligent thought just shows you how full of shit they are.

  19. The left weaponizes language. You think they mean one thing, attempt to have a logical conversation, but then you find out none of their words correspond to your (and classical) definitions. None of your logic can apply to them. “We need to have a conversation about …” = “shut up while I rant at you”. “Undocumented Immigrant” – does NOT mean someone who’s paperwork has been misplaced. This is a related language tactic They expand the scope to include legitimate and illegitimate subjects, so, in this example – you’re Anti-Immigrant – never mind if you’ve gone and married an immigrant. We could go on and on and on.

    1. I saw a CNN story today where at an activist request, the Merriam Webster dictionary is amending the dictionary definition of racism.

          1. The activist said she was tired of people using the dictionary’s definition against her in arguments. So she wants to change the dictionary. How Orwellian.

            1. And of course, the dictionary makers will change it out of fear of being accused next.

    2. The left has made up their own language. It’s confusing for the rest of us, because the words sound, and are spelled, exactly the same as many familiar English words, but the meanings are completely different.

  20. There’s a cheating attempt to present us with a binary choice. Accept communist revolutionaries or accept alleged white supremacist ‘murders’ of blacks by police.

    Well, given the track record of communists, and given that some of them are explicitly interested in carrying out mass murders of more than an eighth of population, objectively the right option /if/ the binary choice is true, weighing black lives equal to white lives, is to kill the blacks.

    The binary choice is definitely not a true representation of our options.

    Now, if one does not know any African-Americans in RL, media attempt to present African-Americans as committed supporters of the communists may seem plausible. At which point, one can do a plausibility check of killing 40 million blacks, and conclude from Cambodia that it should be theoretically possible.

    The practical reality is that blacks are not actually isolated to the degree that mass murder is a feasible possibility, and for that same reason, police killings are probably not selective enough to be significant as racist murders.

    Squashing the Commies hard now is not an act of racial oppression.

  21. I had a… horrible I guess is the best word, thought train this morning. These “medical professionals” saying that racism is a greater threat than the Vermillion Virus, so are encouraging the “protests.” With the research showing that those with darker skin seem to have poorer health outcomes, most likely due to Vitamin D deficiency, are they deliberately trying to get a wave of minority deaths? With the twin goals of something else to hammer Trump with, as well as working to solve Margaret Sanger’s “problem?” I hate hate hate thinking that poorly of people, but these nitwits haven’t impressed me with their morality.

    1. I have thought of it, too. In Detroit, some of the first deaths were a dispatcher and a nurse. The first child who died was the 5-year-old daughter of a Detroit police officer and a firefighter. In other words, people who keep “the system” aka civilization up and running.

      I get the feeling that such law-abiding citizens are considered “acceptable losses” by these damned movements.

      1. I get the feeling that such law-abiding citizens are considered ‘acceptable losses’ by these damned movements.

        More likely they’re deemed “race traitors” defending the oppressive status quo of White European Hegemonists. Abiding by unjust laws is, itself, injustice.

        Sigh – I now need to apply a >70-proof sanitary rinse to my brain, having harbored such thought.

  22. (hint, Africa is very diverse, as any place which had poor roads till recently is.

    Has poor roads still. No paved road from one side to the other E-W or N-S. Continent spanning roads are rare. The US and Canada have multiple E-W superhighways from coast to coast. The US multiple N-S. No point in paving roads all the way North in Canada….

    A full network of paved roads is still pretty rare in the world. A full network of working cargo rail even rarer.

    1. Yup I’ve always wanted to climb on I-90 in Massachusetts and end up in Washington state. Thank you President Eisenhower.

      1. I-40 outside Wilmington, NC sometimes has a sign (it disappears, or I blink and miss it—been a while really) that says 2,400 miles to Barstow, CA (California).

    2. I’m told the Alaska Highway through Canada is now completely paved, and it’s N-S, so … that’s one!

      Friend who used to do the trip regularly in the 1970s said the old gravel road was so well maintained that your main hazard was being run over by a grader.

