This was not a borderline issue

If you don’t think that stopping the boats won the election for the Coalition you are completely out of it. Adani also mattered. But without both, we would have a Labor Government right now.

Speaking of which:

DEVELOPING: Trump announces tariff-avoiding deal with Mexico.

Pop the tequila and pass the guacamole — the US has struck a trade deal with Mexico that will avert tariffs on imports.

“I am pleased to inform you that The United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico,” President Trump tweeted Friday night.

“The Tariffs scheduled to be implemented by the U.S. on Monday, against Mexico, are hereby indefinitely suspended,” he added.

“Mexico, in turn, has agreed to take strong measures to stem the tide of Migration through Mexico, and to our Southern Border,” he said.

Related: Mexico Capitulates to Trump’s Tariff Threat, Deploys 6,000 Troops to Guatemalan Border to Curb Migration.

And that will be just a start. Incredible there are votes in open borders for the Democrats, since the certainty of maintaining an open border will be the submergence of everything that has made America the great country she is.

 

In defence of Professor Ricardo Duchesne

The following has been take verbatim and in total from The Other McCain. It is titled, Sociology Professor Who Quoted ‘Red Pill’ Sites Forced Out of Canadian University.

In 2011, University of New Brunswick sociology professor Ricardo Duchesne published The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, a critique of multiculturalism. In 2017, Professor Duchesne published Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age:

At this pivotal moment in recent Western history, Richard Duchesne tackles what may be the most crucial question for people of European descent:

‘What makes us unique?’

Casting aside the dominant cultural Marxist narratives and dismissing the popular media attacks on concepts of ‘whiteness’, Duchesne draws on a range of historical examples, sources and philosophies to examine the origins of European man, his achievements, and the nature of the Faustian spirit that has driven his innovation and creativity.

Last month, Huffington Post published an article detailing how Professor Duchesne was “peddling white supremacist views while the university’s leadership is unable or unwilling to intervene.” As a result, Professor Duchesne has now been forced into retirement:

A University of New Brunswick professor accused of being a white supremacist and denounced by more than 100 colleagues for his views on immigration is taking early retirement, the university announced on Tuesday.

Prof. Ricardo Duchesne provided his notice “to focus on his own pursuits as an independent scholar,” vice-president Petra Hauf said in a statement.

“We respectfully accept his decision and thank him for his 24 years of service.” . . .

Duchesne, who teaches sociology at the Saint John campus, has appeared on far-right podcasts and YouTube channels. He has also written about what he calls the “relentless occupation of the West by hordes of Muslims and Africans,” and asserts that “only out of the coming chaos and violence will strong White men rise to resurrect the West.”

He says he’s looking forward to retiring at the end of the month and pursuing independent studies.

He plans to write about “why European civilization was far more creative than all the other civilizations combined” and “why all European-created nations are being forced to diversify themselves through mass immigration,” he said in an emailed statement.

He will also address “why the mainstream media never allows any critical thinking about the mandated ideology of diversity,” he said.

Googling some of the phrases attributed to Professor Duchesne, I found a March 2017 article, “There Is Nothing the Alt Right Can Do about the Effeminacy of White Men,” a historically informed analysis of cultural decadence. Professor Duchesne cites such sources as Plutarch, Polybius, Sallust and Livy on the similar trend of decadence in ancient Rome. Interestingly, Professor Duchesne also cites “red pill” sites Chateau Heartiste and Return of Kings. He does this to refute their claim that feminism is to blame for the decline of the West, concluding instead that this decline is a consequence of historical forces:

The expectation recently articulated in a Counter-Currents article that reading about Rome’s glories can teach current White men to regain their valor and heroism is pure wishful thinking. White men today will never build up their “resolve as great as that of the Romans” by reading about the Romans. The Romans built their character, before and during the time of Cato the Elder, by living at a point in the historical cycle when anarchy and savagery demanded hardness, by working extremely hard as farmers, by living in a very patriarchal culture that had harsh laws and expectations, and by undergoing intense military training and warfare. The Rome of Cato was a civilization at its peak; the West today is senile and childless, its families in decline, preoccupied with appearances, and overall too lazy and comfortable.

Decline is irreversible. The relentless occupation of the West by hordes of Muslims and Africans is an expression of White male decadence and effeminacy. Only out of the coming chaos and violence will strong White men rise to resurrect the West.

