Don’t read this if you want to keep your nice, warm glow on.
Don’t read this if you want to keep your nice, warm glow on.
Talk about your “inconvenient truth.”
This is sobering. Saddening. Angering. I loved London, when I was there in 1985 and again in 1990. (I also wanted to visit Paris some day. Not in its current state…) “When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life!” exclaimed Samuel Johnson, in 1777. What a different 241 years make!
And of course, what is true of London (and other major cities in England, and increasingly throughout the British Isles) is true of many other places in Europe, and could rapidly become true of the United States, too, if those who support the migrant “caravans” – along with “sanctuary cities,” and similar inanities – have their way.
This video is not going to be an easy or popular one to listen to, especially for those who are still sucking at the teat of the dominant “liberal”/progressive narrative. Stefan Molyneux says things that are not going to go down easily, for some. But that does not make them wrong.
Unfortunately, he is all too right.
“Diversity is our strength.”
Sorry, not sorry, for the language.
God damn – and I mean that quite literally, may God Almighty condemn to destruction in this life and perdition in the next – those who, in the name of an insane, twisted obsession with so-called “diversity,” are seeking to destroy the West, and its culture, history, and civilization (including, not incidentally, Christianity and the Judeo-Christian tradition). God damn them to Hell.
Many have borrowed philosopher George Santayana’s famous phrase: “Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it,” but in our current political climate, some fear we are currently in the process of erasing history.
“Pulling down Confederate statues in the Southern United States, and ISIS members burning and destroying documents, monuments and artifacts that date back thousands of years–these are but two examples of people struggling to come to terms with not only the facts of history, but also its ever-present reminders…
“It may not be the popular stance today, but Parsons believes that if we censure objects and reminders, censuring memory could be the natural next step. He concludes: “You can tear down all the statues of Douglas Bader and his dog, but history will never be a safe space…historical correctness does not change the past, it does not improve the present. It offers no hope for the future.”
An excellent article. Read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest!
Contrary to popular belief, Germany had entered World War One only reluctantly, and as a result of its mutual-assistance pact with Austria-Hungary. When it became obvious that the Kaiserreich could not defeat the Allies – especially after the entry of the United States, with over a million fresh troops, and in light of the “November Revolution” that resulted in Bolshevik (Marxist / Communist) takeovers of several major German cities – its representatives sought to negotiate, in good faith, a treaty to end the war.
Those negotiations were intended to be conducted on the basis of Woodrow Wilson’s “Fourteen Points,” which “called for the victorious Allies to set unselfish peace terms with the vanquished Central Powers of World War I, including freedom of the seas, the restoration of territories conquered during the war and the right to national self-determination in such contentious regions as the Balkans.”
Those reasonable hopes did not take long to be dashed: Continue reading “Treaty of Versailles | The Holocaust Encyclopedia”
“The Kavanaugh fight has been primarily a bitter contest among American elites. Kavanaugh, recall, is a Yale Law graduate, and a favorite of the Federalist Society. The men and women now being trained at Yale Law (and Harvard Law, and similar elite institutions) are going to be running the country. They and their allies in the elite media. This is hardly a controversial observation to make. What is now very clear — very clear — is that when they are in power, they will use it to crush people like me.”
In which thoughtful conservative, author the The Benedict Option, and avowed “Never Trumper” Rod Dreher admits that he is among those being “red-pilled” by the insanity and absurdity of the anti-Kavanaugh witch-hunt:
“[Christine Blasey Ford] has been playing a game with the Senate Judiciary Committee, trying to dictate the terms of her testimony. Yesterday [September 25th], when the Republicans on the committee designated a female veteran sex crimes prosecutor to conduct their questioning for them, she hollered foul. You would think that someone interested in getting to the truth of the matter would welcome that kind of questioner. But no, Blasey Ford’s reaction gave away the game. She wants to be interrogated by older Republican men, so the focus isn’t on what she says, but the identity of her questioners. It was never about a traumatized victim trying to bring the truth out. It was always about destroying Brett Kavanaugh by any means necessary…
“Again: this is not about getting at the truth. This Thursday event, from a left-wing perspective, is what we used to call a “show trial.” It is meant to illustrate a political verdict already reached…. If Amy Coney Barrett had been the nominee, the Left would be painting her as a gibbering religious fanatic bent on imposing Catholic sharia on America. This is as clear as clear can be now. There is no lie they will not tell, no smear they will not employ, to destroy Brett Kavanaugh. He is no longer, in their eyes, a human being, but a symbol of all they hate.
“I look at him, and what’s being done to him, and see my sons, and even my daughter. If they were nominated for a position like Kavanaugh’s, I would want them to have a fair hearing. I don’t think that’s possible any more in America, not for the kind of people identified by the cultural Left as the Enemy. And make no mistake, if my daughter grows up to be a believing Christian and a social conservative, she will be the Enemy, as sure as my sons will be. These cultural elites would eagerly destroy the character of my children, as well as myself and most of my friends, to pursue their political goals.”
“The friend of mine who knows Kavanaugh personally has always been a Never Trump Republican. He too is the product of an Ivy League education, and is part of the American elite, broadly speaking. Based on our conversation last night, this process has changed him. It has radicalized him. It has red-pilled him. It’s doing the same thing to me.