      1. If you feel a deep need to go North South I-95 runs from Bangor Me. to the Keys in Florida

        1. I’m unsure whether I95 through Connecticut is covered by the definition of “paved.” /snark

          1. Grew up along I-95 in CT. Yes the old Baldwin bridge across the Connecticut could be rough after winter and the Quinipiac in New Haven was a mess, but from New London to New Haven it was usually OK.

      2. Did it four years ago. Had stretches where they were repaving and you had to travel over gravel with a pilot truck. Not that bad and the scenery is magnificent.

    3. > full network of paved roads

      Let’s see… the BRICS countries are supposed to have 42% of the world’s population, 23% of the GDP, and 30% of the territory.

      Brazil: nope
      Russia: nope
      India: nope
      China: nope
      South Africa: nope

      Rail is much better if you’re poor, want to keep your population under control, or both…

      1. Rail is much better if you have reeeeaaaaalllly long ways to go, especially with cargo, particularly from one major hub to another. It really has little to do with “keeping control” – unless you’ve already got lots of freedom of movement and are trying to force everyone onto short haul rail.

        1. Rail is only 40% of US cargo by ton/miles, according to the Federal Railroad Administration. And much of that is stuff like coal and ore, between endpoints that seldom move.

          1. Even after all the creative punishment they put on to using it to try to promote people riding on it?

            That’s kinda impressive.

            1. Coal, ore, and tankers are heavy. By volume, you’re probably looking at a less than a quarter of that.

              Feral Excess flies stretch jumbos stuffed like sausages; the cargo bays are full of styrofoam peanuts, bubble wrap, and corrugated cardboard. Non-packing cargo weight is trivial.

              1. All of those also get trucked to the load/offload, delivery for use, etc, and part of why oil pipelines are popular is because of the creativity in pushing passengers.

                1. Oil pipelines are popular because they are efficient. They only move the oil, without hauling thousands of tons of steel, copper and other materials along for the ride, and then having to send them back empty to pick up another load.

  23. Off-topic, but does anyone have a good recommendation for a book on the Cultural Revolution in China? When searching online I got recommendations from that MacFarquar idiot, but I don’t trust him.

    1. Dikötter’s book. All three of his about China, plus the one about cults of personality, are well worth reading, but they are not easy (due to the subject matter, not his style). Chung and Halliday’s biography of Mao has some good material in it as well, but covers Mao’s entire life. _Mao’s War on Nature_ has a little, although more about the Great Leap Forward.

      1. I just ordered the one about the Cultural Revolution. In paperback. I’ll keep the others in mind.
        I also got Nien Chang’s Life and Death in Shanghai.

    2. If you have a strong stomach, you might also want to look at Jasper Becker’s “Hungry Ghosts” for what happened after the Cultural Revolution.

      …I’m serious about the strong stomach. What has been read cannot be unread. Mao’s famines are horrifying. And one of the main reasons I decided a long time ago anyone trying to institute Communism or even C-Lite in the U.S. needs to be stopped. Cold.

    3. When Huai Flowers Bloom by Shu Jiang Lu is a great book, but not if you are looking for an overview of it. (It is, however, of particular interest to those who are interested in story.)

  24. Note it’s always the “racist right’s” fault when a Dem in a Dem city in a Dem state is killed by a Dem union member after being protected by a Dem prosecutor and using Dem laws to justify the actions.

  25. So, bear with me, this might get a bit long…
    This posting and something I saw yesterday just kind of clicked in my head with what I saw.
    For those who may not know, there’s a show that’s been on A&E for a while now, LivePD. The I’d usually turn it on for “background noise” while doing something else in the living room. The gist of it was, camera crews would ride along with various POs in various departments and it would be broadcast (almost) live (enough delay to for the bleeper guy to catch the cursing.)
    As of about yesterday, it has been cancelled.
    From the tone of one of the hosts’ Twitter posts, he was gobsmacked by this, he thought and expected they’d be coming back after things settle down.

    Now, we get to my theory.