Well, these startling assertions would make an interesting topic of debate, if only Professor Duchesne’s critics were willing to debate him, but instead they have sought to silence him, to terminate his employment and ostracize him as persona non grata. How odd is it that disciples of Marx and Lenin — advocates of revolutionary socialism — are tolerated in academia, but a professor who makes reference to Plutarch and Livy is condemned as a Thought Criminal? The point is not whether one agrees with Professor Duchesne’s racial beliefs or his bleak assessment of future prospects, but instead whether these beliefs can be the subject of open discussion and debate. There is a totalitarian tendency in academia that now seeks to silence certain perspectives by labeling them “hate speech,” and it’s never the Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries who are silenced.

Free speech is an ethical obligation

A interesting comment on an interview of Janet Fiamengo:

It appears that these students need an ethics course to explain the concept of rights and obligations. Free speech isn’t a right, it is an obligation, you fulfil your obligation by allowing your worst enemy to speak, they fulfil their obligation by ensuring that you can speak. If you only support those you agree with, and label everything you disagree with “hate speech” you have not fulfilled your obligation and have no right.

Here’s the interview, if you can stand the footage of the protestors she has had to deal with.

Toronto life

I suppose something like it could happen in Melbourne. And then there’s this: A Call to Slaughter Jews at Toronto’s Al Quds Day March.

If you don’t understand the reference, go to the link. And it just so happens that something like it did just happen in Melbourne: WATCH: Melbourne Al Quds Rally Participant: “Hamas Should Be Here”.

So while reading about that, I was also reading this: Spinoza and Friends about seeing the world as God might Himself. And then most unexpectedly, right in the middle came this.

I have followed Israel’s situation for nearly two decades now. I see what the Palestinians are up to and I see what the Israelis are up to and I conclude that peace will only come about when Israel extends sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Gaza and kicks out the Palestinians who refuse to recognize the Jewish state. Which means most of them. People call me right-wing. Most of my friends call me right-wing or worse. I barely talk to them now. I do not understand how they can believe in a two-state solution when the Palestinians, in word and by deed, proclaim their desire to liquidate the Jewish state and murder its people. Has not one Holocaust been enough? I understand people’s predilection for peace. It is an expectation normal to a democratic society. But the Arab Muslim world is not a democratic society and is not going to become one anytime soon. Why observe their world through western eyes? Do not excuse what they say or do by claiming it is a response to western arrogance, colonialism, or any of the other sins which so many have so wrongly laid at the doorstep of the West. As if peoples and countries have not been conquering and plundering each other since time immemorial! My friends would do better to read the Bible, but they don’t do that anymore either.

If you want peace, prepare for war, and if war comes, kill your enemies. Is that really the message? Whether it is or not, it is the message our enemies have in store for us, but one we cannot use ourselves.

AND THERE IS ALSO THIS: Toronto Muslim: Executing gays may sound “unfair,” but that’s sharia law and “it’s coming to Canada”.

The numbers are scary

From the English Spectator, this is the title: Muslims aren’t Europe’s new Jews and this is the sub-title: “They’re Europe’s new anti-Semites”. By Daniella Greenbaum Davis.

An ADL study from 2015 highlighted some interesting data regarding anti-Semitism within German society, and in western Europe more broadly. Eleven classically anti-Semitic ideas were posed to respondents. For each of the 11 statements, Muslims living in Germany had a much higher rate of responding “probably true” than did the overall population when asked the same question. Asked whether Jews “have too much power in international finance markets,” 74 percent of German Muslims agreed, compared with 29 percent among the overall population. When asked whether Jews “are responsible for most of the world’s wars,” 33 percent of German Muslims agreed, compared with 9 percent among the overall population. When asked whether Jews “think they are better than other people,” 40 percent of German Muslims living in Germany agreed, as compared to 16 percent for the overall population. And so on and on and on.

Needless to say, the numbers are scary in both directions. It’s horrifyingly that 51 percent of Germans think that “Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust.” It’s profoundly disappointing that in Germany, as in the US, charges of anti-Semitism have become a popular way to delegitimize political rivals. The right and the left fling accusations at each other, but both sides are more concerned with scoring ideological points than with the  safety of Jews who are suffering increased attacks both physically and online.

More at the link, all equally depressing but she ends with some useful advice.

Now is also the time for Jews, in Europe and in the US, to recognize where their friends-for-now, or at least their defenders, are on the political spectrum.

