Student demos for a conservative cause

Les Mis is a truly misbegotten piece of literature, which has irritated me in the same way each of the times I have seen it. My sympathies are instantly on the side of Inspector Jobert and his attempts to put down the demonstrators in the streets. These radical nitwits have poisoned the wells of western civilisatin and are about to snuff out our entire way of life on behalf of equality, climate change and multiculturalism, three of the most inane causes ever invented.

But what is going on in Hong Kong is different. Same students, same demos, but this time on behalf of conservative and small-l liberal causes. There the students are fighting a desperate, and almost certainly losing battle on behalf of their desire to be governed by people of their own choosing according to their own values based on how things have been done in the past. Alas, their values are personal freedom politically and capitalism economically. They are therefore, as they say, on the wrong side of history, something that all of those fools on the left will immediately understand and therefore viscerally oppose everything these students are trying to preserve.

A study in self-delusion

This is a very long article that ultimately wore me out but even though written by someone on the left side of politics, gets to the heart of the matter. It is titled, I can tolerate anything except the outgroup and is about how we can let pass our true enemies who are really far away and reserve our greatest enmities for those who are nearby. The author, Scott Alexander, practices a very sophisticated form of self-delusion in his attack on conservative beliefs, but it is more interesting than usual. And it is nice that he at least sees some of what is wrong although will not finally grasp the point he continuously alludes to. Here is a bit of a summary:

Freud spoke of the narcissism of small differences, saying that “it is precisely communities with adjoining territories, and related to each other in other ways as well, who are engaged in constant feuds and ridiculing each other”. Nazis and German Jews. Northern Irish Protestants and Northern Irish Catholics. Hutus and Tutsis. South African whites and South African blacks. Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs. Anyone in the former Yugoslavia and anyone else in the former Yugoslavia.

So what makes an outgroup? Proximity plus small differences. If you want to know who someone in former Yugoslavia hates, don’t look at the Indonesians or the Zulus or the Tibetans or anyone else distant and exotic. Find the Yugoslavian ethnicity that lives closely intermingled with them and is most conspicuously similar to them, and chances are you’ll find the one who they have eight hundred years of seething hatred toward.

But he says a good deal more. I thought this was true, although it is not at all true about me. What has alienated me from my high regard for America in the past is how it has embraced the values of the Democrats almost across the board. But I can still see what the author means:

My hunch – both the Red Tribe [Republicans] and the Blue Tribe [Democrats], for whatever reason, identify “America” with the Red Tribe. Ask people for typically “American” things, and you end up with a very Red list of characteristics – guns, religion, barbecues, American football, NASCAR, cowboys, SUVs, unrestrained capitalism.

That means the Red Tribe feels intensely patriotic about “their” country, and the Blue Tribe feels like they’re living in fortified enclaves deep in hostile territory.

Here is the conclusion:

We started by asking: millions of people are conspicuously praising every outgroup they can think of, while conspicuously condemning their own in-group. This seems contrary to what we know about social psychology. What’s up?

We noted that outgroups are rarely literally “the group most different from you”, and in fact far more likely to be groups very similar to you sharing almost all your characteristics and living in the same area.

We then noted that although liberals and conservatives live in the same area, they might as well be two totally different countries or universe as far as level of interaction were concerned.

Contra the usual idea of them being marked only by voting behavior, we described them as very different tribes with totally different cultures. You can speak of “American culture” only in the same way you can speak of “Asian culture” – that is, with a lot of interior boundaries being pushed under the rug.

The outgroup of the Red Tribe is occasionally blacks and gays and Muslims, more often the Blue Tribe.

The Blue Tribe has performed some kind of very impressive act of alchemy, and transmuted all of its outgroup hatred to the Red Tribe.

This is not surprising. Ethnic differences have proven quite tractable in the face of shared strategic aims. Even the Nazis, not known for their ethnic tolerance, were able to get all buddy-buddy with the Japanese when they had a common cause.

