A local friend of mine posted a link to this National Review article earlier today: Chick-fil-A to End Donations to Christian Charities after LGBT Backlash
The article follows from the headline, but feel free to read it if you wish.
This was always going to happen.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb once wrote about the power of intolerance, and the concept is very applicable here.
Let’s say you’re cooking a meal for a group of friends, and you chose pork. Now, everyone who can eat pork is obviously okay. The Jewish guy might not eat the pork due to his religious beliefs, but he’d probably attend anyway. Maybe he’ll bring something he can eat along with him to cook up or just pick at the non-pork side items. His religion forbids him from eating the pork, but his religion does not concern your eating habits. Invite an extremist Muslim, and he’d want to kill everybody for eating the pork (a moderate one may just refuse to attend).
To be intolerant toward a practice personally (the Jew in the pork example) does not give you any power over the guy cooking the food. But to be intolerant toward it generally (the Muslim in the pork example) gives you veto rights over the meal, unless the host chooses to be fine with not inviting you (and the attendant social consequences).
How does this relate to Chick-Fil-A? I mean, besides the fact that “attendant social consequences” in their case resolves to roundabout 50% of their entire customer base?
Well, Leftists are intolerant generally with regard to patronizing organizations who go against their political orthodoxy. Chick-Fil-A has been losing some amount of money – only they probably have a good idea of how much – due to this intolerance. Furthermore, the price continues to go up. Leftists continue to make a bigger and bigger issue of this. Leftists actually got restaurants blocked in some places over this. At some point, it could easily threaten the company’s existence, and the leadership knows this. They pay X dollars for staying closed on Sunday, and were fine with that. But to donate to the ‘wrong’ charities costs them an increasing and ultimately unknown future price which could eventually drive them out of business.
Rightists may, for a while, be lackluster about Chick-Fil-A after caving, but ultimately they lack the Left’s general intolerance, and their desire to eat good chicken will overturn any Rightist boycott. It’s not enough to overturn Leftist boycotts – at least, not forever.
Thus the Left wins, and the most intolerant wins.
Rightism suffers from a weakness which has long been exploited by the political Left. Ultimately, Rightists generally believe that politics must serve man. Eating well supersedes the political beliefs of an organization in all but the most extreme cases. Leftism reverses the order. Man must serve politics. Each organization’s political stances are hugely important, and perhaps more important than the products and services offered.
Remember GamerGate and Brianna Wu? Brianna was a “game developer” who made an atrocious game called Revolution 60 (although nowhere near as bad as Zoe Quinn’s Depression Quest). With poor graphics that looked like the game came from the mid-90s (despite using a modern game engine), and atrociously terrible art, design, and plot, Revolution 60 was a failure in every respect.
Yet while Brianna Wu stood against the supposed racist, sexist bigots of GamerGate, SJWs continued to praise the game. When Brianna Wu made a political misstep, I remember the SJWs turning on her and saying “finally, we don’t have to pretend to like her game anymore.”
Politics above all else. That is the mantra of the intolerant Left, and it guides them to what they must support, and what they must boycott. And until that changes, expect every organization that is challenged by them to eventually cave-in to their demands. Some may last longer than others, and all things considered, Chick-Fil-A lasted a very long time indeed.
But in the end, all will surrender to them, unless Rightists become equally intolerant in turn.
Politics has become exhausting to me of late. It is quite difficult to summon the energy required to care overmuch about it these days. Everywhere I look, it’s the same story. When Leftism has the reins of power, they push through plenty of their agenda. When Rightism has the reins, Leftism manages to stonewall, delay, throw up procedural roadblocks, etc… preventing much, if any, claw back.
David Hines is fond of explaining that Leftists are just better at this game. They hustle more, they organize better, they are more ruthless and practiced in the Machiavellian arts. Frankly, it’s all true. Rightist intellectuals – for what utility the term might have – tend to be antisocial to some degree. It’s probably related to our preferences toward individualism. It is difficult, if not impossible, to muster our full strength the same way Leftists do.
And so the Overton Window slides ever-further leftward, and there’s very little any of us can do to stop it. Sometimes, with Herculean effort, we can slow it down for a time, but that is all.
Leftism has won. It won a long time ago. It won before I was born.
Much of the frustration we see from Leftists directed toward Trump is probably because they thought the final demographic victory had come, and even our ability to slow them down was a thing of the past. All that remained, they thought, was the mop up action. Our final bastions, like the Second Amendment (and the First) would be surrendered.
