Algore’s Inconvenient Sequel flops at the box office.
At Berkeley, police stood down as the Blackshirts attacked conservative events – twice.
At Middlebury College in Vermont, police stood idly by as “Anti”-fascists attacked a conservative speaker and one of their own professors.
And in Charlottesville last weekend, the police were given a “Stand Down” order, (by a mayor who condemned the permitted protesters, but pointedly refused to address the Blackshirts) allowing the Blackshirts to attack a “white supremacist” rallly with impunity
Nope – nobody dare suggest that Big Left is all about getting and holding power. Perish the thought.
If you wrap your politics in Nazi trivia, you deserve to be marginalized. And if you drive your car into a bunch of protesters (who are not a current threat to you), you pretty much deserve to spend a couple of decades in prison.
With that out of the way, let’s get down to business.
The Original Anti-AntiFa: After the 1932 German parliamentary elections, the Reichstag established what become known as “The Hitler Cabinet”, to try to establish some of the political stability the German people craved.
In what seems counterintuitive to people who understand neither German history nor the world of extremist politics, the idea of the Hitler Cabinet it had the support of the Communists, with whom the Nazis had been fighting in the streets for nearly a decade and a half. The Communists supported the Nazi-led cabinet – they figured, not without justification, that more Nazi thugs patrolling the streets would drive more of the undecideds in the middle toward the hard left.
They figured they were playing the long game. They miscalculated, only because they underestimated the speed with which the new cabinet would assimilate and co-opt the power of the state and the Army.
The larger lesson is this; Extremists love a world of white hats and black hats.
And as we saw in Charlottesville over the wekeend, they’re slowly getting it.
Steam: In Tom Wolfe’s Bonfire of the Vanities, the character of Reverend Bacon – a race-baiting hustler who was clearly a composite of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton – had a memorable metaphor about activism; it was about channeling “steam”. Steam – anger – always tries to expand, finding any place it can to push outward to equalize the pressure. The goal of at community activist is to channel that “Steam” in the desired direction. Which the Reverend Bacon, of course, does. Read the book. It may be more valuable today than it was when it was publsihed.
In 2009 and 2010, the Tea Party tried to channel a lot of conservative, libertarian, originalist “steam” the right way. We were civil, we were utterly inclusive, we left our protest sites cleaner than we found them, and not only was there *zero* violence (except for leftists who came to start fights), but nearly every time someone showed up with a racist sign, the blogswarm found out they were ringers from the left (when I keynoted a rally in 2010, we made it widely known that all signs would be photographed and published; for *some* reason, everyone was above board. Go figure). We CRUSHED Obama in 2010.
And the media worked overtime to smear, slander and demonize us – with the active connivance of the Beltway GOP establishment.
At the same time, Obama’s Homeland Security department was passing around lists of “right wing hate groups” that included pretty *every* conservative grassroots organization; pro-life, 2nd Amendment, tax reform, land rights, court reform groups all got labeled “Terrorists”.
If you tell 160 million people – half the country – who assemble peacefully to redress their grievances that they are all racist extremist white supremacists who are a bigger threat than radical islam, eventually some of them going to figure that whole civility thing is a crock, and can never work.
Voila: Of course, that was the goal, Marty. To create more extremists. Because Big Left needs a right-wing extremist boogeyman to rally against. And after nearly a decade of trying, now they got one.
Yep. I condemn Nazis. But then that’s not the point, is it?
James Damore is exploring his legal options against Google.
And apparently he has some:
According to Dan Eaton, an attorney and ethics professor at San Diego University, the engineer certainly has grounds for a case on two fronts. “First, federal labor law bars even non-union employers like Google from punishing an employee for communicating with fellow employees about improving working conditions,” Eaton writes.
And second, because the memo was a statement of political views, Eaton says Google may have violated California law which “prohibits employers from threatening to fire employees to get them to adopt or refrain from adopting a particular political course of action.”
An international corporation with armies of both lawyers, Google knew all this. They decided to take their chances with state and federal law anyway rather than stick up for one of their employees and risk public backlash. That’s an incredibly telling decision from a company that has mastered everything from artificial intelligence to self-driving cars.
