TUESDAY ROUNDUP
Once again I list what I think were the best posts on my various blogs in the preceding week.
On Dissecting Leftism I support President Bush's "revisionist" view of the Yalta meeting between FDR and Stalin
On Political Correctness Watch I discuss human protandry (girls who turn into boys at puberty) and point out that it disproves academic feminism
On Greenie Watch I note the deceptions of the Greenie priesthood
On Education Watch I have an article by a dedicated teacher who finds quality teaching impossible in Los Angeles public schools
On Socialized Medicine I note that people are increasingly going to India for private medical treatment
On Gun Watch I have some excerpts from an article by a pro-gun Leftist
On Leftists as Elitists I note a Leftist who proves what an elitist he is while denying that he is an elitist!
*************************
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
ELSEWHERE
Trust the government to care for kids: "The parents of a baby handed back to a sadistic foster mother want answers after shocking new evidence of abuse and bungling. The Herald Sun has obtained three pieces of key evidence in the case of five-month-old "Ben", who was left in foster care despite suffering broken bones, cuts, burns and bruises. First, photos taken by the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne show the boy's horrific injuries. Despite the extent of the wounds shown in the images, the boy was given back to the foster mother. Second, the Herald Sun has learned that a pediatrician's report recommended he not be returned to the foster mother after examining his injuries during that same hospital visit in November 2003. Third, the boy's older sister "Rachel" gave a graphic account stating that she watched the foster mother gouge out her brother's teeth with a knife a month after being returned to her care.... The foster mother, in her 40s, has been interviewed by police but no charges have been laid."
Great stuff! "Executives at National Public Radio are increasingly at odds with the Bush appointees who lead the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In one of several points of conflict in recent months, the chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which allocates federal funds for public radio and television, is considering a plan to monitor Middle East coverage on NPR news programs for evidence of bias, a corporation spokesman said on Friday. The corporation's board has told its staff that it should consider redirecting money away from national newscasts and toward music programs produced by NPR stations. Top officials at NPR and member stations are upset as well about the corporation's decision to appoint two ombudsmen to judge the content of programs for balance."
David Brooks: "George Bush won the white working class by 23 percentage points in this past election. Many people have wondered why so many lower-middle-class waitresses in Kansas and Hispanic warehouse workers in Texas now call themselves Republicans. The Pew data provide an answer: they agree with Horatio Alger. These working-class folk like the G.O.P.'s social and foreign policies, but the big difference between poor Republicans and poor Democrats is that the former believe that individuals can make it on their own with hard work and good character. According to the Pew study, 76 percent of poor Republicans believe most people can get ahead with hard work. Only 14 percent of poor Democrats believe that. Poor Republicans haven't made it yet, but they embrace what they take to be the Republican economic vision - that it is in their power to do so. Poor Democrats are more likely to believe they are in the grip of forces beyond their control. The G.O.P. succeeds because it is seen as the party of optimistic individualism"
Bill Frist states his case in USA Today: "All 100 members of the U.S. Senate will soon decide a basic question of fairness. Will we permit a fair, up-or-down vote on every judicial nominee? Or, will we create an unprecedented 60-vote requirement for the confirmation of President Bush's judges? I sincerely hope that it is the former."
GOP outreach to blacks continues: "Hutchison isn't alone when it comes to powerful Republicans who aren't waiting until election time to reach out to blacks. The GOP's effort began last year when President Bush addressed the National Urban League. Ken Mehlman, the national party chairman, has been especially aggressive in urging African-Americans to consider a return to the "party of Lincoln.""
Black Republican worries Dems: "City Councilman Otto Banks, the biggest vote-getter in Harrisburg, Pa., held a campaign fundraiser in the Pennsylvania state capital Friday with the help of Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman that sent new fears rippling through Democratic ranks. Mr. Banks, 33, a political newcomer, stunned Harrisburg's black community when he left the Democratic Party in March to become a Republican, starting what Mr. Mehlman and other Republican officials say they hope will become a realignment trend that will consign the Democrats to permanent minority status."
John O'Sullivan sees some hope for the future for the British Tories. I personally think that the volcanic internal wrangling in the Labour party is their only hope. Remember the old saw that governments lose elections, oppositions don't win them.
Polipundit notes that there are 11 million more jobs in America now than there were in 1997. He is right that you will not see that mentioned in the MSM.
I rarely do any fisking of Leftist articles but a New York Times article on social class motivated me to do some. See today's LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS.
A reader has sent me in an interesting quote from Engels -- which I have just posted on Marxwords. It shows how much Engels hated working.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Trust the government to care for kids: "The parents of a baby handed back to a sadistic foster mother want answers after shocking new evidence of abuse and bungling. The Herald Sun has obtained three pieces of key evidence in the case of five-month-old "Ben", who was left in foster care despite suffering broken bones, cuts, burns and bruises. First, photos taken by the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne show the boy's horrific injuries. Despite the extent of the wounds shown in the images, the boy was given back to the foster mother. Second, the Herald Sun has learned that a pediatrician's report recommended he not be returned to the foster mother after examining his injuries during that same hospital visit in November 2003. Third, the boy's older sister "Rachel" gave a graphic account stating that she watched the foster mother gouge out her brother's teeth with a knife a month after being returned to her care.... The foster mother, in her 40s, has been interviewed by police but no charges have been laid."
Great stuff! "Executives at National Public Radio are increasingly at odds with the Bush appointees who lead the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In one of several points of conflict in recent months, the chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which allocates federal funds for public radio and television, is considering a plan to monitor Middle East coverage on NPR news programs for evidence of bias, a corporation spokesman said on Friday. The corporation's board has told its staff that it should consider redirecting money away from national newscasts and toward music programs produced by NPR stations. Top officials at NPR and member stations are upset as well about the corporation's decision to appoint two ombudsmen to judge the content of programs for balance."
David Brooks: "George Bush won the white working class by 23 percentage points in this past election. Many people have wondered why so many lower-middle-class waitresses in Kansas and Hispanic warehouse workers in Texas now call themselves Republicans. The Pew data provide an answer: they agree with Horatio Alger. These working-class folk like the G.O.P.'s social and foreign policies, but the big difference between poor Republicans and poor Democrats is that the former believe that individuals can make it on their own with hard work and good character. According to the Pew study, 76 percent of poor Republicans believe most people can get ahead with hard work. Only 14 percent of poor Democrats believe that. Poor Republicans haven't made it yet, but they embrace what they take to be the Republican economic vision - that it is in their power to do so. Poor Democrats are more likely to believe they are in the grip of forces beyond their control. The G.O.P. succeeds because it is seen as the party of optimistic individualism"
Bill Frist states his case in USA Today: "All 100 members of the U.S. Senate will soon decide a basic question of fairness. Will we permit a fair, up-or-down vote on every judicial nominee? Or, will we create an unprecedented 60-vote requirement for the confirmation of President Bush's judges? I sincerely hope that it is the former."
GOP outreach to blacks continues: "Hutchison isn't alone when it comes to powerful Republicans who aren't waiting until election time to reach out to blacks. The GOP's effort began last year when President Bush addressed the National Urban League. Ken Mehlman, the national party chairman, has been especially aggressive in urging African-Americans to consider a return to the "party of Lincoln.""
Black Republican worries Dems: "City Councilman Otto Banks, the biggest vote-getter in Harrisburg, Pa., held a campaign fundraiser in the Pennsylvania state capital Friday with the help of Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman that sent new fears rippling through Democratic ranks. Mr. Banks, 33, a political newcomer, stunned Harrisburg's black community when he left the Democratic Party in March to become a Republican, starting what Mr. Mehlman and other Republican officials say they hope will become a realignment trend that will consign the Democrats to permanent minority status."
John O'Sullivan sees some hope for the future for the British Tories. I personally think that the volcanic internal wrangling in the Labour party is their only hope. Remember the old saw that governments lose elections, oppositions don't win them.
Polipundit notes that there are 11 million more jobs in America now than there were in 1997. He is right that you will not see that mentioned in the MSM.
I rarely do any fisking of Leftist articles but a New York Times article on social class motivated me to do some. See today's LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS.