Research suggests Blue Tribe / Red Tribe prejudice to be much stronger than better-known types of prejudice like racism. Once the Blue Tribe was able to enlist the blacks and gays and Muslims in their ranks, they became allies of convenience who deserve to be rehabilitated with mildly condescending paeans to their virtue.

It’s a spooky article since where it leads is to the disintegration of all community feeling for those of a different political perspective. But what it most importantly means is that groups from alien cultures and far different practices and beliefs [FGM, for example] become the allies of convenience for the left, meaning there is no assimilation required and the fracturing of American society continues apace.

At the end, the conclusion is the same old same old that what is needed is more tolerance only that the tolerance should be directed at the outgroups of the left. What really needs to happen is that there is less tolerance for the ruining of American society by assuming everything everyone does is just fine and none of anyone else’s business but their own.

I am personally in virtually all of the characteristics part of the blue team but my sentiments are almost entirely red team. There is nothing I or anyone else on the conservative side of things can do to stop the ruin, but this kind of smarmy smugness about Democrat virtue and tolerance does make me smile at the self-delusions these people have.

Why is this story not on the front page of every paper?

But at least it’s in The New York Post, Teen girls recall horrors of ISIS captivity:

Teenage girls who escaped the brutal clutches of ISIS terrorists have recounted a harrowing nightmare of beatings, torture, rape and degradation that included being forced to watch videos of men being beheaded.

The girls, members of the persecuted Yazidi minority from northern Iraq, say they were captured and sold or given as gifts.

“We would try to make ourselves look ugly,” an escaped girl, 15, told the Global Post news service. “Some women would cry or scream or fight, but it made no difference. They were always taken anyway,”

She said they were debased so badly that death, even by suicide, was more appealing than living under ISIS’s barbaric control.

“One girl hanged herself,” the teen said. “Another tried, but the ISIS guards stopped her and beat her very badly. No one else tried after that.”

One of the young victims said she became frail and sick because her guards gave them so little to eat.

Their captors also made them watch videos of beheadings of Yazidi men.

“In some [videos] they put the heads into cooking pots,” the anguished victim recalled. “Sometimes they would stand on them. There were so many heads. And they would ask us, ‘Do you know this one?’ and laugh.”

Another teen, a 19-year-old mother said her ordeal began when she tried to flee from her village in the Sinjar region of Iraq with her husband and infant child. ISIS vehicles caught up with them and others who were running, and forced the men to lie face-down on the ground.

The rebels executed boys as young as 14, she said. She watched as her husband was shot to death.

Clinging to her only child, the mother and other women were bundled on the backs of pickup trucks and taken to a holding facility. There, they were pressured to convert to Islam and given copies of the Koran.

“There was a big hall with three floors and each floor had five or six rooms,” the 15-year-old said. “They told us if we didn’t convert to Islam they would kill all the men in our families, so we said to ourselves, ‘It’s just words. In our hearts we are still Yazidi.’ So I did it to save my brother.”

No one doubts that these stories are true. It’s just that no one cares.

An instructive thread on community opinion

The Australian has published an article whose main message can be read from this single paragraph:

In a good community, we can empathise with our neighbours. We can empathise with Muslim people in our community that they are in a difficult spot because of the actions of a small number of extremists.

The comments thread at the Catallaxy blog in response to this article may be read as representative of conservative opinion in Australia. This is not untypical:

The religion of Islam, it’s teachings , it’s followers are committed to some extent or other to displacing the infidels and their laws. According to Islam, this can be achieved by submission or by elimination. Islam wants imposition of sharia. Those are the facts.

Smiling friendly moslems aside, every moslem believes in this, whether they enable it or not. Your article above exhorts us to reach out to our would be conquerors. You may not realise it but we, the Christian West, are in a struggle to keep our way of life intact. The wars going on in the ME are the overt battles. The more important battle IMO is the one being waged right here – in the blogs and media of the West. For the hearts and minds of everyday people. Because it is us, voters, who will either allow Islam to grow in our midst or halt that cancer.