Trump summoned some hidden reserve of Rightist strength for a final defense. American Rightists, and the President himself, are now under political siege, having decided against surrender. Assault after assault has been made against the walls. Tunnels have been dug underneath them to soften them. Quisling traitors from within the gates have been propositioned and tempted into action. It has been relentless. Yet so far that final siege continues on. For how long is anybody’s guess.
Can a repeat of the 2016 miracle happen again? I don’t know. Can Trump stave off impeachment? Can the hung Congress be held another term? Your guess is as good as mine.
But Leftist victory is still assured in the end, eventually. Why? Because our actions are almost always defensive in nature. This means that whatever territory they gain becomes a permanent gain for them. Until recent years, even defensive action was deemed too hasty. Better to voluntarily surrender things to the Left at a relatively slow, but consistent pace. David Hines is right about that much, at least. If Rightist tactics do not change, if they cannot organize, they will fall, no matter how well-manned the walls are against the enemy.
Give the Leftists credit for their unceasing dedication to their cause. When one avenue of attack fails, they immediately seize upon another, and another, and another. They never stop. They are political terminators and we are the collective John Connors. Of course, Girrrrrrlpower Hollywood made sure to kill him, too, in their latest craptastic sequel.
This won’t continue forever, of course. Leftist regimes eventually move too far to the Left (see: Venezuela) and collapse of their own internal contradictions (see: USSR). But does that do any of our generation any good? Does it even do any good for our kids? It will probably be a struggle for generations. And there is no guarantee we will ever claw back to freedom again, though one hopes.
I’m sorry to be such a pessimist, but I don’t see the United States lasting much longer. And I don’t see Rightists winning back their country, not even through bloodshed, for despite all the talk of the boogaloo, and the many arms we possess, we lost the Culture Wars, badly. In any armed conflict, we will be the bad guys. The moral high ground is theirs. Most Rightists know this at some level, that’s why there has been no boogaloo, no one willing to fire the first shot, or light that powder keg like an Austrian Archduke.
That doesn’t mean I think this is hopeless, mind you. I just don’t see any political way to fix this mess, and I don’t see any violent way to do it either. Which means we probably have to wait out the inevitable Leftist collapse; keep something of our views and way of life intact (and arms buried) for the time when the Leftists grow overconfident, when they begin their inevitable infighting and self-cannibalization, when their economic system falls apart like a house of cards.
Maybe then a boogaloo would work. Or maybe then a boogaloo wouldn’t even be necessary (though perhaps some helicopters would be).
Or maybe we just need to get off this rock and colonize space. Leftist lunacy is ultimately incompatible with the natural world, despite their obsession with environmentalism. Sooner or later reality must intrude on their little fantasies, and only our vast wealth and technological sophistication enables them to be so damned wasteful. Ancient tyrants could only marvel at the amazing levels of wastefulness we have been able to sustain.
Waste of that sort is fatal on the frontier. Even the Puritans had to give up their pseudo-Communist fantasies when presented with life on the frontier. Learn or die, those are the only two options. It may very well be that freedom can ultimately only sustain itself on the frontier, where the punishment for totalitarian, utopian ideas is death.
But that is all speculation. For now, exhausted as I am of all this, I suppose I must go back to the walls and do my part to slow the Leftist advance. Damnit, friends… there’s a shitpot lot of them out there.
The concept of inbreeding dangers is well known in biology – the more often the family tree intertwines, the greater the dangers of congenital birth defects – those defects that are in the genes.
Most of us carry some defective genes – we might only be aware of the dominant ones. Recessive genes, as they only represent when the other parent also passes one on, may ‘hide’ for generations.
Those recessive traits will naturally turn up more often when both parents share common ancestors. Such was a problem with many of the ruling families of Europe in the mid- to late-20th century. As the number of royal families dwindled, their heirs had fewer choices for partners.
Marriage outside of the extended family? This led to less stability in the power elite, who had less of a stake in supporting the monarchies.
The same dynamic comes into play with some cultures that limit their breeding pool to extended family members. In some parts of the world (most notably with Muslim cultures, Arabic or not), marriage with even relatively close family members is encouraged – cousins, uncles, etc.
What has this led to?
Astounding levels of genetic diseases among these families.
I don’t see this changing much soon. The practice, as mentioned above, also increase group/familial cohesion, and keeps the money (bride-price) in the family. Other than forcing genetic testing on prospective spouses before issuing a visa (unlikely in the current climate of Western Countries, and likely to lead to cheating on the tests), I don’t see this changing in the near future.