Question: Will a Goodle “self-driving car” actually drive someone who opposes Planned Parenthood?
But I digress. If Mr. Damore has a legal plaintiff’s fund, I’ll be contributing.
By the way –
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
The Justice Department is part of the Executive Branch. They work for the President.
In theory, the Justice Department ought to be non-political. But as these articles note, the career bureaucrats have their own agenda and they resent their bosses telling them what to do. The comments by former Obama administration officials make it clear that they believe they are not accountable to the President. They’re not accountable to anybody.
The notion of unaccountable bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda is anti-American. There is no authority for it in the Constitution, legislation or case-law. It usurps lawful authority. It’s a form of coup, undermining the rightful government. They are the swamp Trump promised to drain.
Take a lesson from Ronaldus Magnus. Fire them all.
I’m becoming more convinced every day that Federal Law Enforcement is the “standing army” that the founding fathers were worried about, but couldn’t have possibly conceived of.
Earlier this week “Governor” Dayton declared the firebombing of a Bloomington mosque “terrorism” – notwithstanding the fact that no investigating agency has released any conclusions about motive.
Which is a little strange, given that tis’ been five days, now.
Make no mistake; there is a xenophobic minority in this state. Eventually, one of them could – or may have – done something stupid.
But on Monday, I pointed out that if I were a betting man (and I’m not), I’d put at least a little money on the idea that the Bloomington attack was a hoax. Too much says “contrived” to me:
- The “firebomb” was tiny; it scorched the floor and burned some drapes. Not that there’s such a thing as a good firebomb, but still.
- It landed in an unoccupied room. Now, that could have been blind happenstance. But…
- …the actual sanctuary of the mosque was full of people conducting morning prayers – who would, of course, be “witnesses” to this hate crime.
I could very well be wrong – but I say even money it was a hoax.
Oh, yeah – one other factor. Nearly every other “hate crime” since November 8 has been a hoax as well. By my unscientific but focused count, it’s not even close; among “hate crimes” that’ve gotten any publicity, it’s been overwhelmingly hoaxes.
Seems like people think being a victim includes victimizing oneself.
And there is, unfortunately, precedent; the vandalism at a Saint Cloud mosque two years ago, which was trumpeted far and wide as a sign of gathering xenophobia, turned out to be a parishioner – who, to his dubioius “credit”, turned out to be operating less from misplaced political victimology-mongering than from being, from the press report, kind of an impulsive idiot.
Which didn’t stop Minnesota’s Big Left from trying to pin that attack on, well, you and me.
New Google logo?
If the shoe fits…
UPDATE: They keep coming:
A bunch of journos are apparently getting ready to sue the President for blocking them from his Twitter account.
I’m about ready to send money to their plaintiff’s fund.
Because the journos are right. Why should pols get to decide whose speech to restrict, and from whom they can restrict access to their public speech?
It’s downright un-American.
And I’ve got quite a little list of DFL pols who’ve done exactly the same to me, and I’d guess most every conservative pundit in Minnesota.
And yes, I may have actually broken the story of Alondra “The Industrial Engineer” Cano distributing personal information on Twitter about people who’d criticized her privately (or so they thought() on the City of Minneapolis website to try to bully them into silence.
Both of these politicians blocked me almost immediately after I publicly ate their lunches. Waah waah waaah.
Likewise, the Twitter accounts of “Alliance for a Better Minnesota” and “Protect MN” have long since blocked me – because I crush them every time I turn my attention to them.
But others – Rep. Melissa Hortmann, Senator Tina LIebling, as well as several DFL-xupporting non-profits – already had me blocked before I ever attempted to write/tweet about them.
I know that there are apps that can systematically block all social media from authors matching some lists or algorithms – which is why I suspect the blanket block from DFL pols.
But I don’t care. If it’s fair for CNN, it’s fair for me.
Remember that in all cases, while I am a stone-cold purveyor of unassailable fact, I am also scrupulously polite to a fault. Anyone who wants to claim otherwise is welcome to prove it – and yes, there I AM more than willing to file a test case. I’m not the sharpest tool in the box, but I’m way smarter than that.