A reader has sent me in an interesting quote from Engels -- which I have just posted on Marxwords. It shows how much Engels hated working.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Monday, May 16, 2005
FILIBUSTERS AND THE COURTS
Buchanan on why filibusters of judicial nominations must be stopped: "For decades, radical secularists like William Douglas, Earl Warren, William Brennan, Thurgood Marshall and Harry Blackmun have abused their power as Supreme Court justices to impose their values and views on a society that opposed or even detested those values and views. We have seen voluntary prayer, Bible-reading and the Ten Commandments purged from public schools; the pornography industry, once a sordid criminal enterprise, given First Amendment protection; and children forcibly bused across town on judicial orders because of the color of their skin. We have seen abortion, once a crime in 50 states, declared a constitutional right, followed by the discovery that the Constitution protects homosexual sodomy, though Jefferson equated it with rape. We are no longer a democratic republic. The Supreme Court picks what cases it will hear, what laws it will permit to stand, what rights it shall invent. We overthrew a rule of kings. Now we are oppressed by a rule of judges".
Why the circuit courts are important: "Democrats have made much of the fact that the Senate confirmed 204 federal judges during President Bush's first term, while 'only' 10 judicial nominations were filibustered. However, it is not coincidental that 100 percent of the filibustered nominations were for the powerful circuit courts of appeal. ...[W]hat can only be described as a concerted judicial-filibuster campaign during the 108th Congress was truly unprecedented. Indeed, throughout the entire history of the U.S. Senate, neither the minority-party members in that chamber nor senators of the party that did not occupy the White House had ever before engaged in such a coordinated, protracted filibustering campaign to frequently deny up-or-down votes for one judicial nominee after another... Democrats have cleverly -- and shrewdly -- perpetrated their unprecedented judicial obstructionism exclusively against nominees to circuit courts of appeal. Relatively speaking, these courts have become vastly more powerful in recent decades. With the Supreme Court issuing fewer and fewer decisions, the circuit courts have become the final arbiters more often than in the past. Unless reversed by the Supreme Court, a decision by an appellate court remains the final determination on both legal and constitutional grounds throughout its jurisdiction."
Black conservative Craig DeLuz is outraged at the hatred of judicial nominee Janice Rogers Brown being displayed by Democrats. A small excerpt: "Janice Rogers Brown has become a lightning rod for liberals because she is Black. But as a conservative, she does not subscribe to typical liberal racist ways of thinking. Liberals think that Blacks cannot be successful without the government's help. They don't believe that Blacks can go out and get jobs, so the government must take care of them. They don't believe that Blacks can be successful in school, so they wish to lower the standards for graduation so that Black students will feel better about themselves. They believe that Blacks are victims of a racist system, so they should not be held responsible for their actions; as if we are incapable of controlling ourselves. This is what liberal racists think of us. And sadly, they have been successful in getting most Blacks to buy into this view of themselves. It's nothing more than psychological slavery. But Janice Rogers Brown challenges that image. A successful Black woman with Brown's humble beginnings and yet also possesses conservative world view, is contrary to the dependent characterization liberals wish to paint of us"
********************************
Buchanan on why filibusters of judicial nominations must be stopped: "For decades, radical secularists like William Douglas, Earl Warren, William Brennan, Thurgood Marshall and Harry Blackmun have abused their power as Supreme Court justices to impose their values and views on a society that opposed or even detested those values and views. We have seen voluntary prayer, Bible-reading and the Ten Commandments purged from public schools; the pornography industry, once a sordid criminal enterprise, given First Amendment protection; and children forcibly bused across town on judicial orders because of the color of their skin. We have seen abortion, once a crime in 50 states, declared a constitutional right, followed by the discovery that the Constitution protects homosexual sodomy, though Jefferson equated it with rape. We are no longer a democratic republic. The Supreme Court picks what cases it will hear, what laws it will permit to stand, what rights it shall invent. We overthrew a rule of kings. Now we are oppressed by a rule of judges".
Why the circuit courts are important: "Democrats have made much of the fact that the Senate confirmed 204 federal judges during President Bush's first term, while 'only' 10 judicial nominations were filibustered. However, it is not coincidental that 100 percent of the filibustered nominations were for the powerful circuit courts of appeal. ...[W]hat can only be described as a concerted judicial-filibuster campaign during the 108th Congress was truly unprecedented. Indeed, throughout the entire history of the U.S. Senate, neither the minority-party members in that chamber nor senators of the party that did not occupy the White House had ever before engaged in such a coordinated, protracted filibustering campaign to frequently deny up-or-down votes for one judicial nominee after another... Democrats have cleverly -- and shrewdly -- perpetrated their unprecedented judicial obstructionism exclusively against nominees to circuit courts of appeal. Relatively speaking, these courts have become vastly more powerful in recent decades. With the Supreme Court issuing fewer and fewer decisions, the circuit courts have become the final arbiters more often than in the past. Unless reversed by the Supreme Court, a decision by an appellate court remains the final determination on both legal and constitutional grounds throughout its jurisdiction."
Black conservative Craig DeLuz is outraged at the hatred of judicial nominee Janice Rogers Brown being displayed by Democrats. A small excerpt: "Janice Rogers Brown has become a lightning rod for liberals because she is Black. But as a conservative, she does not subscribe to typical liberal racist ways of thinking. Liberals think that Blacks cannot be successful without the government's help. They don't believe that Blacks can go out and get jobs, so the government must take care of them. They don't believe that Blacks can be successful in school, so they wish to lower the standards for graduation so that Black students will feel better about themselves. They believe that Blacks are victims of a racist system, so they should not be held responsible for their actions; as if we are incapable of controlling ourselves. This is what liberal racists think of us. And sadly, they have been successful in getting most Blacks to buy into this view of themselves. It's nothing more than psychological slavery. But Janice Rogers Brown challenges that image. A successful Black woman with Brown's humble beginnings and yet also possesses conservative world view, is contrary to the dependent characterization liberals wish to paint of us"
********************************
ELSEWHERE
There is an amusing piece of psychological research emanating from UCLA at the moment. It is such bad research that I encourage readers to answer the questionnaire and spook it. For a start, by administering the questions over the internet, they show the usual sublime indifference to proper sampling that is characteristic of psychologists but, perhaps more importantly, the survey is very transparent and its Leftist intentions stand out. Take this excerpt from their preamble: "many would argue that at their core, Americans are self-interested and care foremost about their own well being. Of course, the opposing view is that Americans are generally quite caring and concerned for the well being of others". Which of those views would you say is the one the authors hold? I think it is pretty clear that the former is the answer they want to hear. And researchers do tend to get the answers they want. In the trade it is called "The Rosenthal effect". The survey also asks for political affiliation so one bet that the really nasty guys will turn out to be Republicans! For a brief look at the utter lack of scholarly standards in political psychology, see here
V.D. Hanson on academic "tenure": "Renewable five-year agreements - outlining in detail teaching and scholarly expectations - would still protect free speech, without creating lifelong sinecures for those who fail their contractual obligations. The cost of university tuition continues to creep higher than the rate of inflation. The percentage of cheaper classes taught by adjunct instructors is increasing as well. Yet the competence of recently graduated students is ever more in question. What is not scrutinized in this disturbing calculus is a mandarin class that says it is radically egalitarian, but in fact insists on an unusual privilege that most other Americans do not enjoy. In recompense, the university has not delivered a better-educated student, or a more intellectually diverse and independent-thinking faculty. Instead it has accomplished precisely the opposite".
The role of blogs in supporting Prof. Klocek is getting noticed. Note this AP story: "A longtime DePaul University instructor who argued with pro-Palestinian students at a campus activities fair last fall no longer works for the school. That much is not in dispute. But why Thomas Klocek lost his job while other professors under fire for their statements, including the University of Colorado's Ward Churchill, kept theirs has created a buzz among conservative-leaning Internet blogs about free speech rights at campuses across the country".
