Friday, November 24, 2017


The Goal...and Inevitable Result

All forms of socialism seek to, to some degree, transform their societies and ultimately human nature. It is absolutely impossible to reach these ends without complete and total control over all aspects of society. Thus, the establishment of socialism, by it’s very nature, requires authoritarian rule and elimination of opposition.

Socialism is communism (and fascism for that matter). Socialism will, in the end, always equal constrained human vitality, prosperity, and creativity. Socialism always equals dictatorship

Monday, November 20, 2017


The Horrors of Capitalist Oppression

(Another repost...until I get more time to write)

Wednesday, November 08, 2017


Consistency in Clulessness Among Our Nobel Betters

previously posted

Wednesday, November 01, 2017


Multiculturalism and the Dance of Compulsory Affiliation

“...That’s a racist white privilege micro-aggression...”

I like my personal space to be quiet, peaceful, and elegant, with a dash of sophistication, if possible. I’m most comfortable in a room with bookshelves filled with esoteric subjects and cultural topics. I like my walls graced with fine art prints bathed in warm pin-lighting. A Bach keyboard concerto further perfects an environment suited to my tastes. I like what I like...but that’s just me.

My wife’s parent’s preferences are different than mine. They’re decent hardworking people who like loud tacky television variety shows, walls adorned with gold plastic clocks, searing neon light, and cheesy print patterns biting one’s eyes and scorching one’s soul. They’re also from a different culture than mine and that probably figures into the general incompatibilities.

My in-laws environment and the values it represents is, to me, an eruption of cortisol producing cacophony.

My response to all this is to “avoid” - to passively escape to my own space and my own values.

When appraising my situation, it occurs to me that peoples’ affinities and differences are completely natural and normal. A cactus doesn’t like to live in a rainforest and a Redwood tree would perish in a dessert. Their “likes and dislikes” are not a bias born of “hate” or mean-spiritedness - they merely “want” to live their lives as they “choose.” One’s essence is reflected in the environment or culture one choses to affiliate with or reject.

There is a tendency for humans to coalesce with those of like attributes and affinities, not because they are hateful or bigoted but is their nature to do so. When one attends a large party, one can see little clusters of people, some small, some larger. What draws them together is a combination of factors from physical attraction (I dare say, based on appearances), like interests, values, and personality. I’m not one to gravitate towards a group of jocks discussing game scores. It’s not my thing but, to be sure, much in my world would be of little interest to many of them.

I remember attending public schools and later college Ed School (to become a teacher) where the focus was always forcing unlike people to nurture what they have in common with each other and “celebrate diversity.” The education industrial complex’s contrived nonsense didn’t help me to appreciate sports, plastic gold clocks, or cheap TV fare - or revolutionary movements for the cause of skin color and victimhood. I certainly wouldn’t demand that others change their character and values and suddenly appreciate Stanley Kubrick films over pop comedies. In spite of Edland’s efforts to guide my affinities, things like skin color were irrelevant to me and, in spite of what we are daily led to believe, most people could care less about such things.

In the realm of “race” and culture, I’d prefer the company of middle class black persons with interests similar to my own than rich or poor white people of very different temperaments and interests who happen to share some superficial features.

Many people — of any ethnicity — would feel some discomfort at the sight of someone approaching them who is rough, unkempt, and laden in tattoos and piercings. They’d likely be less concerned if a person — again, of any ethnicity — were to walk toward them wearing a suit and carrying a briefcase. In the end, all of our responses exhibit an element of prejudice, often born of honest perceptions.

If it’s understandable and acceptable to avoid those we have little in common with, why should we allow those in power to impose their social planning schemes upon us — to force us into the company of those who not only don’t share our values but, in many cases, despise who we are? The Obama administration had once developed the brilliant idea of deliberately housing poor people in wealthy neighborhoods. Sounds noble (to some). In fact it’s stupid. A guarantee of suspicion and conflict. Another favorite in the social-planners book of schemes is to empty the cities and disperse everyone to the countryside (Cambodia in the 70’s) or, its opposite; concentrate everyone in urban areas (the UN’s "Project 21"). Can one imagine going to a party where an omnipotent authority directed everyone to “socialize” in an environment and among those one has the least in common with?

In the past, simple immigration from varied locations could produce positive results because the new group actively sought to join a nation and its culture to some degree. Even those less enthusiastic about “losing” their cultural identity, over time, came to harmonize with a native population — immigrants subtly changed the host culture and the host culture changed the immigrants. This was an organic process and relied upon natural affinities among individuals, families, and communities.

The imposed edicts of our time to “celebrate diversity...or else” is a blending of cultures that is completely different in nature to the organic assimilations of the past. “Immigrants” shipped in to fulfill the latest fad of cultural Marxism often have no desire to blend, assimilate, or appreciate the host culture. If this was merely a passive / avoidance thing, a couple of generations would harmonize the issue to positive ends for all parties, but current newcomers are often openly hostile to the values of Western culture and occasionally note their hope that they will one day rule over their hosts. This isn’t “diversity” — it’s a war strategy and one can see it often when non-citizens tell Americans that “this country never was great” or “the flag of Sariah will one day fly over the White House.”

In the U.S. and many western countries a couple of decades ago, controversy involving race was diminishing considerably. The issue would erupt from time to time (when the media sought to exaggerate an isolated incident) but those most focused and obsessed with the issue were academics and professional unemployed “revolutionaries.”

I’ve lived in many environments across the U.S. (including the back roads of Kentucky) over the course of a few decades and during that time I may have actually heard a white person say something negative or racist about a minority less than eight times. In those instances it was some off-the-cuff remark. It was rude, tacky, and showed a high level of ignorance but it certainly wasn’t a new dawn of Jim Crow. I have no doubt that there are people out there right now who hate minorities — or “oppressive” majorities. Racists exist, to some degree,...everywhere, but far less so than pop culture would like us to think. In spite of what academics would tell us, there are people of all races who hate other races (racism). The media would have us believe that there are “white supremicists” everywhere. They’re not.

The current obsession with an imagined rampant racism in America is total nonsense. That’s why they had to invent “micro-aggressions” to compensate for a lack of real racism to whine about — crying “wolf” when an occasional hamster comes your way.

After eight years of Obama/Alinsky insurgency tactics, race issues are once more a big deal and are being utilized by the left to the usual ends, disrupt and destroy civil culture so the philosopher kings can impose their cookie-cutter gulag on everyone.

Current circumstance seems to back up the reality that people of very different interests and values who are forced together not only fail to harmonize but retreat into entrenched enclaves where they often fear and despise one another. In a natural organic progression of encounter this would either not happen or at least dissipate over time. The last thing the left wants to see is human interaction based upon the free choices of individuals. To them we are all just game pieces in their latest social experiments.

When one considers current media and academic obsessions with micro-aggressions,” “white privilege,” and “racism;” just remember;

divorced unemployed paraplegics white men dying of cancer...”have all the power.”

For this imaginary problem, the left’s solution is the usual; destroy free society as it is and replace it with...them.

My solution?...Roll your eyes, yawn, and laugh — not necessarily in that order.

Some further insight on this issue (and a rather good Youtube channel).

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?