So yes, “journos”. Sue Donald Trump. I beg of you. Indeed, there’s some legal grounding already starting to happen:
So let the courts court, and the juries jurr.
Then get it incorporated onto all the states.
And hurry. Some MN Pols need some freaking free speech already.
And we’ve got some lost time to make up for.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
Journalists and actors and leaky politicians love to claim they’re part of The Resistance, as if Trump were Hitler and these schmucks were the French Underground. So Brave.
Except members of The Resistance were summarily executed. Lined up and shot. That was the price they agreed to pay when they decided to join.
Trump should reinstitute the policy, for the sake of verisimilitude. Put some skin in the game or drop your claim to stolen valor.
The number of “progressives” who know more about history than they learned in 11th grade would fit into a Prius with room for a load of (Whole Foods* groceries in the front seat.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
John Scalzi summed up Liberals’ worldview when he quipped “Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is.”
The problem with any quip is that it contains a kernel of truth so it can’t be denied completely. But only a kernel, meaning it should be denied in part. The difficulty lies in determining which part.
In Rome in 400 AD, Straight White Male was undeniably the lowest difficulty setting. Women and minorities had it tougher, no question. In South Africa in 2017, Straight White Male is a death sentence. The validity of the quip depends on Where you are.
Limiting the quip to the United States, it’s still not universally true. In Virginia in 1800, sure. In Minneapolis in 2017 with its commitment to diversity and affirmative action in education and employment, it’s definitely not so. The validity of the quip depends on When you are.
Liberals continue to act as if today was November 1, 1959; as if Eisenhower was still the President; as if drinking fountains were still segregated, women had coat-hanger abortions, welfare was non-existent and the Klan enforced Jim Crow laws.
It takes a special kind of wilfull blindness to ignore the progress America has made, to continue to blame everything on the past, insisting on new and better solutions to problems that already have been solved.
“Willful Blindless” – or consistent strategy?
City comes up with an estimate of $65,000-$110,000 to build a stairway linking two levels of a city park, and replacing a rutted path with a steep incline that was causing injuries.
Citizen builds the stairway for $550.
Retired mechanic Adi Astl says he took it upon himself to build the stairs after several neighbours fell down the steep path to a community garden in Tom Riley Park, in Etobicoke, Ont. Astl says his neighbours chipped in on the project, which only ended up costing $550 – a far cry from the $65,000-$150,000 price tag the city had estimated for the job.
“I thought they were talking about an escalator,” Astl told CTV News Channel on Wednesday.
Astl says he hired a homeless person to help him and built the eight steps in a matter of hours.
Problem solved, right?
Because boy, is the government mad:
City bylaw officers have taped off the stairs while officials make a decision on what to do with it. However, Astl has not been charged with any sort of violation.
Mayor John Tory acknowledged that the city estimate sounds “completely out of whack with reality” on Wednesday. [Noooooo! – Ed] However, he says that still doesn’t justify allowing private citizens to bypass city bylaws to build public structures themselves.
“I think everyone will understand that it will be more than $550,” he said on Wednesday. “We just can’t have people decide to go out to Home Depot and build a staircase in a park because that’s what they would like to have.”
Of course not.
There are consultants – members of the political class – to be paid to study the issue. There are contractors – favored by the political class, frequently due to polices promulgated and administered by other members of the political class – to whom money must be funneled, usually via other members of the political class.
If people just made stuff work, the system would completely break down!
“But what about the handicapped?”
He pointed out that the park already has an accessible path for those who worry about falling down the incline, which is essentially a shortcut from the parking lot to the garden area.
It’s all about showing the peasants who’s boss.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
The author proposes that conservatives begin to use shaming and shunning as a weapon against liberals, the way they have used them against us. I say it won’t work, because Liberals control all the institutions where shaming and shunning is enforced.
I can’t shame anybody on Facebook or Twitter, because my post will be blocked by the liberals who administer the website.
My complaints to HR will be disregarded because of the liberals who administer employee discipline programs. My complaints to the court will be dismissed because of liberals who sit on the bench. And of course, God help anybody who attempts to shun gays by refusing to bake their wedding cake.