Allende: A typical Leftist of his day: "Salvador Allende, the socialist president of Chile who was killed during a CIA-backed coup in 1973, was an anti-Semite who held fascist ideas in his youth, says a new book which has split Chile. The book, Salvador Allende: Antisemitism and Euthanasia, will shock those around the world who revere the late president as a socialist martyr..... The disclosures come from Allende's 1933 doctoral dissertation which had been kept secret. In it he asserts that Jews have a disposition to crime, and calls for compulsory sterilisation of the mentally ill and alcoholics. Victor Farias, the book's Chilean-born author, said Allende quotes approvingly a "cure" for homosexuality, which was then a crime: "It could be corrected with surgery - small holes would be made in the stomach, into which small pieces of testicle would be inserted. This would make the person heterosexual.""
Last Saturday, The Australian (Australia's national newspaper) editorialized about the attack on Chrenkoff and "Opinion Journal" by "Media Watch", a programme of Australia's Left-leaning public Broadcaster (The ABC). I have reposted the editorial here as it may not stay up long. I must say that the inability of the ABC to find "Opinion Journal" via wsj.com (something I myself used to do often before I bookmarked "Opinion Journal") shows what dopes the ABC journalists are. "Media Watch" will be on air again tonight so I hope somebody tells me if they reply to the editorial. I never watch the supercilious garbage myself.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
There is an amusing piece of psychological research emanating from UCLA at the moment. It is such bad research that I encourage readers to answer the questionnaire and spook it. For a start, by administering the questions over the internet, they show the usual sublime indifference to proper sampling that is characteristic of psychologists but, perhaps more importantly, the survey is very transparent and its Leftist intentions stand out. Take this excerpt from their preamble: "many would argue that at their core, Americans are self-interested and care foremost about their own well being. Of course, the opposing view is that Americans are generally quite caring and concerned for the well being of others". Which of those views would you say is the one the authors hold? I think it is pretty clear that the former is the answer they want to hear. And researchers do tend to get the answers they want. In the trade it is called "The Rosenthal effect". The survey also asks for political affiliation so one bet that the really nasty guys will turn out to be Republicans! For a brief look at the utter lack of scholarly standards in political psychology, see here
V.D. Hanson on academic "tenure": "Renewable five-year agreements - outlining in detail teaching and scholarly expectations - would still protect free speech, without creating lifelong sinecures for those who fail their contractual obligations. The cost of university tuition continues to creep higher than the rate of inflation. The percentage of cheaper classes taught by adjunct instructors is increasing as well. Yet the competence of recently graduated students is ever more in question. What is not scrutinized in this disturbing calculus is a mandarin class that says it is radically egalitarian, but in fact insists on an unusual privilege that most other Americans do not enjoy. In recompense, the university has not delivered a better-educated student, or a more intellectually diverse and independent-thinking faculty. Instead it has accomplished precisely the opposite".
The role of blogs in supporting Prof. Klocek is getting noticed. Note this AP story: "A longtime DePaul University instructor who argued with pro-Palestinian students at a campus activities fair last fall no longer works for the school. That much is not in dispute. But why Thomas Klocek lost his job while other professors under fire for their statements, including the University of Colorado's Ward Churchill, kept theirs has created a buzz among conservative-leaning Internet blogs about free speech rights at campuses across the country".
Allende: A typical Leftist of his day: "Salvador Allende, the socialist president of Chile who was killed during a CIA-backed coup in 1973, was an anti-Semite who held fascist ideas in his youth, says a new book which has split Chile. The book, Salvador Allende: Antisemitism and Euthanasia, will shock those around the world who revere the late president as a socialist martyr..... The disclosures come from Allende's 1933 doctoral dissertation which had been kept secret. In it he asserts that Jews have a disposition to crime, and calls for compulsory sterilisation of the mentally ill and alcoholics. Victor Farias, the book's Chilean-born author, said Allende quotes approvingly a "cure" for homosexuality, which was then a crime: "It could be corrected with surgery - small holes would be made in the stomach, into which small pieces of testicle would be inserted. This would make the person heterosexual.""
Last Saturday, The Australian (Australia's national newspaper) editorialized about the attack on Chrenkoff and "Opinion Journal" by "Media Watch", a programme of Australia's Left-leaning public Broadcaster (The ABC). I have reposted the editorial here as it may not stay up long. I must say that the inability of the ABC to find "Opinion Journal" via wsj.com (something I myself used to do often before I bookmarked "Opinion Journal") shows what dopes the ABC journalists are. "Media Watch" will be on air again tonight so I hope somebody tells me if they reply to the editorial. I never watch the supercilious garbage myself.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Sunday, May 15, 2005
YALTA
One passage in President Bush's speech in Latvia a week ago has stirred up vigorous debate on both Right and Left. This is the passage:
I have hesitated to say anything about it so far -- though I have linked to various related statements by others -- because I myself have always had many reservations about Allied actions in BOTH world wars. But it is a huge debate that has been going on for many years now so I will outline my conclusions here without endeavouring to support them other than by suggesting readings that those interested in the subject might look at if they want to follow anything up:
That FDR was either a fool or a rogue in his dealings with Stalin is I think undoubted and I am glad that GWB has come out saying that by implication -- but whether anything FDR could have done would have saved the Baltic States from Stalin is highly dubious. He could however have saved the whole of Germany by unleashing Patton and that could well have saved Poland too.
There has also long been a hangover from wartime propaganda that claims that the war was fought for various worthy objectives -- the defence of democracy etc. I don't think, however, anyone has been much deceived by that. The war was a war of national survival for those threatened by Hitler and for FDR it was a war he was desperate to enter so that he could -- in good Leftist fashion -- exercise power and dominate world politics. He wanted to be at the head of the table at the end of the war. As in World War I however, the American people did not want a bar of intervention in Europe so he had to engineer an attack by the Japanese to get the people onside.
OK. I have probably said too much already. Just to get you thinking, here is an excerpt from a much reproduced comment by Buchanan on the issue:
There are other good comments by Jeff Jacoby and Geoffrey Wheatcroft and V.D. Hanson. There is a good history of the evolving thinking about the war here and in my view the best balanced account of what did happen and what could have happened is here. And I cannot resist putting up the following excerpt from the Wheatcroft article:
*******************************
One passage in President Bush's speech in Latvia a week ago has stirred up vigorous debate on both Right and Left. This is the passage:
"For much of Eastern and Central Europe, victory brought the iron rule of another empire. V-E Day marked the end of fascism, but it did not end oppression. The agreement at Yalta followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Once again, when powerful governments negotiated, the freedom of small nations was somehow expendable. Yet this attempt to sacrifice freedom for the sake of stability left a continent divided and unstable. The captivity of millions in Central and Eastern Europe will be remembered as one of the greatest wrongs of history.
I have hesitated to say anything about it so far -- though I have linked to various related statements by others -- because I myself have always had many reservations about Allied actions in BOTH world wars. But it is a huge debate that has been going on for many years now so I will outline my conclusions here without endeavouring to support them other than by suggesting readings that those interested in the subject might look at if they want to follow anything up:
That FDR was either a fool or a rogue in his dealings with Stalin is I think undoubted and I am glad that GWB has come out saying that by implication -- but whether anything FDR could have done would have saved the Baltic States from Stalin is highly dubious. He could however have saved the whole of Germany by unleashing Patton and that could well have saved Poland too.
There has also long been a hangover from wartime propaganda that claims that the war was fought for various worthy objectives -- the defence of democracy etc. I don't think, however, anyone has been much deceived by that. The war was a war of national survival for those threatened by Hitler and for FDR it was a war he was desperate to enter so that he could -- in good Leftist fashion -- exercise power and dominate world politics. He wanted to be at the head of the table at the end of the war. As in World War I however, the American people did not want a bar of intervention in Europe so he had to engineer an attack by the Japanese to get the people onside.