You have chosen to be with the appeasers. So be it. There are however those who won’t give in to the false comfort of appeasement, like me. Islam wants to take away my way of life. Islam wants us changed. The way I see it if enough Australians reject Islam here, that will be prevented. I reject Islam and this Govts capitulation in not naming this enemy in our society is vile. I wont be reaching out to Islam.

Read the entire thread. It is quite instructive.

The most ignorant man in every room he enters

From The Age, ‘Bigger threat than terrorism’: Barack Obama signals Australia, India and China must improve on climate change:

The US President argued that the problem of climate change had surpassed terrorism as the biggest threat to life on Earth.

“For all the immediate challenges that we gather to address this week – terrorism, instability, inequality, disease – there’s one issue that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other, and that is the urgent and growing threat of a changing climate,” Mr Obama said.

The most ignorant man in every room he enters, not just because he is astonishingly devoid of much if any useful knowledge, but also because of the circles he travels in where everyone has earned their positions because of what they know. The UN is filled with total climate sceptics. Whatever they may say in public, there is not one country in which such beliefs are seriously harboured by almost anyone at the highest levels of political decision making. And it is not just Obama’s beliefs on climate that are so bizarrely empty but on almost every topic of importance today. Obama may be near unique in his ignorance of so much, or more likely, is simply trying to create as much damage to the West as possible with not a personal belief in sight.

And no sooner do I put this post together, but up on Drudge I find this: Obama’s breathtaking naivete at the United Nations.

President Obama on Wednesday delivered a speech at the United Nations filled with his usual soaring rhetoric of global collectivism and the importance of “international norms.” But the president also displayed a shocking naivete about global affairs, religion, Islam — a Pollyannaish interpretation on the state of the world and America’s role in it.

You can read it all but if you don’t know these things already you probably never will.

Broken people

For someone on the right, the people on the left have a decidedly crazy look about them. Not all, of course, but far too many. Here is an interesting article on The Leftist Mind Explained. The article was inspired by a comment from Glenn Reynolds where he wrote, “I’m beginning to think that most lefty movements are just about broken people trying to manipulate the rest of us so they can feel good about their broken selves.” It stuck with me as well since you really do want to make some kind of sense of behaviours and beliefs that are both clearly wrong and clearly destructive. This is how the article ends:

They all desire, in the kinds of abject Loneliness that fills their Souls like a diseased bile, to drag all of us down into the cesspit of their types of pathological Miseries. They are the armies of The Culture Of Death, the vanguard of Nihilism.

For centuries, the Western World was able to keep such attitudes confined to a small number of the population. With the spread and acceptance of Leftist Thinking in the last two hundred years, however, these various perverse ways of approaching Life have ascended to domination, a Hegemony Of Perversity, if you will. The reasons for this triumph are many, but they all bespeak of a Civilization that is in decline, one that is slowly committing suicide.

Well, maybe. I don’t know what drives them but I do know they terrify me. They are everywhere and if they cannot be stopped they will be the ruin of us.

The traditional refrain of the sociopath, the monster, the bully and the aggressor

From the comments thread at Catallaxy on “Breaking news at Endeavour Hills Police station”, where a terrorist was shot dead trying to murder two Australian policemen:

The one marginally more positive thing I can see in the wash up of this is that authorities are not pretending that this is anything but terror related as they have done in many other countries in similar situations . This kind of delusional thinking that is tantamount to coverup harms our ability to respond to future threats by masking militant Muslims in a cloak of respectability.

Having said that it would be hard to do otherwise in the circumstances. The guy was clearly a person of interest and clearly came armed and aiming to inflict injury or death.

But what is not so heartening is that as predictable as the tide, Muslim spokespersons are as good as claiming it’s the police’s fault.

