Elsewhere (173)
Douglas Murray on the loudly throbbing brain of Mr Paul Mason:
Mason writes, “In Gaza, in August 2014, I spent ten days in a community being systematically destroyed by drone strikes, shelling and sniper fire.” Nothing about Hamas rocket-fire or any context about a long-running war. Instead he describes this apparently naked aggression as an example of “how ruthlessly the elite will react” to defend modern capitalism. But why would anyone bomb Gaza to do that? As well as holding many of the other worst views in the world, are Hamas also in possession of a particularly devastating critique of late capitalism?
Mr Mason’s adventures in radical thought have previously entertained us.
Thomas Sowell on the politics of self-congratulation:
T.S. Eliot once said, “Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm – but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.” This suggests that one way to find out if those who claim to be trying to help the less fortunate are for real is to see if they are satisfied to simply advocate a given policy, and see it through to being imposed – without also testing empirically whether the policy is accomplishing what it set out to do. The first two steps are enough to let advocates feel important and righteous. Whether you really care about what happens to the supposed beneficiaries of the policy is indicated by whether you bother to check out the empirical evidence afterwards.
And George Will on the Planned Parenthood horror show:
In partial-birth abortion, a near-term baby is pulled by the legs almost out of the birth canal, until the base of the skull is exposed so the abortionist can suck out its contents. During Senate debates on this procedure, three Democrats were asked: Suppose a baby’s head slips out of the birth canal — the baby is born — before the abortionist can kill it. Does the baby then have a right to live? Two of the Democrats refused to answer. The third said the baby acquires a right to life when it leaves the hospital.
Feel free to share your own links and snippets in the comments. It’s what these posts are for.
“Like many Labour people, free to dream I’d go further than Corbyn: I’d go for a windfall wealth tax to pay off the deficit, make the Queen be Elizabeth the Last, abolish faith schools, private schools and inheritance, tax millionaires at 70%: add your wishlist here.”
What about second properties or investments in foreign assets?
“A nice young man wearing a pink tutu and nothing else made me an excellent cup of tea and, when I said admitted to being a radical feminist, excitedly showed me the house’s small library of gender theory, women’s liberation text and fair-trade pornography.”
I think that might be the most unintentionally funny sentence I’ve ever read.
@The Lancastrian Oik | August 05, 2015 at 09:49
What the Hell is “fair trade pornography”? Are their (ahem) props lovingly hand-crafted by dusky Amazonian maidens from organically-tapped rubber? Do they eschew the silicone products of foreign multinationals in favour of a more natural pulchritude? Do they try to have carbon-neutral orgasms?
I looked it up on Google and there at the top of the list (you could just about predict it) was a Guardian article by Zoe Williams. Is some vast conspiracy of practical jokers making all this stuff up?
Thanks for your research about PP, dicentra, now that 3% makes sense.
It makes one think how large part of the left is a slogan-machine (also numerical data is forged as slogan, here), whose brazen hollowness is simply revealed when explanatory questions are asked: “hot it works?”, “where this number come from, exactly?”, “how is your society supposed to run, actually?”. Of course, this is certainly true of most ideological enterprises, but the left seems to be really outstanding in this regard, both in terms of ‘quality’ (often rising to brain dazzlement) and perseverance. It’s not a case that political campaigning on the left is mainly a case of drumming unlikely chosen words in everybody’s head (“war on women” is a specially illuminating instance, imo).
Another large part of the left takes to quasi-religious levels the common phenomenon of sentimental credulity: give them any ideology-reassuring data, however unbelievable (for instance, “abortion makes up 3% of PP’s activity”), and they will immediately feeeel its accuracy.
“Take Bluebeard, which has more than a little in common with Fifty Shades of Grey, being about a young woman who gets together with an older man who has a secret room full of dark secrets.”
The dippy female in 50 Shades is 22, and the “older man” is 26. I know, I know, 4 HUGE LONG years apart. And “a secret room full of dark secrets”? As opposed to a secret room full of dark ferrets?
“I deny obvious objective reality. It’s what makes me special.”
I blame that damn T-shirt for this mindset: “I reject your reality and substitute my own.”
Take Bluebeard, . . . Please.
—Thank you Henny.
And do remember Bluebeard’s wine cellar—He had a wife in every port.
Wherein a Guardian writer suggests that listening to your boyfriend’s problems is “labour” that you should be compensated.
Stereotyping ideological opponents as joyless fanatics is often a bad idea but some of them don’t half make it difficult not to do.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/03/prof-who-accused-cop-profiling-flunks-dash-cam-test/
Police dash-cam video debunks professor’s racial profiling claims
Police dash-cam video debunks professor’s racial profiling claims
Somewhat related, a Fox News host recently suggested that young black males would be less likely to get shot or tazed if they “stopped resisting arrest.” I.e., if they stopped running, refusing to follow instructions, fighting the officers attempting to detain them, being generally belligerent and threatening, etc. Apparently, this unremarkable piece of advice is now considered beyond the pale. Salon’s Scott Eric Kaufman insists that black males “shouldn’t have to” comply with lawful instructions from the police. Which sounds like exactly the kind of attitude that gets people hurt.
Don’t watch dat, watch dis…
She’s an Article 4 Free Inhabitant. Then the cop rapes her. But according to the laws and customs of 1781, is it really rape-rape? Either way, I’m guessing time travel is a real bitch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k29WyfC1HKI
Madness…one step beyond…
Don’t watch dat, watch dis…
Wow. Stunning. I marvel at his patience. This kind of thing is why the reality show Cops is one of my guilty pleasures.
Salon’s Scott Eric Kaufman insists that black males “shouldn’t have to” comply with lawful instructions from the police.
They can all hide out at his house.
They can all hide out at his house.
Heh. Now there’s your reality show. “Former academic and pretentious leftist finds himself sharing his home with two carjackers, a crack dealer and assorted thugs.” Oh come on. You know you’d watch.
She’s an Article 4 Free Inhabitant.
Article 4 of the Articles of Confederation, which were superseded by the Constitution in 1789. I found what they’re referring to (badly):
“Free inhabitant” = Not a slave.
It just means that Virginia can’t treat a Georgian differently than a New Yorker or than other Virginians. Reciprocity and stuff. It’s pretty clear.
“Former academic and pretentious leftist finds himself sharing his home with two carjackers, a crack dealer and assorted thugs.” Oh come on. You know you’d watch.
I’d FINANCE it.
Hey. Maybe we can get a kickstarter or gofundme going for just such a project. SEK so totally deserves it…