“I have no more trust in or affection for Donald Trump or the Republican Party than I did before the Kavanaugh hearings. In fact, if I had to choose, I would rather have the Democrats running economic and foreign policy than the Republicans these days. But I have been driven by the liberal elites into believing that whatever their sins and failings, the Republicans are the only thing standing between me (and people like me) and the destruction that these highly ideologized left-wing elites would happily wreak on us, for the sake of their idea of Justice.
“I have been a registered Independent since 2008, and do not like in any way, shape, or form Donald Trump and the GOP. But after what has happened, and continues to happen, to Kavanaugh, I genuinely fear the Democratic Party and the elites — especially the academic and media elites — who guide it. I am hearing from conservatives like me who have been alienated from the GOP because of its own fecklessness, and because of Donald Trump, who have been red-pilled by the Kavanaugh persecution, and who now intend to vote Republican purely out of self-protection, for as long as we can manage it.”
The graphic above, like the “red-pill” meme, is taken from the 1999 film The Matrix. In the film, the main character Neo is offered the choice between a red pill and a blue pill by rebel leader Morpheus (pictured), with the words of the caption. If nothing up to this point has accomplished it, it seems to me that the Kavanaugh hearings are offering that choice to many Americans, as they seem to have to Dreher and others:
A choice between comfortable illusions of a sunlit, rose-tinted Liberal utopia in which the buzzwords of the Left are dreamily realized, and everyone lives happily ever after in a secular paradise of “diversity,” “tolerance,” “multiculturalism,” and “equality” (all as defined by the Left, of course) – but with the shadow of the guillotine and the re-education camp looming behind the walls of the Matrix – or the grittier world of… well… reality. Of truth.
And the truth, unfortunately, is that the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the hard Left; they are in full SJW mode, and the issue is not truth – no matter how much they protest that it is – but power. This is how revolutions begin, folks: with attacks not only on traditional values, but on the very structures of society, of government, of jurisprudence. These are the neo-Jacobins, the neo-Bolsheviks, the neo-Red Guards.
As I have said before, if unsubstantiated allegations become the basis for destroying an individual’s personal and professional reputation, career, family – life – we are all at risk.
And as I have also said, more than once, as I watch the trajectory we seem to be on: I fear for my country.
The consensus on political correctness was that it was a way of expressing things that everyone – or at least all the right people – took for granted. For progressives it was the same thing as good manners, an argument that was often presented in just those words…
It is said that revolutions always devour their own children. That does seem to be true, but understandably, their children resist being devoured, and the resultant thrashing about can cause a lot of mayhem, and often a lot of injury to innocent (or at least, not unduly culpable) bystanders.
The sooner political correctness thrashes itself into oblivion, the better, as far as I’m concerned! Then we can get on with simply being decent to each other, unless of course we have a good reason not to be. And in that case, we can be at enmity honestly, without the need to disguise it with PC cant, or to pretend that we are not, in fact, at enmity after all…
Who cares if Obama belatedly cheers for transparency and accountability? He should admit that he made the government more dangerous at home and abroad.
James Bovard’s short but detailed and meticulously-sourced essay should be a must-read in every high school and college political science class – and since that’s not going to happen, it deserves to be shared, forwarded, and otherwise spread as widely as possible. Doing my bit, here!
Bovard is no cheerleader for the current President, no rider of the “Trump Train” – he comments that “Americans should be alarmed at Trump’s power grabs” (in one of his few failures to cite-and-source, he gives no indication of what those are), and reminds us that “Obama is correct that Americans should be on guard against any ‘absolutism’ from the Trump administration.”
But he also reminds us that “Obama declared Friday that Americans are ‘supposed to stand up to bullies, not follow them.’ But Trump won in 2016 in part because many Americans considered the federal government the biggest bully in the land.” And he cites example, after example, after example of how Obama either maintained or, in many cases, increased government power and intrusiveness, at the expense of transparency and freedom.
And these are only some of the examples he cites – and, as I say, carefully sources. And after all this, Obama presumes to lecture us on Trump, or to present himself as some sort of moral leader? It’d be a joke, if it wasn’t so un-funny. The truth is, as Bovard accurately notes, “Nothing that Trump can do or say should be permitted to expunge Obama’s derelictions.”
I am in complete agreement! And as for Obama himself, he should do what nearly every former President has done, which is ride off into the sunset – or sit quietly on his porch, enjoying his substantial Presidential retirement income – and cease and desist his attempts to undermine a sitting President.
P.S. Needless to say, the Obamacrats in the public square were less enamored of Bovard’s conclusions. As he pointed out in a follow-up on his personal blog,
“I am chagrined that not everyone liked yesterday’s USA Today oped, ‘Obama Fueled the Distrust that Led to Donald Trump.’ I expected the piece to spur thoughtful exchanges by folks with different perspectives.”
If so, I fear he was either hopelessly naive, or at least excessively optimistic. He continues,
“Alas, my hopes for a rebirth of civility have been mercilessly crushed. Here’s some responses generated via Twitter, email, and elsewhere online.”
As I commented, both on his blog and on his Facebook page, I suspect that most of the above “respondents” (if one can even dignify them with such a title) failed to read past the headline. And if they did, they clearly failed to comprehend what they were reading – or, just as likely, flatly refused to do so, lest their preconceived notions be disturbed by facts.
[Bovard’s] op-ed piece is spot-on, and (as I mentioned above) should be required reading in every high school and college-level political science class in the nation.
If Democrats dislike Trump, they should reflect on the fact that they have only themselves to blame, by tolerating Obama and nominating Clinton.
But frankly, I doubt that most of today’s Democrats are capable of that level of reflection. Sad to say!