OK. I have probably said too much already. Just to get you thinking, here is an excerpt from a much reproduced comment by Buchanan on the issue:
"If Yalta was a betrayal of small nations as immoral as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, why do we venerate Churchill and FDR? At Yalta, this pair secretly ceded those small nations to Stalin, co-signing a cynical "Declaration on Liberated Europe" that was a monstrous lie. As FDR and Churchill consigned these peoples to a Stalinist hell run by a monster they alternately and affectionately called "Uncle Joe" and "Old Bear," why are they not in the history books alongside Neville Chamberlain, who sold out the Czechs at Munich by handing the Sudetenland over to Germany? At least the Sudeten Germans wanted to be with Germany. No Christian peoples of Europe ever embraced their Soviet captors or Stalinist quislings. Other questions arise. If Britain endured six years of war and hundreds of thousands of dead in a war she declared to defend Polish freedom, and Polish freedom was lost to communism, how can we say Britain won the war? If the West went to war to stop Hitler from dominating Eastern and Central Europe, and Eastern and Central Europe ended up under a tyranny even more odious, as Bush implies, did Western Civilization win the war?"
There are other good comments by Jeff Jacoby and Geoffrey Wheatcroft and V.D. Hanson. There is a good history of the evolving thinking about the war here and in my view the best balanced account of what did happen and what could have happened is here. And I cannot resist putting up the following excerpt from the Wheatcroft article:
"The French suffered a catastrophic defeat in 1940, and the compromises many Frenchmen made with their conquerors thereafter ranged from the pitiful to the wicked. More Frenchmen collaborated than resisted, and during the course of the war more Frenchmen bore arms on the Axis than on the Allied side".
*******************************
ELSEWHERE
Hollywood logic: A UPI Hollywood reporter says: "There is a widely held assumption among many people in the United States -- particularly among conservatives -- that public broadcasting is dominated by liberal politics. But the Washington-based Center for Digital Democracy recently reported that Tomlinson has been sitting on polling data showing that a substantial majority of Americans are happy with the programming on PBS and NPR". [How does the report in the second sentence disprove the claim reported in the first sentence? Whether people are happy with it depends on what they expect of it and expectations of balance are probably long gone]
Liberal Avenger is still providing me with entertainment. In response to my admission yesterday that maybe I have an overdeveloped sense of humour, he emailed me as follows: "Maybe you're just a cheap date?". I don't really follow the relevance (if any) of that comment but the abusive intent is clear enough. After I dubbed him "Mr. Hatespeech", his emails to me became polite for a while but he has now obviously reverted to form. He also on one occasion admitted that he is no intellectual. He certainly seems determined to prove it!
Arabs vote with their feet: "Last year as part of discussions about territorial compromise with the Palestinian Authority, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon proposed transferring an area of Arab villages in northern Israel to a new Palestinian state. The proposal would have placed about 200,000 Arab citizens of Israel under Palestinian sovereignty by simply redrawing the internationally recognized, pre-1967 border. Israel would have received in exchange an equivalent geographic area on the West Bank. No one would have moved. The plan simply was a 1-for-1, territorial exchange that put Arabs in Palestine and Jews in Israel. Who could object to such a sensible compromise? The Arab citizens of Israel. "I want to live under the democratic law of Israel, not the law of Arafat," a resident of the village of Muakala told the Jerusalem Post."
I think we have another very holy Pope. Note these of his words: "We have considered the fall of man in general, and the falling of many Christians away from Christ and into a godless secularism. Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in His own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of His Presence abused, how often must He enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that He is there! How often is His Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him! How much pride, how much self-complacency! What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall! "
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Hollywood logic: A UPI Hollywood reporter says: "There is a widely held assumption among many people in the United States -- particularly among conservatives -- that public broadcasting is dominated by liberal politics. But the Washington-based Center for Digital Democracy recently reported that Tomlinson has been sitting on polling data showing that a substantial majority of Americans are happy with the programming on PBS and NPR". [How does the report in the second sentence disprove the claim reported in the first sentence? Whether people are happy with it depends on what they expect of it and expectations of balance are probably long gone]
Liberal Avenger is still providing me with entertainment. In response to my admission yesterday that maybe I have an overdeveloped sense of humour, he emailed me as follows: "Maybe you're just a cheap date?". I don't really follow the relevance (if any) of that comment but the abusive intent is clear enough. After I dubbed him "Mr. Hatespeech", his emails to me became polite for a while but he has now obviously reverted to form. He also on one occasion admitted that he is no intellectual. He certainly seems determined to prove it!
Arabs vote with their feet: "Last year as part of discussions about territorial compromise with the Palestinian Authority, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon proposed transferring an area of Arab villages in northern Israel to a new Palestinian state. The proposal would have placed about 200,000 Arab citizens of Israel under Palestinian sovereignty by simply redrawing the internationally recognized, pre-1967 border. Israel would have received in exchange an equivalent geographic area on the West Bank. No one would have moved. The plan simply was a 1-for-1, territorial exchange that put Arabs in Palestine and Jews in Israel. Who could object to such a sensible compromise? The Arab citizens of Israel. "I want to live under the democratic law of Israel, not the law of Arafat," a resident of the village of Muakala told the Jerusalem Post."
I think we have another very holy Pope. Note these of his words: "We have considered the fall of man in general, and the falling of many Christians away from Christ and into a godless secularism. Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in His own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of His Presence abused, how often must He enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that He is there! How often is His Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him! How much pride, how much self-complacency! What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall! "
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Saturday, May 14, 2005
NOAH'S ARK RUNS AGROUND
Maybe I have an overdeveloped sense of humour but one of the funniest columns I have read recently is this one by Timothy Noah. Our Tim just cannot figure out why so many working class Americans vote GOP. With typical Leftist condescension, he is amazed that they are not just animated cash-registers. He goes through the explanations for conservatism put forward by Leftist psychologists -- summarized in the absurd "Berkeley study" -- but in the end concedes that the explanations concerned are indeed absurd. His ark just ends up high and dry with nowhere to go.
He really should read Disraeli -- that great Conservative friend of the workers of over a century ago and one of Britain's greatest Prime Ministers. Dizzy could have told him that the workers are perfectly capable of seeing that what is bad for their country is bad for them too and it takes no great insight to see that the shifty characters who infest the Democratic party are bad for America. Most of them don't even LIKE America! Taranto had a laugh at poor Tim too.
Update
I suppose I should have mentioned that have done a fair bit of academic research into working-class conservatism. Some of the articles concerned are here and here and here and here
***************************
Maybe I have an overdeveloped sense of humour but one of the funniest columns I have read recently is this one by Timothy Noah. Our Tim just cannot figure out why so many working class Americans vote GOP. With typical Leftist condescension, he is amazed that they are not just animated cash-registers. He goes through the explanations for conservatism put forward by Leftist psychologists -- summarized in the absurd "Berkeley study" -- but in the end concedes that the explanations concerned are indeed absurd. His ark just ends up high and dry with nowhere to go.
He really should read Disraeli -- that great Conservative friend of the workers of over a century ago and one of Britain's greatest Prime Ministers. Dizzy could have told him that the workers are perfectly capable of seeing that what is bad for their country is bad for them too and it takes no great insight to see that the shifty characters who infest the Democratic party are bad for America. Most of them don't even LIKE America! Taranto had a laugh at poor Tim too.
Update
I suppose I should have mentioned that have done a fair bit of academic research into working-class conservatism. Some of the articles concerned are here and here and here and here
***************************
ELSEWHERE
Taranto has updated his comments on the way Chrenkoff was treated by Australia's major public Broadcaster (the ABC). It appears that the ABC DID seek prior clarification about some of the issues they mentioned but were dumb enough to try dealing with Dow Jones rather than with Opinion Journal. Dow Jones own an excellent newspaper (The Wall St Journal) and its associated websites but they are absolute corporate shitheads and I believe every word the ABC said about how Dow Jones ignored them. It took Australian mining entrepreneur and Lubavitcher Joe Gutnick 4 years and 27 court appearances to get Dow Jones to retract a libel against him! Their arrogant attitude in that matter ended up costing them around a million dollars all up in the end.