    The show was cancelled because the A&E execs caved to pressure from various leftist groups who couldn’t stand the idea of a show that not only shows POs interacting with the public, but often showed them being decent human beings. Pulled some person over for a busted taillight, get a whiff of weed (in a state where it’s not legal,) ask the people in the car if there’s weed, get a straight up “yes sir” and have the weed handed over voluntarily (small amount,) and cut them loose with just a “fix it ticket” for the light and a verbal warning about the weed?

    Can’t have that, now can we?
    Doesn’t fit the current narrative that all cops are racist, power-tripping, wanna-be murdering psychopaths!

    So, how does this tie back to the gist of the blog posting?
    Fairly easily, I think. Either “all cops are bad cops,” or “cops should be the only people allowed to carry firearms” seems to be something the lift flip flops on depending on the needs of the moment. Right now they’re in “all cops are bad cops” mode, wait until there’s perhaps a self-defense shooting or a 2A protest somewhere and they’ll flip to “cops should be the only people allowed to carry firearms” and be linking arms with POs and singing kumbaya so fast you won’t have time to blink…

  26. I wish someone would send some intrepid reporters to the Yucatan peninsula; they gotta be hurting after all the rain they got from Cristobal.

  27. Power Line offers an amusing revision of a Seinfeld bit, updating it for today’s “Silence s Violence” bullies.

    YOU MUST COMPLY! — an excellent portrayal of the binary mind at work. Many Huns doubtless recognize this as an ancient theme, depicted in A Man For All Seasons as Thomas More is pressed to endorse the King’s new marriage:

    Cromwell: Now, Sir Thomas, you stand on your silence.

    Sir Thomas More: I do.

    Cromwell: But, gentlemen of the jury, there are many kinds of silence. Consider first the silence of a man who is dead. Let us suppose we go into the room where he is laid out, and we listen: what do we hear? Silence. What does it betoken, this silence? Nothing; this is silence pure and simple. But let us take another case. Suppose I were to take a dagger from my sleeve and make to kill the prisoner with it; and my lordships there, instead of crying out for me to stop, maintained their silence. That would betoken! It would betoken a willingness that I should do it, and under the law, they will be guilty with me. So silence can, according to the circumstances, speak! Let us consider now the circumstances of the prisoner’s silence. The oath was put to loyal subjects up and down the country, and they all declared His Grace’s title to be just and good. But when it came to the prisoner, he refused! He calls this silence. Yet is there a man in this court – is there a man in this country! – who does not know Sir Thomas More’s opinion of this title?

    Cromwell: Yet how can this be? Because this silence betokened, nay, this silence was, not silence at all, but most eloquent denial!

    Sir Thomas More: Not so. Not so, Master Secretary. The maxim is “Qui tacet consentiret”: the maxim of the law is “Silence gives consent”. If therefore you wish to construe what my silence betokened, you must construe that I consented, not that I denied.

    Cromwell: Is that in fact what the world construes from it? Do you pretend that is what you wish the world to construe from it?

    Sir Thomas More: The world must construe according to its wits; this court must construe according to the law.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    Sir Thomas More: [More has been condemned to death, and now for the first time breaks his years-long adamant silence on Henry VIII’s divorce of Queen Catherine to marry Ann Boleyn] Since the Court has determined to condemn me, God knoweth how, I will now discharge my mind concerning the indictment and the King’s title. The indictment is grounded in an act of Parliament which is directly repugnant to the law of God, and his Holy Church, the Supreme Government of which no temporal person may by any law presume to take upon him. This was granted by the mouth of our Savior, Christ himself, to Saint Peter and the Bishops of Rome whilst He lived and was personally present here on earth. It is, therefore, insufficient in law to charge any Christian to obey it. And more to this, the immunity of the Church is promised both in Magna Carta and in the king’s own coronation oath

    [Cromwell calls More ‘malicious’]

    Sir Thomas More: … Not so. I am the king’s true subject, and I pray for him and all the realm. I do none harm. I say none harm. I think none harm. And if this be not enough to keep a man alive, then in good faith, I long not to live. Nevertheless, it is not for the Supremacy that you have sought my blood, but because I would not bend to the marriage!

Comments are closed.