You know, there may be something to this

Nice to be on TV, I suppose, but the plot lines seem a bit farfetched. From a comment at Instapundit:

I think aliens control American politics, and use it as source material for an intergalactic reality show.

“In next week’s episode, watch as we switch the winner of the presidential race at the last minute. You won’t believe what happens to the supporters of the losing candidate!”



● Feminists ‘self-identify’ as males… to infiltrate men-only swim session.

● “A man with a violent criminal record is suing a battered women’s shelter for refusing to take him in…after getting drunk and becoming belligerent. So he went to a battered women’s shelter and demanded entry, claiming he identified as a woman. The battered women’s shelter is a faith based organization and it denied him entry. The man, you should know, does not appear to have taken steps to legally change his name nor to have surgery to conform to his supposed gender identity.”

● “Look, either we all agree that there’s such a thing as consensus reality, or we don’t. If you can change your sex just by saying so, you should be able to change your race too. If you guys expect me to accept Caitlyn Jenner, then I expect you to accept Rachel Dolezal. She’s a strong, beautiful black woman. And you can be one too.”

● “Last week, a U.S. District judge named George L. Russell III declared that the local high school in St. Michaels is violating the rights of a student named Max Brennan, who was born a girl but has decided he is a boy. (Like the parties to the case, judge, defendant, and plaintiff, we’ll refer to Max as a boy, for courtesy’s sake.) When Max told school authorities about his decision, they did what they could to accommodate him, calling him by his new name and referring to him with masculine pronouns. On Max’s behalf, they even subjected school staff to a ‘professional development workshop’ on the subject of transgender students. Max wasn’t satisfied. He wanted to use the boys’ locker room when changing clothes for gym class and showering afterwards. The school administration offered him instead the use of a ‘gender-neutral’ restroom where he could change, and gym teachers allowed him additional time to get to class. Max says he has been ‘generally accepted and recognized as male’ by his classmates. But when he used the restrooms to change clothes, he reported receiving ‘weird looks.’ A gay rights activist group called FreeState Justice volunteered to take the school district to court. Judge Russell agreed that not allowing Max full use of the locker room ‘harms his health and well-being.’ Max now has the right to shower with the boys, while the case continues its way through the courts. Doubtless some parents in St. Michaels are wondering why, all of a sudden, the law requires their sons to shower with a girl, just because the girl says she is a boy. They join many parents around the country under similar circumstances who are wondering the same thing. This is where [Ryan T. Anderson’s new book], When Harry Became Sally will come in handy.”

Finally, it’s may be behind the Commentary subscriber paywall, but if you have access to it, Sohrab Ahmari’s new article, “The Disappearance of Desire: The transgender movement’s missing element,” is a fascinating deep-dive read.

The universe may be defined as where everything is possible, but some things are just too outrageous even for intergalactic TV.

They believe they have a right and duty to keep you ignorant

Your choices are being limited by people on the left side of the political spectrum who prevent you from hearing alternative points of view because you might think these other views are actually correct. If they thought you would never agree with them, they would not try to stop you from hearing what these other points of view are.

It is an astonishing arrogance that Google, twittwr, Facebook, and other forms of social media – the “they” in the heading – believe they have the right and the duty to keep you from hearing other people’s opinions.

Open debate is the only defence against wrong opinion. Google stops you from hearing the truth at least some of the time, and perhaps as much as half the time. We should not put up with it. Totalitarians keep you from hearing other opinions that they do not agree with. Their aim is to take your freedom from you as best they can by preventing you from hearing opinions they do not think you should be allowed to find out.

Funny enough, you can find both Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto on Google, as you should. You just can’t find all of the videos from PraegerU,

Not only will they sell the rope used to hang them they will feel virtuous in making the sale

I knew enough of these corporate CEO bureaucrats from my days in the Chamber of Commerce, who are in reality no different from public servants. Unlike the genuine entrepreneurs who built their enterprises from the ground up, the ones who have taken over these large enterprises are often as left wing as a university professor in the humanities. This is Rita Panahi quoting Jordan Peterson on corporate virtue signalling.

“People who are doing this at the corporate level will rapidly get their comeuppance … If you’re operating within a capitalist environment like let’s say the executives and management of Qantas, who are being paid disproportionately well, you don’t also get to be a social radical. And you don’t get to salve your conscience for receiving a pay cheque that’s 300 times the pay cheque of the average worker by pretending you’re a social revolutionary. It’s an appalling sleight of hand.