We can’t use character assassination against them because they already own the HR department. To those people, claiming my boss harassed me on account of my political beliefs won’t get him disciplined, it’ll get him a raise: it’s good to harass a Nazi fascist, they deserve it. And all the Liberal Democrats who work in HR believe that without question.
It is too late to attempt to use shaming and shunning to shut down liberals. So what’s the next weapon to use in the war of degenerating civil standards? Either we undertake a decades-long sustained effort to take back the institutions, or we bypass the institutions that have been captured by social justice Warriors. And when you talk about bypassing the courts, you’re talking about Street Justice which is another word for Civil War. When reason is not available, violence is the last resort.
Perverting the institutions that ensure social order results in destroying social order. Another application of Berg’s Law: Liberal Values Destroy Liberal Societies.
Leaving only power – those who have it, and those subject to it.
Which is really what it’s all about.
“Progressive” woman risks all to tell the world what used to be screechingly obvious:
I asked why as a woman who was born with woman parts it is now considered transphobic to want to have conversations about the distinct and unquestionable differences in life experience between cis and trans women. I asked why when women have faced systematic violence at the hands of men and 1 in six women is raped, is it wrong for cis women to have some spaces just for them to feel safe in a world where they don’t? And I was immediately threatened, labeled as transphobic, and left to feel as if my voice was nothing.
I am angry. Angry because now even questioning these issues is seen as an act of hate, discrimination, or intolerance. Angry because wanting to have open conversations is now considered hate speech. I am angry that as a woman who has constantly had to be careful of my language and behavior around men to ensure my own safety, I am now being forced to police my language even more, around and for trans women who had entirely
different experiences and anatomy. Female language around female issues is important to many cis women because we have struggled to even have our identities and issues seen as valid.
All these liberals reading 1984,and nobody gets it; it’s not about solving anything. It’s about destroying the will to be free by making it too exhausting, fraught, and dangerous.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
A Seattle councilman says cleaning human urine and feces off the sidewalk outside the courthouse is . . . wait for it . . . racist.
The technological advance that enabled people to live in cities without rampant disease was the sanitary sewer, invented 4,000 years ago. If Seattle can’t even manage to maintain the basic level of sanitation achieved before the Bronze Age, our civilization is doomed.
So many “progressives” want to return to the Bronze Age – provided they’re the aristocracy. And they will be.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
A: I have a question.
B: I’m sorry, I’m not giving you an answer.
A: Why not?
B: Because you don’t want to hear it.
A: Yes, I do. Why won’t you tell me the answer?
B: Because I’m an Old White Male and therefore disqualified from having an opinion, any opinion, about anything whatsoever.
A: You don’t even know what the question is.
B: Doesn’t matter. If I answered it, that would be “mansplaining” which is a hate crime.
A: I bet you don’t even know the answer.
B: I do, but it’s not a sensitive and empowering answer; therefore, to protect your feelings so you don’t feel threatened and need to retreat to a safe space, I’m not telling you the answer.
A: You just won’t tell me because I’m a woman/Black/gay/left-handed/poor/Muslim. That’s racisssssssssssss. You’re too hateful to be allowed to have an opinion and even if you told me the answer, I wouldn’t listen to it because you’re such a hater.
B: Told you.
You might call it fiction.
I call it the Hamline-Midway Facebook page.
…we aren’t just referring to its historical roots, the attempts to disarm blacks after the Civil War and the urban riots of the sixties.
Los Angeles – which still has the “discretionary issue” system Minnesota ditched in 2003 – gives fewer permits to blacks, Latinos and women.
Gotta show ’em who’s boss.
When government controls who has the right to be a citizen rather than a subject, then everyone’s a subject.
Back in the ’00s, when there were a lot more blogs, I used to amuse myself by calling myself “The Twin Cities’ Best Feminist”.
I did it partly – OK, mostly – to troll the local feministbotblogger community; so un-self-aware were they, and so seriously do they take themselves, that they found countless ways to spin their underwear into knots when I wrote that. (“The Twin Cities ‘Best’ Feminist?” Really? What does that even mean?)