You can trust government employees to care for kids: "Broward Sheriff's Office employee assigned to help protect children was suspended Monday, accused of leaving a 2-year-old unattended in her vehicle for about five hours. BSO said that last Wednesday, Community Service Aide Maribelle Martinez was transporting a 2-year-old child as part of her duties with BSO's Child Protective Investigation Section. Investigators said that Martinez left the child unattended in the vehicle outside the CPIS building in Plantation for about five hours. The child was immediately taken to nearby Plantation General Hospital to be examined, and was determined to be uninjured and in good health. Martinez was suspended pending the outcome of an investigation by the Plantation Police Department and the Department of Children and Families. BSO's Office of Professional Compliance is also conducting an internal investigation". In Australia she would have been taken to the police station and charged immediately
Some little-known truths about WWII: "Stalin was ruthless in rallying support for the war effort. Surrender was declared to be treasonous. Anyone suspected of defeatist or counterrevolutionary sentiments was shot or sentenced to hard labor. During the siege of Stalingrad alone, 13,000 were executed. Though a million inmates were released from prison camps for military service, many more were consigned to the gulag during the war. Millions died at the hands of NKVD secret police. The Red Army eventually showed considerable skill in mechanized warfare, but right up until the end its commanders were profligate with their men's lives. The Soviets suffered 350,000 casualties in the battle of Berlin in 1945. The butcher's bill could have been lessened by going slower but that would have risked letting the German capital fall into Western hands. After V-E Day, Stalin was true to his dictum, "We do not have prisoners of war, we only have traitors." Most Russian soldiers liberated from German captivity were sent to the gulag; some were shot outright".
Uncle John's Cabin: "Considering his much-lauded penchant for what passes for 'populist' rhetoric theses days -- 'Let me say this in simple right and wrong, black and white terms,' [John] Edwards bravely told one New Hampshire crowd during primary season. 'I say no to kids going to bed hungry in America. I say no to kids not having clothes to keep them warm' -- one might be tempted to assume that the former senator put his Georgetown house on the market for an asking price of $6.2 million dollars as a prelude to finally joining a commune. Alas, another progressive hero is about to bite the dust. The sale is not a precursor to Edwards liquidating his worldly possessions for redistribution among the proletariat, but, rather, simply a fundraiser for the country estate currently being constructed for him on a 100 acre plot in Chapel Hill, North Carolina."
Julie Burchill on the antisemitism of British academe: "A couple of weeks ago, on April 22, Britain's Association of University Teachers - an organization representing over 48,000 professional swots - voted to ban all contact with two Israeli universities, and asked its executive committee to consider a boycott against a third, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Israel was accused of being "a colonial apartheid state" worse than South Africa, a "regime" worthy of "removal," and its universities of repressing academic freedom. Needless to say, this show of spite received rapturous applause; well, Britain is currently playing host to the biggest ever annual number of violent anti-Semitic attacks, both on people and on property, since the 1930s. Who can blame the teachers, so conscious of their uncoolness, for wanting to get "down wiv the kidz"? They're too respectable to daub swastikas on a synagogue - but it sure feels good to band together and bully them Israeli academics! .... In one way this turn of events is as unexpected as it is cruel - after all, in this country it tends to be academics who react to anything from mild censorship to book-burning with "That's how Hitler started!" That they are now doing something Hitler would thoroughly approve of, and did - barring contact with Jews - seems to have escaped them.... "
This is almost a matter for intervention by the Holy Father. DePaul University is run by the Jesuits, is America's largest Catholic university and is frantically pro-Islamic -- so pro-Islamic that it suspended its professor Thomas Klocek for defending Israel. The Jesuits have a special oath of obedience to the Pope and the present Pope is known for a favourable attitude towards Israel. DePaul administrators have been particularly arrogant about the matter and the forthcoming court case is not going to do their reputation any good. I don't suppose the Holy Father will intervene so in the meanwhile Marathon Pundit is keeping track of what is happening. Update: A reader tells me that DePaul is NOT run by the Jesuits. As the name indicates, it is theoretically a Vincentian university.
Brendan O'Neill (Can you get a more Irish name than that?) has some amusing comments about lapsed Catholics. One snippet: "First and foremost, to be a Lapsed Catholic is to make a virtue of being a lazy git."
Peg Kaplan explains why Leftists hate Wal-Mart. Leftists hate other people's success, mainly.
John Kenneth Galbraith is THE old warhorse of Left-leaning economists. Newmark has a few good shots at some of his empty assertions.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Taranto has updated his comments on the way Chrenkoff was treated by Australia's major public Broadcaster (the ABC). It appears that the ABC DID seek prior clarification about some of the issues they mentioned but were dumb enough to try dealing with Dow Jones rather than with Opinion Journal. Dow Jones own an excellent newspaper (The Wall St Journal) and its associated websites but they are absolute corporate shitheads and I believe every word the ABC said about how Dow Jones ignored them. It took Australian mining entrepreneur and Lubavitcher Joe Gutnick 4 years and 27 court appearances to get Dow Jones to retract a libel against him! Their arrogant attitude in that matter ended up costing them around a million dollars all up in the end.
You can trust government employees to care for kids: "Broward Sheriff's Office employee assigned to help protect children was suspended Monday, accused of leaving a 2-year-old unattended in her vehicle for about five hours. BSO said that last Wednesday, Community Service Aide Maribelle Martinez was transporting a 2-year-old child as part of her duties with BSO's Child Protective Investigation Section. Investigators said that Martinez left the child unattended in the vehicle outside the CPIS building in Plantation for about five hours. The child was immediately taken to nearby Plantation General Hospital to be examined, and was determined to be uninjured and in good health. Martinez was suspended pending the outcome of an investigation by the Plantation Police Department and the Department of Children and Families. BSO's Office of Professional Compliance is also conducting an internal investigation". In Australia she would have been taken to the police station and charged immediately
Some little-known truths about WWII: "Stalin was ruthless in rallying support for the war effort. Surrender was declared to be treasonous. Anyone suspected of defeatist or counterrevolutionary sentiments was shot or sentenced to hard labor. During the siege of Stalingrad alone, 13,000 were executed. Though a million inmates were released from prison camps for military service, many more were consigned to the gulag during the war. Millions died at the hands of NKVD secret police. The Red Army eventually showed considerable skill in mechanized warfare, but right up until the end its commanders were profligate with their men's lives. The Soviets suffered 350,000 casualties in the battle of Berlin in 1945. The butcher's bill could have been lessened by going slower but that would have risked letting the German capital fall into Western hands. After V-E Day, Stalin was true to his dictum, "We do not have prisoners of war, we only have traitors." Most Russian soldiers liberated from German captivity were sent to the gulag; some were shot outright".
Uncle John's Cabin: "Considering his much-lauded penchant for what passes for 'populist' rhetoric theses days -- 'Let me say this in simple right and wrong, black and white terms,' [John] Edwards bravely told one New Hampshire crowd during primary season. 'I say no to kids going to bed hungry in America. I say no to kids not having clothes to keep them warm' -- one might be tempted to assume that the former senator put his Georgetown house on the market for an asking price of $6.2 million dollars as a prelude to finally joining a commune. Alas, another progressive hero is about to bite the dust. The sale is not a precursor to Edwards liquidating his worldly possessions for redistribution among the proletariat, but, rather, simply a fundraiser for the country estate currently being constructed for him on a 100 acre plot in Chapel Hill, North Carolina."
Julie Burchill on the antisemitism of British academe: "A couple of weeks ago, on April 22, Britain's Association of University Teachers - an organization representing over 48,000 professional swots - voted to ban all contact with two Israeli universities, and asked its executive committee to consider a boycott against a third, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Israel was accused of being "a colonial apartheid state" worse than South Africa, a "regime" worthy of "removal," and its universities of repressing academic freedom. Needless to say, this show of spite received rapturous applause; well, Britain is currently playing host to the biggest ever annual number of violent anti-Semitic attacks, both on people and on property, since the 1930s. Who can blame the teachers, so conscious of their uncoolness, for wanting to get "down wiv the kidz"? They're too respectable to daub swastikas on a synagogue - but it sure feels good to band together and bully them Israeli academics! .... In one way this turn of events is as unexpected as it is cruel - after all, in this country it tends to be academics who react to anything from mild censorship to book-burning with "That's how Hitler started!" That they are now doing something Hitler would thoroughly approve of, and did - barring contact with Jews - seems to have escaped them.... "
This is almost a matter for intervention by the Holy Father. DePaul University is run by the Jesuits, is America's largest Catholic university and is frantically pro-Islamic -- so pro-Islamic that it suspended its professor Thomas Klocek for defending Israel. The Jesuits have a special oath of obedience to the Pope and the present Pope is known for a favourable attitude towards Israel. DePaul administrators have been particularly arrogant about the matter and the forthcoming court case is not going to do their reputation any good. I don't suppose the Holy Father will intervene so in the meanwhile Marathon Pundit is keeping track of what is happening. Update: A reader tells me that DePaul is NOT run by the Jesuits. As the name indicates, it is theoretically a Vincentian university.