“In addition, you don’t get to invite the radical leftists into your corporate utopia without opening the door to a major fifth column. If you are naive enough to think that the demand of the radicals for the transformation of your company is going to end with a few requests for language transformation then you’re a complete bloody fool.

“It’s staggering to me to watch the corporate elite types kowtow to the radical Marxists. They do it to virtue signal or because they’re feeling guilty or maybe because they’re facing genuine pressure and don’t want to stand up against it. But they’re playing a game that will punish them intensely.”

“In the early 1970s when it became absolutely untenable for anyone with any moral intellectual pretensions to be on the side of the Communists … the same doctrine went underground and transmuted into this postmodern dogma that completely dominates the humanities and social science end of the university curriculum and increasingly plays a determinative role in the legislative process at every level of government in the West. It’s the same old wolf in new sheep’s clothing.”

Lindsay Shepherd and Mark Steyn

On the off chance you think the generations coming through to replace us are in some sense onside with the notion of free speech and an open society, then watch this video. As they discuss, argument from the left is reduced to ad hominem forms of personal attack. Since everything is socially constructed everything must be socially deconstructed. White males believe what they believe because it is in their personal interests to believe it. Therefore, nothing white males have to say has the slightest value so far as understanding the world is concerned. Non-white, non-males have the answers and are the only ones anyone should pay attention to, all the more so since truth is relative and never absolute.

In the video, Mark Steyn talks to Lindsay Shepherd, the Teaching Assistant at Wilfrid Laurier University in Canada who became internet famous at the end of 2017, when three members of the WLU faculty attempted to destroy her life for having shown a short Jordan Peterson public television clip to her students. She had, however, recorded her interview and then released the recording to the media which stopped them in their tracks, and has, in fact, made her famous. Articulate beyond her years, a product of the modern left though she is, she is a bridge between us and the millennial generation. She describes herself as “the most left-wing member of her family”.

Here as well is the original recording of Lindsay’s inquisition by the faculty at Wilfred Laurier, worth every minute of the 43 minutes it takes to listen to it through.

And if you want to see where this is heading, you should look at this and this. More people in “the shut up business”, as Steyn describes it. However, as one commenter on the MS/LS video said:

Peterson’s command of facts, deep understanding of human nature and group behaviour, and wealth of experience with people in need is a reality the SJWs and post modernists cannot deal with. And it rings true to those who listen to him. And gives them something real to anchor too.

So there is hope, as faint as it may well be.

The Mark Steyn interview comes via Expression, Identity, and the Corruption of the Academy.

An absolutely certain test for detecting moronic ignorance

You want to know what ignorant morons look like? They are the people who vote no to this.

He created a 3m-high illuminated sign — like a vintage advertising billboard — that asks passers-by to vote on whether capitalism has benefited them. The votes are tallied on an electronic scoreboard….

In most iterations, the results had been roughly split between those in favour and those against capitalism.

Half the people in the wealthiest communities that have ever existed have no idea what allows them to enjoy the living standards they have! To vote no on whether capitalism has benefited them, as in has capitalism been a net plus in their lives, means a level of stupidity, ignorance and ingratitude that is beyond comprehension. Beyond dumb and deranged. Ignorance almost in its purest essence. It is also why we in the West are in such danger of having the socialists in our midst turn every economy, including our own, into the next Venezuela.

Conservatives are everywhere

Another completely dense article from Janet Albrechtsen, this time on Where have all the conservatives gone? Her first half sentence: “It is premature to read the last rites to Australian conservatism”. As if she’d know. Oddly, just the other day this same issue came up in a letter I was writing, in which I wrote in reply to someone else:

“Conservative” is not a list of policies but a state of mind that values the past and wishes to preserve what we have learned by heart so that it can be passed on to future generations. Border protection is the single most conservative policy of the present day. Lose on that, and everything else disappears. Zero tariffs is not a “conservative” policy in any sense I can think of.

So here is Janet going on about the same thing, but with hardly a sense of what that elusive thing called conservatism is. I will come to the comments in a minute, but first will take you to her last para:

Just as Ronald Reagan was once described as an optimist in a party that had acquired a habit of pessimism, Australian conservatives need a good dose of optimism before they can man up for a long battle over ideas that still matter today.