My suggestion? A complete ban on immigration for a generation or two. It’s the solution that finally began to get the Sicilians to marry outside of the gene pool.
By 1930, more than two-thirds of immigrants had applied for citizenship and almost all reported they could speak some English. A third of first-generation immigrants who arrived unmarried and more than half of second-generation immigrants wed spouses from outside their cultural group.
The Immigration Act of 1924 virtually shut down Italian immigration (among other groups), and led to their assimilation through intermarriage to other groups.
If a person chooses to marry someone from “the Old Country”?
Fine. You can either live apart until such time as that person qualifies for NON-family visa status, or – my preference – go to that country and live there – permanently. No, your citizen status should NOT transfer to your children, as you will be subject to the laws of your spouse’s country. Naturally, those serving in the US military are exempt.
Add on a provision that no person who has been naturalized may themselves sponsor another immigrant, and you’ll go a long way towards reducing chain migration.
Is this a sign that I’m anti-Non-Whites?
In America, at this time, we have a lot of indigenous citizens who, as far as I am concerned, get first call on any charitable or government assistance to reach economic independence. Americans First.
St. Crispian’s Day – October 25.
This article by AP highlights the extreme case of Zimbabwe, where the collapse of the society, along with a drought, have brought the country to a near-standstill.
What I found interesting was the passivity of the people, who line up at the public wells, waiting hours for their ration of water. They are angry at the government, who they believe should supply the water – somehow.
Claudius Madondo, chairman of the residents association controlling the line, said nearby wells were no longer functioning, forcing the rationing. Some of the people waiting heckled him.
“Nothing is working in this country, how do we survive?” Hatineyi Kamwanda, another resident, said. “We can’t even use the toilets, the children are not going to school because of this and now we fear cholera is going to hit us again.
“The president should treat us as human beings, we voted for him.”
The idea that a vote should translate into favored treatment is common to many of the Impoverished Helpless.
Bloomberg blames government mismanagement, that makes a normal drought situation worse – MUCH worse.
Zimbabwe is in the grip of a nationwide drought that’s depleted dams, cut output by hydropower plants, caused harvests to fail and prompted the government to appeal for $464 million in aid to stave off famine. It’s disastrous for a nation whose economy has been driven to the brink of collapse by two decades of mismanagement, meaning the authorities can’t afford to effect repairs, let alone extend water access to a burgeoning urban population.
For more detail on the post-Mugabe era, see this link.
Naturally, blaming corrupt government is NOT a tactic that will further Leftist aims. So, what else can they do?
Blame Climate Change.
“Climate change does not see boundaries or borders,” said Tich Zinyemba, head of the public weather service at Zimbabwe’s Meteorological Service Department. “Some of the things which we are seeing now such as prolonged droughts, dry spells are as a result of climate change.”
This paper on the historic droughts provides more background, but still is heavily reliant on government intervention and top-down projects.
Few of the available sources have alternative remedies to begging, demanding, and pleading with 1st world countries to pony up the dough to get Zimbabwe out of the rut it’s in. What is NOT generally considered is the effect that intervention at the “boots on the ground” level might have.
In drier areas, scanty rainfall for a few years can kill vegetation permanently and poor land-practices only make it worse.
Heritage has some figures about the problems of the country, but few solutions.
Surprisingly, the most thorough treatment of Zimbabwe’s condition, both past and present, is Brittanica. A surprise to me was this stat:
Zimbabwe has one of the highest literacy rates in Africa, with nine-tenths of the population being able to read.
Keep in mind, what 3rd world countries consider literate can mean something as basic as: can write own name. I’m not kidding about that; when I was in college, I had opportunities to talk with many non-Americans. In that process, I learned about the vast differences between official statistics and reality in many parts of the world.
But, Brittanica has (somewhat buried near the bottom of the entry) acknowledged the impact of dispossessing the landowning White population.
…a law was passed in 2002 that allowed Mugabe to pursue an aggressive program of confiscating their farms, forcing more than half of the country’s white farmers to relinquish their property and rendering tens of thousands of black farmworkers homeless and unemployed. As was the case in the 1990s, property was often claimed by politically connected individuals with little or no farming experience rather than by the landless peasant farmers or war veterans who were supposed to benefit from the redistribution program. The government’s lack of forethought in forcing out the white farmers and not replacing them with experienced farmworkers contributed to a significant decline in agricultural productivity; this, as well as drought, led to severe food shortages.
When your neck is injured from shaking your head at the latest Leftist idiocy.