Background: I did it partly because it was true. Well, partly – because “Feminist” doesn’t just have one meaning. Because as Camille Paglia noted around twenty years ago, there are really two branches to “Feminism”.
There’s “equity” Feminism – the idea that women should have the same opportunity to go as far and do as much as their merits and talents can take them. It’s the feminism that killed off the “barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen” thing; the one that advanced the world out of the “Mad Men” era. I think any father with a daughter qualifies on one level or another. Am I “the best” at this? Sure, why not?
Then there’s “Identity Feminism” – the idea that women are an identity group, like blacks or Armenians or Jews, with an agenda and history and grievances against long-time enemies and oppressors, and a collective (and to one extent or another, retributive) political interest. I’m proud to say, I’m no good at this. l
So we have – again, Paglia’s idea, not mine – the “feminists” who seek equality, and the “feminists” who seek demagoguery and political power.
We’ll come back to that.
Boys Without Mothers Won’t Quite Be Boys: There’s a huge body of research about what happens when girls grow up without fathers – because our society is rife with it, thanks to our family court system and an urban culture than systematically devalues fatherhood. Such girls grow up much more likely to fail in school, to get pregnant while a teenager or single, to have trouble with guys, and to suffer from depression and other psychological issues in adulthood.
The study of boys without mothers – or whose mothers systematically devalue their relationships with their sons – is a lot newer, since it happens a lot less often But it’s starting to happen. And it’s not pretty. Boys whose mothers are absent, impaired, or who just undercut that relationship in favor of other things – other relationships, addiction, or dysfunctional addiction to career – grow up very likely to act out, to be violent, to have trouble in school and at work, and to have the same raft of psychological issues as girls whose fathers do, basically, the same thing.
We’ll come back to that.
Meet The Mother Of The Year: Jody Allard is a feminist writer in, where else, Seattle. And her sons are going to make some psychologists very wealthy, Ro judging by this article, “I’m Done Pretending Men Are Safe (Even My Sons).
I have two sons. They are strong and compassionate—the kind of boys other parents are glad to meet when their daughters bring them home for dinner. They are good boys, in the ways good boys are, but they are not safe boys. I’m starting to believe there’s no such thing.
A psychologist once told me there are two lies that everyone tells: “I never doubted my sexuality” and “I’ve never ever even once thought about suicide”. Without arguing about the point, I’d add a third; “I’ve never thought things about my kids that concerned, worried or scared me”.
But one thing most parents don’t do is tell it to their kids, even directly.
Not Allard (emphases added by me):
I wrote an essay in The Washington Post last year, during the height of the Brock Turner case, about my sons and rape culture. I didn’t think it would be controversial when I wrote it; I was sure most parents grappled with raising sons in the midst of rape culture. The struggle I wrote about was universal, I thought, but I was wrong. My essay went semi-viral, and for the first time my sons encountered my words about them on their friends’ phones, their teachers’ computers, and even overheard them discussed by strangers on a crowded metro bus. It was one thing to agree to be written about in relative obscurity, and quite another thing to have my words intrude on their daily lives.
Can you imagine – one of your parents considering you guilty until proven innocent (not to mention with no actual avenue to prove yourself innocent(?
One of my sons was hurt by my words, although he’s never told me so.
And have it wind up in the Washington Post in a few months? I’d take a pass, too.
He doesn’t understand why I lumped him and his brother together in my essay. He sees himself as the “good” one, the one who is sensitive and thoughtful, and who listens instead of reacts. He doesn’t understand that even quiet misogyny is misogyny, and that not all sexists sound like Twitter trolls.
Let’s just take a step back and reassess: “Mom” has called her sons, essentially, rapists in training – because of traits their mother insists are in them, never mind their lying eyes, brains or senses of self.
It seems to astound Ms. Allard that her son has reacted:
He is angry at me now, although he won’t admit that either, and his anger led him to conservative websites and YouTube channels; places where he can surround himself with righteous indignation against feminists, and tell himself it’s ungrateful women like me who are the problem.