Brendan O'Neill (Can you get a more Irish name than that?) has some amusing comments about lapsed Catholics. One snippet: "First and foremost, to be a Lapsed Catholic is to make a virtue of being a lazy git."
Peg Kaplan explains why Leftists hate Wal-Mart. Leftists hate other people's success, mainly.
John Kenneth Galbraith is THE old warhorse of Left-leaning economists. Newmark has a few good shots at some of his empty assertions.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Friday, May 13, 2005
FROM BROOKES NEWS
US economy: is another recession on the way? The Fed has once again laid down the foundations for a recession by generating another unsustainable monetary boom. As I said years before the last US recession: "It's not if but when"
The Australian economy: is a recession approaching? If figures for incomes are correct and Australian Industry Group & PricewaterhouseCoopers' previous reports are accurate then we may very well have reached the peak of the boom
John Sweeney and the AFL-CIO v. America Now that China has dropped Marxism Castro-loving socialists like Sweeney suddenly discover human rights abuses in the country. My, my, what a coincidence
We Need A 'Pension Revolution' - not social security Business is hated by the left in academe, in media, in Hollywood and the the Democrats. The latter live only to tax and spend. They haven't had a good idea since Truman dropped the bomb
Aboriginal stockworkers and our lying left The social devastation that the Commission's ruling caused to aboriginals is being flushed down the Orwellian memory hole by the journalists and leftwing agitators masquerading as academics
US economy: jobs shift and recession Figures don't tell us very much in themselves. For example, interpreting economic data without the use of a theory not only can be misleading, it can be downright dangerous for economic policy
************************************
US economy: is another recession on the way? The Fed has once again laid down the foundations for a recession by generating another unsustainable monetary boom. As I said years before the last US recession: "It's not if but when"
The Australian economy: is a recession approaching? If figures for incomes are correct and Australian Industry Group & PricewaterhouseCoopers' previous reports are accurate then we may very well have reached the peak of the boom
John Sweeney and the AFL-CIO v. America Now that China has dropped Marxism Castro-loving socialists like Sweeney suddenly discover human rights abuses in the country. My, my, what a coincidence
We Need A 'Pension Revolution' - not social security Business is hated by the left in academe, in media, in Hollywood and the the Democrats. The latter live only to tax and spend. They haven't had a good idea since Truman dropped the bomb
Aboriginal stockworkers and our lying left The social devastation that the Commission's ruling caused to aboriginals is being flushed down the Orwellian memory hole by the journalists and leftwing agitators masquerading as academics
US economy: jobs shift and recession Figures don't tell us very much in themselves. For example, interpreting economic data without the use of a theory not only can be misleading, it can be downright dangerous for economic policy
************************************
ELSEWHERE
Christopher Pearson has an article noting how young Australians are taking more of an interest in Australian traditions than ever before. I think we are seeing the first signs both in the USA and Australia of a youth reaction against all the Leftist propaganda that young people get from the schools and universities. Youth is rebellious and hates being preached to so the Leftist propagandists who infest the educational system are in fact shooting themselves in the foot and creating conservatives by their constant droning hate-speech. It is Leftism the youth are now starting to rebel against, not conservatism.
UCLA brain mappers track down IQ and find it is highly genetic: "UCLA brain mapping researchers have created the first images to show how an individual’s genes influence their brain structure and intelligence. The findings, published in the Nov. 5 issue of the journal Nature Neuroscience, offer exciting new insight about how parents pass on personality traits and cognitive abilities, and how brain diseases run in families. The team found that the amount of gray matter in the frontal parts of the brain is determined by the genetic make-up of an individual’s parents, and strongly correlates with that individual’s cognitive ability, as measured by intelligence test scores. More importantly, these are the first images to uncover how normal genetic differences influence brain structure and intelligence. Brain regions controlling language and reading skills were virtually identical in identical twins, who share exactly the same genes, while siblings showed only 60 percent of the normal brain differences. This tight structural similarity in the brains of family members helps explain why brain diseases, including schizophrenia and some types of dementia, run in families. “We were stunned to see that the amount of gray matter in frontal brain regions was strongly inherited, and also predicted an individual’s IQ score,” said Paul Thompson, the study’s chief investigator and an assistant professor of neurology at the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging."
Religiousness too, is highly hereditary: "A study published in the current issue of Journal of Personality studied adult male monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins to find that difference in religiousness are influenced by both genes and environment. But during the transition from adolescence to adulthood, genetic factors increase in importance while shared environmental factors decrease. Environmental factors (i.e. parenting and family life) influence a child's religiousness, but their effects decline with the transition into adulthood. An analysis of self-reported religiousness showed that MZ twins maintained their religious similarity over time, while the DZ twins became more dissimilar. "These correlations suggest low genetic and high environmental influences when the twins were young but a larger genetic influence as the twins age" the authors state"
Arizona Hispanic boycott fails: "An immigrant advocacy group asked Hispanics to boycott businesses and to stay home from work yesterday to protest legislation by Arizona lawmakers targeting illegal aliens, and said it was a trial run for a full-scale, three-day economic protest planned for July. "This is a test so people can see and feel the power we have and the actual stranglehold we have on the economy of this state," Elias Bermudez, executive director of Centro de Ayuda, an immigrant advocacy group in Phoenix, told reporters this week. Although advertised extensively on Spanish-language radio and television stations, most community and civic leaders agreed that yesterday's boycott was a failure because many potential participants could not afford to lose a workday or business income."
Nat Hentoff sets out the total misrepresentations being used in an attempt to discredit one of GWB's judicial nominees (Justice Brown). But misrepresentations are normal for Leftists. The truth is just too inconvenient for them.
There is a detailed article here on the destruction of U.S. immigration law by Congressional Leftists -- which resulted in the 9/11 terrorists entering the USA without the slightest difficulty.
Good news on the U.S. economy. It's surging ahead despite high oil prices.
Germany lurching back to the 1930s: "The unholy anti-free market alliance between labor unions, the SPD and large segments of the CDU fits well within the emotional state of affairs of contemporary Germany. With Germany's economy, its welfare programs and the job market in a serious crisis, people are beginning to loose their entrepreneurial spirit. Optimism about one's personal future is at a historic low point. The perceived and actual outlook for the country's economy is bleak. Depression as a mental issue has been rising steadily. To many, the current mood among the population in Germany resembles the late 1929-30 period. Now as back then, with overall conditions like these, it is not surprising that rosy, warm, get-something-for-nothing rhetoric of anti-capitalism rears its ugly head."
I have just put up on LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS some comments about the supercilious and obnoxious Garrison Keillor. Taranto also skewers Keillor, as does Peg Kaplan.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Christopher Pearson has an article noting how young Australians are taking more of an interest in Australian traditions than ever before. I think we are seeing the first signs both in the USA and Australia of a youth reaction against all the Leftist propaganda that young people get from the schools and universities. Youth is rebellious and hates being preached to so the Leftist propagandists who infest the educational system are in fact shooting themselves in the foot and creating conservatives by their constant droning hate-speech. It is Leftism the youth are now starting to rebel against, not conservatism.
UCLA brain mappers track down IQ and find it is highly genetic: "UCLA brain mapping researchers have created the first images to show how an individual’s genes influence their brain structure and intelligence. The findings, published in the Nov. 5 issue of the journal Nature Neuroscience, offer exciting new insight about how parents pass on personality traits and cognitive abilities, and how brain diseases run in families. The team found that the amount of gray matter in the frontal parts of the brain is determined by the genetic make-up of an individual’s parents, and strongly correlates with that individual’s cognitive ability, as measured by intelligence test scores. More importantly, these are the first images to uncover how normal genetic differences influence brain structure and intelligence. Brain regions controlling language and reading skills were virtually identical in identical twins, who share exactly the same genes, while siblings showed only 60 percent of the normal brain differences. This tight structural similarity in the brains of family members helps explain why brain diseases, including schizophrenia and some types of dementia, run in families. “We were stunned to see that the amount of gray matter in frontal brain regions was strongly inherited, and also predicted an individual’s IQ score,” said Paul Thompson, the study’s chief investigator and an assistant professor of neurology at the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging."