Globalisation is well on the way to bringing us to ruin

This is an exceptionally good article by Peter Smith at Quadrant Online whose title provides little insight into what is to come: In Determined Pursuit of Unhappiness. It’s about the way in which our political class is attempting to demonstrate a virtue signalling globalist agenda by selling out the people who put them into office. This is near the start but is only a prelude, but an important prelude to what comes after.

There is a fetish with free trade among globalists. Only heretics object. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade took effect from the beginning of 1948. It was succeeded by the World Trade Organization from the beginning of 1995. From around 10 per cent of world GDP in 1948, international trade has since burgeoned to be now around 25 per cent. The free trade agenda has been driven primarily by the libertarian-cum-classical-liberal side of the political divide. Let me be heretical. There is no well-based rationale for free trade. Unless, that is, you think that maximising the availability of cheap stuff outweighs all other considerations.

Free trade brings significantly reduced industrial diversity within nations. It brings a loss of skills. It brings entrenched regional unemployment and despair. It brings long and vulnerable supply lines which threaten national security. International trade is like cabbage, broccoli and other leafy greens. Some is an essential ingredient of a balanced diet; yet more is very good for you. But they don’t make for a complete eating regime. Let me be clear, the issue is not one of trade versus protection. It is about the extent to which the interests of all of the citizens of a nation are brought into account by their political representatives when they are eliminating trade barriers. The wholeness, integrity and security of the nation-state should not be bartered away for a mess of pottage.

But that is only part of what he is trying to explain. This comes closer, found towards the end:

Globalisation is well on the way to bringing us to ruin. In principle, the remedy is simple. We, the people, need to elect politicians whose overriding goal is to create the conditions which preserve and nurture the life, the liberty and the happiness of the citizens of their nation-state; who will always promote their country’s claims over the claims of others; who, even though President Trump has said it, will always put their country and its citizens first. However, in practice, there is a sting in this tale (to corrupt an idiom). Perhaps, in this current age, most difficulty lies not with a paucity of potentially sound-thinking politicians or would-be politicians. Maybe it lies with “we, the people”.

Seriously, you should read it all.

Death by education

A university professor almost invariably knows nothing about the history of the culture we live within. The compartmentalisation of knowledge has left almost every discipline filled with cultural morons, and even where such knowledge ought to be integral to the subject – sociology, say, or history – those who reach the professorial level are as ignorant as school children. They have no idea what other societies are like, or even our own at an earlier stage of history. And beyond that, their own socialisation is towards some fantasist version of what might even be possible given the crooked timber of humanity. Which leads to this: The Death of Merit and the Race to Mediocrity in Our Increasingly Marxist Universities. Here’s some with more at the link.

There are 756,900teachers and professors in Canada, and 5.2 million in the U.S. Almost all of these professors and teachers are daily resolutely and relentlessly attacking Western culture, rejecting American culture, and advocating cultural Marxism.

How did this come about? During the 1960s and 1970s, two converging social movements transformed the culture of education. One was the adoption of Marxism by a wide range of North American university professors in the social sciences and humanities. The other was the widespread adoption of feminist theory. Together, Marxism and feminism redefined North American society as a hierarchy of oppression, with white, patriarchal capitalists at the top, and poor lesbians of color at the bottom. All citizens were redefined as members of racial, economic, gender, sexual, and ethnic classes, with people of white oppressing people of color, males oppressing females, rich oppressing poor, heterosexuals oppressing LGBTQ++, Christians and Jews oppressing Muslims, and so on. This approach is called “social justice” theory.

Having myself come out of the university system of the 1960s and 1970s, I was not only there at the start but also part of the transformation. But we had the rock solid framework of our cultural inheritance to buffer ourselves against our own ignorance and stupidity. Now we are the framework. It is rotting timber that will soon lead to the overturning of our culture which will fall to enemies who will bring on a Dark Age of such blackness that it may be centuries before we become universally enlightened enough to understand the loss that will now be taking place.

The death of Western civilisation takes another step forward

Here are the opening paras of David Solway’s A Professor Who Argues Against Multicultural Ideology and for Western Exceptionalism Now Fears for His Job. Of course he does. For most of those he is describing, they won’t even notice the Dark Age when it comes.

I have met University of New Brunswick sociologist and co-founder of the blog Council of European Canadians Ricardo Duchesne only once and found him reserved, thoughtful and modest. A brilliant writer and genuine scholar, he has authored two impeccably-researched volumes on the history of Western civilization and the settler domestication of pre-industrial lands.