Ya’ know, I used to read Heinlein’s books, and he always talked about the Crazy Times that preceded those future civilizations. Rampant, unpunished crime, extremely partisan and divided citizens, and – by the standards of a society that functioned – complete anarchy and chaos.
Little did I understand that the Left would take that storyline as an instruction manual.
The Impeachment Frenzy is upon us. Damn the evidence, and rush to judgement, which is a terrible idea for justice.
Which, is absolutely the point. If Shiff-for-Brains and Palsied get their way, the whole thing will be over by the time their supporters start their Halloween festivities. That celebration is their favorite, as they dress as usual, and scare the hell out of all of us.
How is all of this ready-made accusation/trial/conviction package possible? Normal investigations take months, if not years to put together.
Behold Lynching In a Box!
The attorney for the – Not-Quite Whistleblower – has written the Acting Director of National Intelligence to express concern for his client’s safety, using off-the-cuff comments Trump made to lay the groundwork for NOT ‘testifying’, or ‘testifying’ in seclusion. I put that in ‘single quotes’, as I’m hard put to understand how you can testify about something you haven’t seen or heard, or otherwise directly verified.
Apparently, Andrew P. Bakaj, Lead Attorney for the Intelligence Community Whistleblower, went to a special law school, where the distinction between evidence, and rumors, hearsay, and gossip, weren’t in the syllabus.
Great. Nothing says “full and fair investigation” like a Star Chamber.
Good thing we have the Dissident Media to provide some perspective.
Americans have a mixed relationship with celebrities. In some ways, they are our icons, our saints, a replacement for religious worship in a time of increasing secularism. In other ways, they are our devils. Miley Cyrus urinating in the streets, Kardashians videotaping their antics under the sheets.
Celebrities have usually been constructs, their public personas at odds with their private eccentricities and foibles. Marketers and media talking heads craft their images, setting them up as icons against a backdrop of quasi-religious mockery. Beyonce is fawned over by her attendants as some kind of goddess.
But once upon a time, celebrity fame was at least tied to something real. Elvis could sing. Elizabeth Taylor could act. Cindy Crawford was beautiful. Talent and hard work were prerequisites to success. By many accounts, Michael Jackson’s family were slave drivers, pushing him, prodding him. Many celebrities likely have similar stories.
The formula was talent + hard work + luck. You needed that last little bit. Some talent scout in that dive bar you were singing in, perhaps. Or a friend of the family who knew someone in Hollywood. You needed that break. But only those who had the gifts and put in the work could take advantage of that break when it came.
The Kardashians proved that talent wasn’t really needed anymore, and it was questionable how much “hard” work they really did. The Kardashians were among the first to be famous for being famous. They were the chicken and the egg rolled into one sexually-charged, quasi-pornographic package made for mass pop culture consumption.
But even if we cannot resolve the Kardashian paradox easily, there was something there. Some preexisting OJ Simpson-derived fame. Some kind of bizarre facsimile of “work” at maintaining their circular fame. They were somehow anointed by the media and by popular culture, but something was still brought to that table, even if weak and ephemeral.
Greta Thunberg and David Hogg represent a new breed of celebrity, a wholly-fictional creation of marketers and journalists: the anointed activist. In David’s case, we may say that at least he was there when the shooting took place that supposedly drove him to activism.
Greta further lowers the bar.
She merely recites talking points delivered by others of similar political mind. She is a kid at the spelling bee, rattling off her letters. Her winnings? A Nobel prize nomination, for one. A great mural put up to honor her, for another. What has she done? What new thing has she created? Where did she come from?
In popular culture, we may create icons out of wholly fictional cloth. Or we may cancel those who actually did something over a mean high school tweet. Cancel culture allows those same marketers and journalists to cancel the fame of anyone they do not like. Although, at least for the nonce, journalists can likewise be cancelled.
They giveth. They taketh away. If we’re lucky, they get taken away too.
All of this is artificial. The Right and the Left argue over the statements Greta spews over the airwaves. But it’s rather like arguing whether or not you like the cut of the emperor’s clothes.
Who will say that the emperor has no clothes?
Like the Kardashians, when you strip away the pop culture iconography, when you wash away the anointment oils of the media, there is nothing left. The product is the packaging. There is nothing here. The emperor has no clothes.
Zoe Quinn, a “game developer” who created what is, in essence, a barely-formatted word document for all of its “complexity” cheated on her boyfriend with five guys. When her boyfriend later wrote a screed about how bad this was, and what she did, this triggered a chain of events that had Zoe Quinn, fake game developer, being granted an audience at the United Nations.