Religiousness too, is highly hereditary: "A study published in the current issue of Journal of Personality studied adult male monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins to find that difference in religiousness are influenced by both genes and environment. But during the transition from adolescence to adulthood, genetic factors increase in importance while shared environmental factors decrease. Environmental factors (i.e. parenting and family life) influence a child's religiousness, but their effects decline with the transition into adulthood. An analysis of self-reported religiousness showed that MZ twins maintained their religious similarity over time, while the DZ twins became more dissimilar. "These correlations suggest low genetic and high environmental influences when the twins were young but a larger genetic influence as the twins age" the authors state"
Arizona Hispanic boycott fails: "An immigrant advocacy group asked Hispanics to boycott businesses and to stay home from work yesterday to protest legislation by Arizona lawmakers targeting illegal aliens, and said it was a trial run for a full-scale, three-day economic protest planned for July. "This is a test so people can see and feel the power we have and the actual stranglehold we have on the economy of this state," Elias Bermudez, executive director of Centro de Ayuda, an immigrant advocacy group in Phoenix, told reporters this week. Although advertised extensively on Spanish-language radio and television stations, most community and civic leaders agreed that yesterday's boycott was a failure because many potential participants could not afford to lose a workday or business income."
Nat Hentoff sets out the total misrepresentations being used in an attempt to discredit one of GWB's judicial nominees (Justice Brown). But misrepresentations are normal for Leftists. The truth is just too inconvenient for them.
There is a detailed article here on the destruction of U.S. immigration law by Congressional Leftists -- which resulted in the 9/11 terrorists entering the USA without the slightest difficulty.
Good news on the U.S. economy. It's surging ahead despite high oil prices.
Germany lurching back to the 1930s: "The unholy anti-free market alliance between labor unions, the SPD and large segments of the CDU fits well within the emotional state of affairs of contemporary Germany. With Germany's economy, its welfare programs and the job market in a serious crisis, people are beginning to loose their entrepreneurial spirit. Optimism about one's personal future is at a historic low point. The perceived and actual outlook for the country's economy is bleak. Depression as a mental issue has been rising steadily. To many, the current mood among the population in Germany resembles the late 1929-30 period. Now as back then, with overall conditions like these, it is not surprising that rosy, warm, get-something-for-nothing rhetoric of anti-capitalism rears its ugly head."
I have just put up on LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS some comments about the supercilious and obnoxious Garrison Keillor. Taranto also skewers Keillor, as does Peg Kaplan.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Thursday, May 12, 2005
SOCIAL JUSTICE, HUMAN RIGHTS AND PUBLIC POLICY
I have just been reading a book with the title given above. It is written by a Scotsman named Hugh V. McLachlan, at Glasgow Caledonian University. He looks at the usual Leftist claims about social justice and human rights and applies relentless logic to them. And he covers what could be fairly abstruse philosophical questions in a remarkably clear and simple way. It would be a very good book for people who want to get their thinking clear on many of the usual Left/Right issues.
He starts out trying to makes sense of postmodernism but rightly concludes that it is self-refuting. To simplify a little, postmodernists claim that no statement is true but if that is so then all statements made by postmodernists are also untrue. So why should we heed them? Fun! Applying logic like that to postmodernists does not bother them at all of course. They only aim to sound clever, not to clarify or explain anything. They would only be bothered if everybody laughed at them and since lots of people seem to take them seriously, they are happy with their "ideas".
McLachlan devotes a fair bit of space to the concept of "rights", "fairness" and "justice" but he also applies his conclusions to things like health care, inequality, education, unemployment, affirmative action, poverty and taxation. His approach is as a philosopher rather than as an economist so his views are "moderate" rather than being outright conservative. He does for instance think that Britain's nationalized health service is justifiable in some form. But that perspective probably helps if one is going to take any of his arguments into discussions with Leftists.
There is more about the book here. Prof. McLachlan can be contacted on h.mclachlan@gcal.ac.uk
******************************
I have just been reading a book with the title given above. It is written by a Scotsman named Hugh V. McLachlan, at Glasgow Caledonian University. He looks at the usual Leftist claims about social justice and human rights and applies relentless logic to them. And he covers what could be fairly abstruse philosophical questions in a remarkably clear and simple way. It would be a very good book for people who want to get their thinking clear on many of the usual Left/Right issues.
He starts out trying to makes sense of postmodernism but rightly concludes that it is self-refuting. To simplify a little, postmodernists claim that no statement is true but if that is so then all statements made by postmodernists are also untrue. So why should we heed them? Fun! Applying logic like that to postmodernists does not bother them at all of course. They only aim to sound clever, not to clarify or explain anything. They would only be bothered if everybody laughed at them and since lots of people seem to take them seriously, they are happy with their "ideas".
McLachlan devotes a fair bit of space to the concept of "rights", "fairness" and "justice" but he also applies his conclusions to things like health care, inequality, education, unemployment, affirmative action, poverty and taxation. His approach is as a philosopher rather than as an economist so his views are "moderate" rather than being outright conservative. He does for instance think that Britain's nationalized health service is justifiable in some form. But that perspective probably helps if one is going to take any of his arguments into discussions with Leftists.
There is more about the book here. Prof. McLachlan can be contacted on h.mclachlan@gcal.ac.uk
******************************
ELSEWHERE
Quite right too: "The US Congress has passed legislation that creates thousands of working visas for Australians and their spouses in what is seen in Washington as a sign of the special relationship with Australia. "I don't think any other country at the moment would have been able to get this sort of visa concession in the current climate," an official said. Some 10,500 E3 visas will be issued annually to Australians with tertiary qualifications who have job offers from American employers, including universities, government departments and businesses. There is no age limit. Until now, Australians have had to compete for one of the 65,000 work visas issued worldwide by the US each year. Last year, 986 Australians received an HIB visa, which does not allow spouses of visa holders to work and has a time limit of six years. Once President George Bush signs the legislation, Australia will become the only country whose nationals are issued special work visas."
I must say that the constant talk about "Blair's bloody nose", Blair being a "lame duck" and the like is yet another proof of how divorced a lot of media commentators are from reality. Tony Blair has just won an unprecedented (for Labour) third term in office with a substantial majority of 66 and that is supposed to be some sort of defeat??? If he had OPPOSED the Iraq war and got a majority of only one, the selfsame whiners would have been describing it as an "historic achievement" or the like. The Soviet Union may have fallen but the Western media seem determined to keep the old lying Soviet press and its distortions alive and well and more pervasive than ever. If they were criticizing Blair for getting only 36% of the vote I would understand that but only the opposition parties seem to be bothered by that. What the mainly Leftist commentators are gloating about is that Blair lost 50 seats -- but coming off the huge majority he had before, his present 66 seat majority is just a return to normal.
England getting restive: "The gap between the amount of public money spent per head in Scotland compared with that spent in England has grown despite devolution. The situation will particularly anger Tories, who won about 60,000 more votes in England than Labour. They secured 92 fewer seats although the South voted overwhelmingly Tory.... According to this year's Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses published by the Treasury last month, 5,593 pounds will be spent on each person in the South East while 7,786 pounds will be spent per head in Scotland. In Wales, the figure is 7,312 pounds and in Northern Ireland 8,566 pounds ..... However, the outcome of the election will renew calls for England to be given its own parliament to campaign for a more equal share of public money or for excluding Scottish MPs at Westminster from English business."
Good to see Taranto skewering one of Australia's puffed-up Leftist public broadcasters. In their best supercilious manner, they tried to diss Brisbane's own Chrenkoff but got their facts wrong. And it was in a TV program where they purport to correct errors of fact. What a laugh! Chrenkoff is certainly laughing about the whole thing. By the way, I love this post by Chrenkoff. No wonder he has such a big readership (2 million hits in one year!).