Missing entirely in her empty screed is mention of Donald Trump, the most conservative political leader of the past thirty years anywhere in the world, and a living example of what a conservative looks like and does. And then these, from the top down, in comments on her article at The Oz.

Mandy6 hours ago
For a prime ministership cut short by Turnbull, the Labor way, Abbott’s legacy is impressive :

stopping the boats, beginning budget repair (getting regulations & spending down), completing beneficial trade deals with Japan, South Korea and China, scrapping the mining and carbon taxes, agreeing to a second Sydney airport, ending wasteful corporate welfare, reducing the public service by 12,000, and abolishing hundreds of unnecessary government boards and agencies.

And, he has said he’s sorry for reneging on the pledge to repeal 18C. He’s acknowledged the wall of opposition he faced at the time – within the parliament and the lobby groups outside of it.He’s said he’s sorry for reneging, what more do you want?

Cultural leadership, no other contemporary parliamentarian can top this -Abbott’s memorable speech, self-penned, for the 2015 dawn service at Gallipoli. A snippet, “So much has changed in one hundred years but not the things that really matter. Duty, selflessness, moral courage: always these remain the mark of a decent human being. They did their duty; now, let us do ours.They gave us an example; now, let us be worthy of it. They were as good as they could be in their time; now, let us be as good as we can be in ours”.

And he’s still providing leadership to this day.From the backbench.Raising the parliamentary bar with contributions via interviews, self penned newspaper articles and speeches such as the Sydney Institute speech on immigration levels (and energy) and his “Daring to Doubt” speech for Global Warming Policy Foundation in London. And the toxic Turnbull and his Team’s reaction to Abbott speaking the truth? They attempt to shoot-the-messenger Abbott, because as Richo has noted, many resent the man they have already knifed, Tony Abbott, because he dares to demonstrate, day after day after day, that the man they chose to replace him as prime minister is a political dud.

sue14 hours ago
We had Abbott and you Janet worked against him in favour of Turnbull. If you have done some research and changed your mind, how about you say so.

Susan12 hours ago
Abbott did not walk meekly away from reforming Free Speech. You omit to tell what we all now know and that it was voted down multiple times in the Liberal Partyroom by your mate Malcolm and his Black hand gang. It was just another little game out of their long planned play book to undermine their PM (Abbott). You still refuse to give any credit to Abbott but it sticks in your craw Janet that Turnbull turned out to be such a vindictive dud, however had he not screwed you over in regards to the position on the Board over one article where you didn’t act as his cheer squad , I wonder if we would be hearing as much criticism of Turnbull from you as we do now?

I’m surprised you too are not making excuses and blaming Abbott, BJ and everyone and everything else for Turnbull’s bad polling. Fact is the man has no Political Judgement, has well and truly alienated what was once the Liberal (Now Turnbull Party) base and seems comfortable and happy for being responsible for driving up power prices, on steroids, now out of the reach of many struggling Families. Young kids and their parents in Australia, not a third world Country (yet), Australia in 2018 who are living without electricity thanks to Malcolm, Bishop, Frydenberg et al’s signing/ratifying the UN Paris agreement.

This is what happens when both Major Parties in Australia are left of centre and it is NOT in the best interest of Australia and its citizens.

Jon13 hours ago
Well Janet it looks like your push to depose Abbot has backfired. I’m pleased you have the grace to cover Turnbull as he is now and not as you hoped he’d be.

Unfortunately Abbot has been trashed so badly it is difficult for him to make a comeback. Who will you anoint this time?

Brian6 hours ago
Cory Bernardi obviously concluded, fighting for Conservative/Christian values within the LP was a pointless exercise.Without conviction at the top, nothing can be achieved. While Turnbull remains, nothing will change. I have concluded that unless a messiah appears on the horizon, (to lead us out of the moral & political wilderness) the abyss is beckoning for Australia

Glencoe12 hours ago
As everyone knows Tony Abbott is the best fighter the Conservatives in the Liberal Party has but Turnbull is too hateful and paranoid to let him loose and people like you, Savva, Van Oneselen and media have hounded him to death each time he starts a topic or comments on poor government policy. If let loose he would be eating Shorten and the Unions but making Turnbull look weak and we cannot have that.