For what? A domestic dispute in which she was the abuser? Not only is talent or hard work no longer a prerequisite, there appear to be no meritocratic standards at all.
Journalists and marketers reserve for themselves – or at least try to – the ability to manufacture fame, or to cancel it, for any reason whatsoever. It is trivially easy to cancel anybody. Ever said something hasty on the Internet? They will find it. Ever made an insensitive joke? They will find out. If you pass that test – somehow – then surely something can be taken out of context. Scrub a word here, cut off the beginning there, and you have a racist quotation. Unless you’re Mike Pence, have you ever been alone with a woman who wasn’t your wife? You could be a rapist, Mr. Kavanaugh! It doesn’t have to be true. It doesn’t have to be substantiated. It could be some typical childish stupidity from a high school kid. It could be nothing at all.
Whatever. It will become gospel, and it will be terrible, and you will be cancelled from polite society. Even if you retain your great station, half the country (or more) will hate you forever. That might even be true for Greta, save that the halves would be reversed.
But it’s all nothing.
The emperor has no clothes.
But journalists will tell you how beautiful the clothes are. They will paint your murals on the walls, sing your praises at all the townhalls. You will be the mascot, you’ll get your book deals. Until you’re cancelled for some idiot’s bad feels.
It’s all fake, and everybody knows. There’s politics at stake, even if the emperor has no clothes.
It would make a great movie!
You have this horrible guy in office – he’s getting rid of all the rules the previous guy(s) put into place – things like:
- Allowing Dept. Heads to impose fines for things that are legal, but the agency doesn’t like
- Rules that limit Due Process for Men (hey, they deserve it!)
- Rules that ignore the law, and permit payment to abortion providers, because they swear – Pinky Swear! – that NONE of the money will be used for abortions (90% of services for pregnant women)
- Repeated prosecutions/harassment of political groups backing your enemies, including IRS abuses
You know the kind of actions – things that unfairly restore the balance of power between citizens and their government.
OK, so we meet in secret, and come up with a plan that says Hearsay Evidence will be Okey-Dokey to be used against that Horrible Person.
Yeah, I know that hearsay evidence is NEVER used in court – you have to have been present at a crime to allow you to testify about it. There are laws about it.
No biggy. We’ll just have the agency that is opposing that Horrible Person (HP, for short) make a NEW rule, that says hearsay evidence is perfectly acceptable.
And – this is the twist that no movie is without – just by the Sheerest Coincidence, there is a person, who absolutely HATES HP (as do all GOOD people), and he just HAPPENS to be told by an unidentified person that HP has engaged in improper conduct.
What was that conduct, you say?
Um, well, you remember those stories about HP’s slurs against the former #2 to our Very Beloved and Honored Leader (VBHL)? How he used his position to bully governments into dropping investigations against his Nimrod Son (NS)?
Well, it’s kinda like that – but subtle, very subtle.
Huh? You’ve read that part of the script and it sounds like a regular conversation, not an attempt at intimidation.
Well, you have to imagine De Niro or Nicholson uttering those words. It works in context.
I’m going to have to insist on an unlimited budget. My film, A Political Coup, is gonna use up all that the studio did on that last turkey, Stop That Justice!, and then some. I mean, you can’t do this on the cheap.
What’s that you say? You’re going to pass on the project?
Heh, heh. Did I mention that I have evidence – real evidence, not this schlock – on all of you? I’m gonna, how do you say it, Make You an Offer You Can’t Refuse.
You don’t want to experience an Arkanicide, do you? And your little dog, too?
I saw the book was out, and wanted to read it. But the price – even after discount, was out of my budget (see below – even for the Kindle edition, it’s $18.99).
There’s something cool I installed, however, It shows up in the right side of the graphic above (larger cropping below). It’s called Library Extension, and you can get it on the Chrome Store.
It checks libraries that you have a card with, and lets you know if you can check out or put a hold on a book. It’s an alternative to buying books that are pricey (in the case of Hanson’s book, likely worth it, but not in my budget).
I’m still in the 1st chapter, and enjoying it hugely (YUUUGELY!). VDH, as he is often called, is scholarly, without being tedious or ponderous in his prose. It’s a true gift, to write for the Common Man/Woman.
Globalization had flattened the hinterland as jobs and commerce were outsourced to lower-cost Asia and Latin America. And yet the disequilibrium had never been fully leveraged by politicians (unless by politicians in negative fashion by Barack Obama in his infamous “clingers” put-down of rural Pennsylvanians in 2008),
I’ll keep posting excerpts as I read it over the next few weeks.