His problem is not an “ungrateful woman”. It’s one, apparently narcissistic woman who he has, luckily, discovered has been trying to gaslight him – to convince him, via .
I teeter frequently between supporting my son and educating him. Is it my job as his mother to ensure he feels safe emotionally, no matter what violence he spews?…When I hear his voice become defensive, I back off but question whether I’m doing him any favors by allowing his perception of himself to go unchallenged. When I confront him with his own sexism, I question whether I’m pushing too hard and leaving him without an emotional safe space in his home.
Am I the only one who suspects that poor kid hasn’t had “emotional safe space” since he was a zygote?
I’ll leave the rest of this exercise in narcissism – in the full, clinical sense – to you to read (or not. And I hope this woman’s poor sons find some way to fill the hole she’s no doubt left in their lives from prioritizing them below her yapping ideology; I hope they can find some sense of themselves outside of her gaslighting.
But for a parent to marginalize their children in the face of their ideology?
It might be mental illness, of a sort (my vote is for Narcissistic Personality Disorder). Is it exacerbated by an ideology that treats men as an enemy to be vanquished – even one’s own children?
Which came first: the mental illness or the ideology?
UPDATE: Kurt Schlichter notes that one of Ms. Allard’s sons has given indications of being suicidal – which, naturally, “she” used as fodder for her self-adoration:
In a post as recent as May, the feminist wrote in Role Reboot about her and her suicidal son watching 13Reasons Why, a show that has been argued to glorify suicide.
Someone get this chick a Mother of the Year award.
Curiously, Allard also has at least one daughter about whom we can’t find any public shaming pieces.
I have no words to describe my revulsion for this “person”.
…that Hillary Clinton lost the election to Donald Trump…
…because the coastal cultural and media “elites” are completely out of touch with “flyover land”.
Oh, it’s not just the NYTimes. On Saturday, the NPR anchor referred to a shooting in “Little Rock, Kansas”.
Nope! Not out of touch!
Swedes burn books to sanitize the historical record…
The other day came the news that the library in Botkyrka municipality, on the outskirts of Stockholm, had burned older editions of one of the Pippi books, Pippi in the South Seas (1948), because local officials have decided that they “contain racism.”
After this action came to light, the municipality issued a press release acknowledging that the books had indeed been destroyed because they contained “obsolete expressions that can be perceived as racist” – but that they had been replaced on the library shelves by a 2015 edition of the book from which those expressions have been carefully scrubbed.
Since Lindgren died in 2002, of course, she was not around to grant anybody the right to fiddle with her prose. Her publishers had simply taken it upon themselves to do to her work what a lot of people would love to do to, say, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Like Mark Twain, Lindgren was the very opposite of a racist. But her use of language in Pippi in the South Seas, like that in Huck Finn, violates the Left’s current ideological tests.
The news of the Botkyrka book-burning was first reported on a July 9 broadcast by investigative journalist Janne Josefsson, who appears to be one of the few level-headed practitioners of that profession left in Sweden. “When you burn books for ideological reasons,” Josefsson later told Expressen, “there’s something in me that says, wait a second now, are we really going to let these things disappear? Shouldn’t they be allowed to survive so that that I can explain to my child that this is how you talked in those days?”
To Big Left, history is just another egg to be broken to make the omelette.
I said it during the 2016 campaign. I’m gonna say it again.
The reason everyone had to start talking about “white privilege” was to pre-empt discussion of “class privilege” – of the sort that is Big Left’s real power base. If the body politics – especially the part that votes Democrat – were too busy barbering about “white privilege”, the notion that a hot tar roofer from Little Rock with an Arklahoma accent has some innate leg up over Oprah Winfrey because white – they wouldn’t have time to fuss about the class divide that separates Kenwood from North Minneapolis, Carlton from North Hennepin Community College,
Every time I’m ready to completely give up on David Brooks – and it happens frequently enough – he writes a column like this, about how class privilege (especially in our “progressive” zip codes) perpetuates itself.