Michael6 hours ago
I attended Jordan Peterson’s excellent event in Sydney last night. We oldies were well and truly outnumbered by young people, particularly young men. When he made a joke about ‘safe spaces’ at universities, the kids erupted with applause. There is hope yet, Janet.

Free trade and the modern left

From a note I wrote to a friend.

I have had two articles of mine put up at Powerline Picks, one I have done on tariffs and the other on Jordan Peterson, which Peterson himself tweeted a link to. My reason for mentioning them is that by concentrating on all of this, I have had a penny drop that I discussed in a note I wrote to someone else, which might interest you since we are both forever trying to unravel the latest scams and tactics of the left. These were the articles: Economic theory is all right in theory which dealt with tariffs and my Quadrant review of Peterson’s 12 Rules for Life.

Mulling the issues over, thinking of tariffs in the context of Peterson, it has very strongly come to mind that oddly, but almost with certainty, the left are now the big free traders because it is the most certain means they have at their disposal to bring our economies down and Western Civilisation along with it. They are no more pro-market than they have ever been, and in no sense are supporters of entrepreneurial capitalism, but with open borders structured to allow Chinese goods to undermine American manufacturing, especially when accompanied by mass immigration from third world hordes lacking any marketable skills, there has never been a better opportunity to bring the West down, and to do it with the connivance of large elements of the right. I don’t think PDT will have seen things as a coordinated set of actions, and perhaps it is just an uncoordinated series of policies that in sum all end up working in the same direction. Perhaps for him it was merely intuitive, in the same way it has been for me, in recognising what must be done to beat back the left without appreciating what the left is up to. But wherever his approach has arisen from, his actions are all necessary as part of a program to maintain the American economic system and its historical constitutional form of government in place even in the face of the kinds of challenges not even the Soviet Union could mount.

There is no need for a central committee of the left to work this out, but once various elements fall into place and their destructive value is recognised, their aim is to keep them where they are. The madness is that these are parody versions of the traditional policies of the right, which has led to an ocean of opposition from those who would normally be expected to support him. Will need to think these things through some more.

I have had some flack on my shared right-of-centre blog over supporting PDT on tariffs, but the flack really comes from the alliance of the Wall Street Journal and the governments of China, Mexico, Canada and Australia. I don’t know whether Trump sees these things as I now do, or he is just working things through one policy at a time, but I don’t know how this can be fought off. The single most important personal characteristic in looking at Trump may be his personal wealth since he cannot be bribed in the way the entire American Congress is at constant risk of being. If classical economic theory – which he is applying although he may not know that either – were not so accurate in creating wealth and jobs, it would truly be the end of the game for us in the West. It may be anyway, but here we are at least being given something of a respite and an opportunity to fight again another day.

Jordan Peterson in Australia

Sounds just like JBP everywhere else. And here he is talking to Bettina Arndt.

And if you are just looking for the highlights.

And with Leigh Sales on the ABC.

And on a supposed comedy interview.

This is how this last interview is described.

Controversial Canadian psychologist Dr Jordan Peterson explains to Tom why keeping his room clean is important, why identity politics suck, and why the ABC should be less Marxist.

And the heading is absolutely right: “Jordan Peterson DESTROYS Tom Ballard.”

And this is the audio from his presentation in Melbourne.

Jordan Peterson with Mark Steyn

From June 2017. About Free Speech. You might even wonder whether this conversation could happen today, never mind a decade from now.

Some quotes from JBP but you need to watch it all for yourself. And there is also Mark Steyn!

I’ve studied the development of totalitarianism for a very long time and one of the things I know is the issue of ceding control over language, and the Government has carelessly made a precedent and the precedent is compelled speech essentially.”

“I think I am a classical liberal in the old school sense. I am an individualist.”

In reference on the form of sex and gender education that is happening in schools, “people have no idea it is happening. . . . The average person has no idea that it is happening.”

“We take free speech for granted, we actually take our whole civilisation for granted and we don’t understand that it rests on certain foundation blocks and if you remove those blocks all hell will break loose. And I think our civilisation is a whole lot more fragile that people understand and it is also in a lot more peril than people understand.”

“We’re also in a situation right now where your right to say anything about religious beliefs, unless they’re Christian, is seriously in danger, and that’s so dangerous that it’s almost beyond comprehension. It puts us back in Mediaeval times.”