In an earlier article for PJ Media, I had occasion to mention Duchesne, who writes in Canada in Decay — one of the most important books in our national literature explaining the emergence of the ideology of immigrant multiculturalism — that Canada is an extreme, though not unique, example of impending ethnocide, “promoting its own replacement by foreigners from other races, religions and cultures.” As Duchesne points out in The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, the same form of national self-deprecation we note in Canada is at work in most Western nations today.

Before multiculturalism took root, Duchesne argues, Canada was not an immigrant nation, as the cliché has it, but a European nation built by settlers and pioneers. The same formulation applies to the U.S. and Australia. He notes a critical difference between categories of newcomers: pioneers create, immigrants contribute (at their best). Multiculturalism, however, which radically changes the identity of a country, is neither a creation nor a contribution; it is “an experiment imposed from above.” Tensions inevitably arise between the rapidly shrinking European majority and the multi-ethnic, culturally alien brew that is displacing it.

Duschesne lays out his agenda in The Uniqueness of Western Civilization. His central contention, he writes, “will be that the West has always existed in a state of variance from the rest of the world’s cultures,” divergences that include, among a plethora of others, “the ‘Greek miracle’, the Roman invention of the legal persona, the Papal revolution, the invention of mechanical clocks, the Portuguese voyages of discovery, the Gutenberg revolution, the Cartographic revolution, the Protestant Reformation, the ‘rational’ mercantilist state and the ‘industrial enlightenment.’” He has no doubt that the “ideals of freedom and the reasoned pursuit of truth were cultivated and realized in the course of Western time.”

Predictably, Duchesne has been attacked as a white supremacist in the leftist media — The Huffington Post, the CBCGlobal TV, and other venues — and by an open-letter cabal of 25 of his UNB colleagues engaged in a war against “hate” — that is, against anything that disagrees with their anti-Western ideology. He will almost certainly find himself under formal investigation by the university, which is now reviewing complaints against him. The administration is actively seeking student grievances to lodge against him and there have also been requests for complaints in social media from the student union representative.

Duchesne is now in the impossible position of responding to a loaded question, that is, one that contains an unjustified assumption and presupposes its own answer, of the “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” type. Such question-begging is a rhetorical sleight of hand that works as a form of entrapment — the defamatory “loaded” technique that culture hero Jordan Peterson, for example, has been regularly subjected to. In Duchesne’s case, the “white supremacist” tag is integrally associated with his name, as if one were a substitute for or translation of the other. The implicit question runs something like: “Have you renounced your white supremacy yet?” or “Are you still a white supremacist?”

The West must awaken to the fact

Referenced among the comments on this thread: the concluding paragraph of Greg Davis’s 2006 book Religion of Peace? Islam’s War Against the World:

“The West must awaken to the fact that it is facing nothing less than the resurgence of the greatest war machine in world history: an ideology that holds the killing of others, the plundering of their wealth, the conquering of their lands, the enslavement of their people, and the destruction of their institutions to be among the highest virtues and the stepping stones to salvation. Islam, while it continues to lack a centralized political structure, is nonetheless reacquiring the means of war it has used to such deadly effect in the past. Yet it seems that the secular West today is determined not to hear the bad news. It is hoping against hope that things are not as bad as they seem. It is hoping that the myriad acts of violence around the world done in the name of Allah are somehow not indicative of ‘real’ Islam. It is hoping that Muslims throughout the world calling for the destruction of America and Europe are just blowing hot air. It is hoping that Islam — a religion founded by one of history’s great warlords; a religion that waged wars of aggression and conquest for a thousand years, that slaughtered and enslaved untold millions and invented modern genocide, and that today is the only force in the world that produces terrorism, suicide bombings, hostage-taking, organized rape, and massacres on a global scale — that this strange, seething, violent mass is somehow ‘a religion of peace.’ Rejecting this fiction and standing up to be counted will determine whether or not we survive the twenty-first century.”

Jordan Peterson interviewed by Dennis Prager

The idea that Peterson is not one of the best advocates for the side of reason and conservative values is again shown to be absolute suicidal, self-defeating nonsense. If you don’t agree with someone 100% is no reason not to welcome the 90% of what you do agree with. And if you don’t agree with 90% of what Peterson says, you are not a conservative anyway.