Recently I took a friend with only a high school degree to lunch. Insensitively, I led her into a gourmet sandwich shop. Suddenly I saw her face freeze up as she was confronted with sandwiches named “Padrino” and “Pomodoro” and ingredients like soppressata, capicollo and a striata baguette. I quickly asked her if she wanted to go somewhere else and she anxiously nodded yes and we ate Mexican.
Brooks’ point is a good one – language is a primary way to include or exclude people. And it’s not just vocabulary; a southern accent is sure to draw discrimination here in Minnesota, while a mid-Atlantic, Boston or Brooklyn accent will engender zoo-like curiosity.
And Brooks’ point is that these dividers – both social, and their more concrete legal varieties, like zoning codes, transit strategies and the like, cost our economy dearly; Brooks quotes one estimate at 50%, which strikes me as high, but you don’t have to look at Minneapolis long to see that there’s a problem.
But it goes way beyond simple inclusion and economics:
American upper-middle-class culture (where the opportunities are) is now laced with cultural signifiers that are completely illegible unless you happen to have grown up in this class. They play on the normal human fear of humiliation and exclusion. Their chief message is, “You are not welcome here.”…
To feel at home in opportunity-rich areas, you’ve got to understand the right barre techniques, sport the right baby carrier, have the right podcast, food truck, tea, wine and Pilates tastes, not to mention possess the right attitudes about David Foster Wallace, child-rearing, gender norms and intersectionality.
The educated class has built an ever more intricate net to cradle us in and ease everyone else out. It’s not really the prices that ensure 80 percent of your co-shoppers at Whole Foods are, comfortingly, also college grads; it’s the cultural codes.
And the first rule of Urban Progressive Privilege club is, you never talk about Urban Progressive Privilege club. You deflect to White, Male Privilege (where the Urban Progressive white male has already declared nolo contendere), and deflect like mad.
As is maddeningly common with Brooks, you should read the whole thing.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
Independence Day, the national anthem, patriotism: fireworks are a national symbol.
Except in Minnesota where the governor believes Minnesotans are so much stupider than our neighbors in South Dakota and Wisconsin, we cannot be trusted to read and follow simple instructions: “Lay on ground. Light fuse. Get away.”
I suppose Wednesday, I’ll be reading news accounts about all the blind and fingerless Cheeseheads swamping the refugee camps in Stillwater after they accidentally burned down their own houses with bottle rockets. At least they had fun doing it. Me, I’m looking forward to lighting those little black ‘snake’ pellets to watch them writhe. Whoopee,
To be fair, they just legalized Sunday liquor sales. They probably figure too much freedom (also booze) will be too intoxicating.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
You figure that if you are forced to shoot somebody and you’re up-front with the cops, the prosecutor will see that you’re a Good Guy and will drop the charges, right? You can’t imagine the prosecutor will twist your words and play dirty tricks to cheat you out of your rights, all in a blind effort to appease a mob. That wouldn’t happen in Minnesota, right?
“In the hour-long interview with Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) investigators, Yanez repeatedly used the pronoun “it” instead of “gun” or “firearm.” Prosecutors told jurors that the language proves Yanez never saw a gun. However, prosecutors never played the video during its case, thinking it more strategic to introduce the footage last Friday during the defense’s case. It is common practice to play a defendant’s interview with investigators during the state’s case.
“The rules of evidence clearly allow for the statement’s admission into evidence during cross examination,” said a written statement issued … by the Ramsey County attorney’s office. “Strategically, we felt the statement would be best used for impeachment purposes on cross examination when the defendant took the stand in his own defense.”
But the move backfired [at trial] when Ramsey County District Judge William H. Leary III criticized the prosecution’s timing and refused to allow the video. Defense attorney Thomas Kelly objected to the prosecution’s effort, calling it an “improper impeachment” of Yanez and asserting that the state allegedly withheld the video in order to compel Yanez’s testimony.”
Twisting words. Dirty tricks. Mob waiting outside.
Here’s the really fascinating question: is this merely local politicians and bureacrats doing their best to achieve justice, but their best isn’t very good? Or is this part of a concerted effort at all levels to make gun ownership not only onerous, but even dangerous, for law-abiding citizens? Defend yourself and we’ll bury you, to make sure nobody else defends themselves.