“The patriarchy is just Western Civilisation. Patriarchy is just a code word for that. Governed by their Marxist dogma and post-Marxist dogma, they think it needs to be re-tooled from the bottom up. It makes them natural allies of any other system that opposes our system.”

“Jacques Derrida may be is the most dangerous person of the last forty years.” His writings are the basis for “an all out assault on Western categories of thought. . . . Categorisation is the basis of cognition. And so he has basically made the claim that thought itself is an agent of oppression.”

“As the politically correct movement inches forward. . . . [The Social Justice Warrior types] find a hypothetically vulnerable group – it doesn’t matter what it is – and then they use them as a protective shield while they move incrementally forward and so if you object you are targeted as if you are picking on the poor vulnerable people.”

Why I had stood out was not that I was speaking in generalities but that “I had said there was something I would not do and so had drawn a line so it was the combination of generalities with specificity that made the issue real for people.”

“Many of the kids on the left equate argument for free speech with racism.”

“Why I took these issues on now is because I believe it will be worse later.”

Peterson on how culture wars are fought with some advice of my own

I went along to hear Jordan Peterson speak last night, and went early since I did have it in my mind that our own ANTIFA types might show up. I suppose it was this story that spooked me. This happened in Kingston, Ontario on the Monday of the same week he spoke in Melbourne on the Thursday.

A woman in eastern Ontario is facing numerous charges after taking part in a protest against a lecture by a controversial Toronto professor.

Police say a 38-year-old woman was arrested near Queen’s University in Kingston Monday evening. . . .

Officials say officers searched her backpack and found a weapon — a metal wire with handles commonly known as a garrotte.

But as it happened, no demos and a very very pleasant night. I won’t discuss anything of what he said during his presentation since he has a couple more to give, but will say he received the loudest applause I have ever heard for anyone, both when he came in and when he finished up. A wonderful evening of reflective thought.

What I will reprint however, as best I can, is his answer to the question that was asked by the lad sitting next to us, who is a trainee teacher, dismayed to the farthest extent about the cultural Marxism he finds at every turn. So his question (one of only five among the around 100 who were still queuing up when the Q&A ended) was how to push back when surrounded by ideological enemies. This, to the best of my recollection and according to my notes, was how he replied.

You are in a war.

If you go along with them you are going to lose.

If you try suicidal forms of resistance you are also going to lose.

The question is how do you fight “ideological possession”*?

You pay attention looking for alternatives and ways to oppose what you see.

But do not make any unnecessary enemies.

If you are going to move forward you need to make a plan and think strategically.

Don’t burn yourself up early. Play for the long run. Do it intelligently and move forward step by step.

You have to always think about what the people you are fighting can take away from you.

And while all that is right, the bit that is missing is a recognition of the crucial importance to help your friends. I am amazed and no little angered by the lack of mutual support for those who take largely the same side but have some difference which becomes all it requires for all too many to separate themselves and declare a fundamental discontinuity between their views and yours.

To take what ought to be a trivial example but is not, Donald Trump deciding for a variety of reasons to place tariffs on aluminium and steel. As it happens, his reasons are sound and sensible – starting from the imperative of ensuring that basic requirements for its war industries, along with shoring up electoral support in potential swing states. But even if you don’t like this particular policy, why join his and our enemies in building an anti-Trump case?

The left never ever on any issue allows the slightest deviance from its core policy front. There are no end of issues for which there is exactly one answer permitted. On our side, it is one thing to explore an issue and wonder about the pros and cons. It is quite another to be subject to some kind of reflex reaction – ideological possession if you will – which does nothing other than help tear down the side you need to succeed if we are not going to be swamped by the next turn of the election cycle.

*Ideological possession = Rote and unthinking answers to genuine social questions. Or as described by someone unnamed somewhere else on a comment on a Peterson video:

“The noise made by a person that has been so fanatically indoctrinated into an ideology that they’re able, quite without conscious thought, to generate a constant stream of sterile, inoffensive, thoroughly orthodox and politically correct platitudes that are almost (but not quite) wholly removed from real meaning and (by design) totally devoid of any visceral human feeling.”

Here are examples from that same Peterson presentation at Queens – but first turn the volume down.

Many of these are apparently students studying at the university.