This quoted on Andrew Bolt’s site:

”The AFP officer was stabbed a number of times, and the Victorian police officer was stabbed twice in the arm before he shot the man dead…

Ghaith Krayem, Secretary of the Islamic Council of Victoria, said he was a “little disappointed” with the police press conference after the incident…

“The police have come out very clearly and almost have said it was the young man’s fault, and I don’t know in the fall of time that may prove to be the case, but I think within a couple of hours I was disappointed…”

The Islamic Council of Victoria expressed “deep sorrow” over the incident, which left the officers in hospital in a stable condition…

“There needs to be a full and objective investigation into this incident to ensure that such a tragedy is never repeated,” the council said in a statement today.

“This tragedy highlights the real cost of a failure to deal with these serious issues and why we have made numerous calls on the Australian government to deal with the root causes of alienation and disaffection of people such as this.”

The same grievance bullshit that attempts to place blame on the victims – in the police force and in wider society who are the subject of this Muslim inflicted violence that we see time and time and time again overseas.

Let me state clearly, in every western country which has been infiltrated by Muslims, some of whom are motivated by a murderous rage against anyone not Muslim or not the right type of Muslim, the constant claim is one of alienation and grievance. This is how these people work themselves up. Even many of those who are not directly motivated by rage against the west too often appear to be susceptible to grievance language which then influences them to support those who are willing to act violently.

Grievance language is also how they cover their activities, because the mantle of victimhood and grievance against the western civilization is a value that they share with the Left, which provides them with cover.

The constant refrain of militants, even while physically abusing and attacking non-muslims is some thing like – “If only you stopped defending yourself we would not have to attack you”.

This is the traditional refrain of the sociopath, the monster, the bully and the aggressor. And this was what the Islamic Council of Victoria is pandering to. Predictably.

Tony Blair’s comprehensive strategy to counter religious extremism

Tony Blair’s seven principles in dealing with religious extremism, via John McTernan:

– Join the Dots. It is One Struggle
– The Problem is Getting Worse, Not Better
– The Challenge is a Spectrum, not Simply a Fringe
– Fight the Fringe; Speak Out against the Spectrum
– Support Modern-minded Muslim Opinion. They Are Our Allies
– East and West Should Work Together
– Education is a Security Issue

Here is Blair’s full essay.

Hillary Clinton – Saul Alinsky correspondence revealed

This is with certainty going to be a small story when it should be immense. The Hillary Letters tell us everything we ought to need to know to wish she never becomes president:

Previously unpublished correspondence between Hillary Clinton and the late left-wing organizer Saul Alinsky reveal new details about her relationship with the controversial Chicago activist and shed light on her early ideological development.

That she, like Obama, is on the far-left is perfectly clear to anyone who understands what being an Alinskyite means. Those who have been that way inclined at some stage in their lives, when they walk away from it are forever aware of both the power and the danger of such ideas. That Hillary and Obama have no record of having abandoned any of this is as good an indication of their current beliefs as one could have. That both have pursued policies as far to the left as could be imagined in a nation in which more than half the population describe themselves as conservative is only possible because of the media cover they receive. No one will ask, of course, but it would be interesting to find out her reaction to things like this:

“Dear Saul,

“When is that new book [Rules for Radicals] coming out—or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation?

“I have just had my one-thousandth conversation about Reveille [for Radicals] and need some new material to throw at people.

All this is hidden right before our eyes. It will not end well.

You can read the actual letters here.

Who should pay for dinner on the first date?

I’m glad to see that chivalry hasn’t completely died, although I do tend to see a bit of self-interest here as well, but only just a bit:

A survey released yesterday morning found that about 77 percent of people in straight relationships believe men should pay the bill on a first date. The survey, put together by the financial website NerdWallet, polled roughly 1,000 people who had been dating their partners for six months or more.

The company’s survey indicates that, in the early stages of courting, the pressure to pay falls primarily on men, but this imbalance hardly dissolves as the relationship progresses. Fifty-six percent of men foot the bill in full once they’re in an established relationship, and, even further down the line, 36 percent of men pay all of household bills, versus 14 percent of women. There’s not much in the way of historical data on the question of who pays for dates, but the findings of a 1985 poll suggest that very little has changed in the past 30 years.

As Ann Coulter once said, when it comes to dating, the boy should be the one financing the cost of research.