That’s the problem; when people stop trusting the “Justice” system, every manner of conspiracy becomes perfectly plausible.
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
St. Paul Police Chief Axtell does not know what he’s talking about.
Gun violence is exploding in St. Paul. The Chief says “ . . . basically it’s yesterday’s fistfights are today’s gun fights.” But then he says it’s “ . . . a community health problem, this is a public health crisis.”
A health problem is caused by disease. The cure is quarantine and medical treatment for those infected, and sanitation to prevent spread of illness. Americans know very well how to handle outbreaks of disease. St. Paul does not have a public health problem.
St. Paul has a cultural problem. Perfectly healthy people are choosing to shoot each other instead of fistfight. We’re not willing to quarantine residents in Frogtown and there is no medical treatment, no vaccine that cures bad behavior. Bad behavior is cured by deterrence and punishment, to make bad behavior unacceptably costly to the actors.
When Charles Napier wanted to end the Hindu practice of burning wives alive on their husband’s funeral pyre, he explained to the priests: “This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.” The practice of suttee ended abruptly.
In fairness, it may be that the Chief knows exactly what’s going on in his city, but he’s afraid to speak the truth because the City Council is a bunch of liberals more concerned with signaling their virtue by mouthing politically acceptable platitudes than with protecting their citizens by enacting effective law enforcement measures. As long as the people dying are young Black men and poor children on the East Side, what’s the big deal?
Can we talk about adding another light rail line now? Because that’s a big deal. That’s something we care about.
I have to hope that there’s a lot of smart cops out there acting dumb because they want to keep their jobs.
The alternative? Remember – today’s police forces didn’t exist when the Constitution was written. I have a hunch they are more like the standing armies our forefathers feared than our current standing army is.
From the New York Times’ piece on the left eating itself at “progressive” Evergreen State:
For expressing his view, Mr. Weinstein was confronted outside his classroom last week by a group of some 50 students insisting he was a racist. The video of that exchange — “You’re supporting white supremacy” is one of the more milquetoast quotes — must be seen to be believed. It will make anyone who believes in the liberalizing promise of higher education quickly lose heart. When a calm Mr. Weinstein tries to explain that his only agenda is “the truth,” the students chortle.
I include the video link in the text. You can click on it. It won’t work.
Of course, it chronicled bullying; it documented the Evergreen Social Justice sturmabteilung trying to bully Professor Weinstein.
The left and their friends in social media are actively shutting down anything in their power that challenges the narrative.
At the “Pride” Parade in Minneapolis yesterday, the processijon got delayed 20 or so minutes by a BLM group that apparently couldn’t find the freeway.
After they’d had their die-in, they got up and spent the rest of the parade marching a block or two ahead of the rest of the procession.
But not before issuing a list of demands…to the Pride organizers.
Here they are – direct and unedited:
LIST OF OUR DEMANDS
- We demand that Twin Cities Pride honors the legacy and life of trans women of color and recognize Pride as the byproduct of their resistance of police brutality and repression
- We demand Twin Cities Pride combats State violence with the total elimination of police and law enforcement
I’m sure that’ll go over well.
- We demand Twin Cities Pride is accountable for their perpetuation of white supremacy and homonormativity and that they eradicate their normalization of these violent systems
I’m just gonna let that sit there like a big glob of goo.
- We demand Twin Cities Pride provide an exclusive healing space at future events for indigenous and people of color to process, rest, and restorative justice
“Process, rest and restorative justice” – Verb, Verb, Noun phrase?
Apparently grammar is an agent of white supremacy.
- We demand Twin Cities Pride divests from all corporations as they promote the marginalization, exploitation, and criminalization of marginalized communities
- We demand Twin Cities Pride funds and organizes a Town Hall alongside members from marginalized communities including but not limited to Twin Cities Coalition for Justice 4 Jamar, Native Lives Matter, and Justice4MarcusGolden
- We demand Twin Cities Pride provide radical reparations via redistribution of resources and monetary compensation to grassroots organizations of the coalition’s choice
And there we are; good old-fashioned extortion.
My big question: will the left manage to eat itself before it eats everything of worth in our society?