Another instance of where we have the internet to thank for corrections that we otherwise would not hear is the Oreskes fraud. A sociologist named Naomi Oreskes did a "study" which arrived at the hilarious claim that there was total consensus among scientists about global warming. Despite the falsity of that claim being widely known, the "study" was published in a serious scientific journal. When an article from a science professor (Peiser) giving the actual facts was submitted to the same journal, however, they refused to print it -- giving grounds for their refusal which were also falsehoods. This should have been a major scandal of the sort that the media love reporting but we have heard not a whisper of it from them so far that I can tell. You can read Peiser's unpublished corrective article plus the whole of Peiser's correspondence with the journal here. There is a also a big discussion of the matter here. I reported the matter on GREENIE WATCH on December 9, 2004 and on May 2, 2005
Mike Adams is a genius. His latest hilarious shot at feminist bigotry is here. The feminist sourpusses won't be laughing, of course.
Carnival of the Vanities is up again with much good reading
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Quite right too: "The US Congress has passed legislation that creates thousands of working visas for Australians and their spouses in what is seen in Washington as a sign of the special relationship with Australia. "I don't think any other country at the moment would have been able to get this sort of visa concession in the current climate," an official said. Some 10,500 E3 visas will be issued annually to Australians with tertiary qualifications who have job offers from American employers, including universities, government departments and businesses. There is no age limit. Until now, Australians have had to compete for one of the 65,000 work visas issued worldwide by the US each year. Last year, 986 Australians received an HIB visa, which does not allow spouses of visa holders to work and has a time limit of six years. Once President George Bush signs the legislation, Australia will become the only country whose nationals are issued special work visas."
I must say that the constant talk about "Blair's bloody nose", Blair being a "lame duck" and the like is yet another proof of how divorced a lot of media commentators are from reality. Tony Blair has just won an unprecedented (for Labour) third term in office with a substantial majority of 66 and that is supposed to be some sort of defeat??? If he had OPPOSED the Iraq war and got a majority of only one, the selfsame whiners would have been describing it as an "historic achievement" or the like. The Soviet Union may have fallen but the Western media seem determined to keep the old lying Soviet press and its distortions alive and well and more pervasive than ever. If they were criticizing Blair for getting only 36% of the vote I would understand that but only the opposition parties seem to be bothered by that. What the mainly Leftist commentators are gloating about is that Blair lost 50 seats -- but coming off the huge majority he had before, his present 66 seat majority is just a return to normal.
England getting restive: "The gap between the amount of public money spent per head in Scotland compared with that spent in England has grown despite devolution. The situation will particularly anger Tories, who won about 60,000 more votes in England than Labour. They secured 92 fewer seats although the South voted overwhelmingly Tory.... According to this year's Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses published by the Treasury last month, 5,593 pounds will be spent on each person in the South East while 7,786 pounds will be spent per head in Scotland. In Wales, the figure is 7,312 pounds and in Northern Ireland 8,566 pounds ..... However, the outcome of the election will renew calls for England to be given its own parliament to campaign for a more equal share of public money or for excluding Scottish MPs at Westminster from English business."
Good to see Taranto skewering one of Australia's puffed-up Leftist public broadcasters. In their best supercilious manner, they tried to diss Brisbane's own Chrenkoff but got their facts wrong. And it was in a TV program where they purport to correct errors of fact. What a laugh! Chrenkoff is certainly laughing about the whole thing. By the way, I love this post by Chrenkoff. No wonder he has such a big readership (2 million hits in one year!).
Another instance of where we have the internet to thank for corrections that we otherwise would not hear is the Oreskes fraud. A sociologist named Naomi Oreskes did a "study" which arrived at the hilarious claim that there was total consensus among scientists about global warming. Despite the falsity of that claim being widely known, the "study" was published in a serious scientific journal. When an article from a science professor (Peiser) giving the actual facts was submitted to the same journal, however, they refused to print it -- giving grounds for their refusal which were also falsehoods. This should have been a major scandal of the sort that the media love reporting but we have heard not a whisper of it from them so far that I can tell. You can read Peiser's unpublished corrective article plus the whole of Peiser's correspondence with the journal here. There is a also a big discussion of the matter here. I reported the matter on GREENIE WATCH on December 9, 2004 and on May 2, 2005
Mike Adams is a genius. His latest hilarious shot at feminist bigotry is here. The feminist sourpusses won't be laughing, of course.
Carnival of the Vanities is up again with much good reading
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
BRAIN SCIENCE NOTES
People realize that blacks are more dangerous. How amazing! "Negative feelings about black people may be subconsciously learned by both white and black Americans, suggests a brain imaging study. The research is among the first to test the brain physiology of racial biases in both black and white subjects. The new study showed that both white and black people had increased activity in an area of the brain called the amygdala - which responds to fearful or threatening situations - when completing a matching task with images of black faces". Logical Meme has more.
Homosexual brains respond like female brains: "Using a brain-imaging technique, Swedish researchers have shown that men and women respond differently to two odors that may be involved in sexual arousal, and that homosexual men respond in the same way as women. The two chemicals, one a testosterone derivative produced in men's sweat and the other an estrogen-like compound found in women's urine, have long been suspected of being pheromones, chemicals emitted by one individual to trigger some behavior in another of the same species. The role of pheromones, particularly in guiding sexual behavior, has been well established in animals but experts differ as to what importance, if any, they have retained in human mating. The new research may open the way to studying human pheromones as well as the biological basis of sexual preference. The study, by Dr. Ivanka Savic and colleagues at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, is being reported in Tuesday's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences..... The report by Dr. Savic and her colleagues recalls a 1991 report by Dr. Simon LeVay that a small region of the hypothalamus was twice as large in straight men than in women or gay men."
************************************
SOME MEDICAL NOTES
A sane verdict: "A jury took less than three hours yesterday to throw out a prosecution which threatened to extend the crime of manslaughter to carers who fail to prevent suicides by people who have repeatedly made it clear that they wish to take their own lives. Jill Anderson, 49, who told police she and her pain-racked husband, Paul, had exchanged the phrase 'I love you' at least 17 times a day in his final weeks, was cleared after admitting that she had failed to dial 999 when he took the last of many overdoses at their Yorkshire country cottage .... Lawyers are assessing the implications for the use of manslaughter by gross negligence as an alternative to the Suicide Act, which applies only to people who actively assist someone to die. The prosecuting QC was the Treasury counsel David Perry, who represented the Home Office in the Diane Pretty case, arguing against her right to die, and there have been suggestions that the government has been looking for ways to tighten things up."
Organ sanity needed: "Let's put some perspective on the 'ethics' of money in transplant situations: The surgeon who performs the transplant is paid. The nurses, anesthesiologists, medical technicians and aides who assist the surgeon are paid. The company which transports the organ from its point of origin to its point of use is paid. The lady behind the counter at the hospital coffee shop who serves up a cuppa joe to the patients' families while they await word is paid. Only one party to this whole process is expected to forego payment for 'ethical' reasons -- the donor (or, if the donor is dead, the donor's estate). The result? Only 30% of Americans register to donate their organs. Hundreds of Americans die every month awaiting a transplant organ which never arrives. Thousands of transplantable organs are buried or baked every month. Nobody wins. The exclusion of market values from the organ transplant process results in death after death -- in the midst of an abundance of potential life."
Freedom and the organ shortage: "Governments cause lots of problems. Individuals solve lots of problems. When individuals try to solve a problem caused by government, they face an uphill struggle. The organ shortage is an interesting example, and since April is National Donate Life Month, the subject is worth reviewing in detail. There is a large and growing shortage of transplantable human organs in the United States. Over 88,000 Americans are now on the national waiting list, and about 40,000 more join the list every year. Over 6,000 Americans died waiting for transplant operations last year. But these deaths are not the result of any real scarcity of organs. In fact, Americans bury or cremate about 20,000 transplantable organs every year. Rather, the federal government has caused the organ shortage by bureaucratic meddling in the transfer of organs from people who no longer need them to people who do."
Good thing they found out eventually: "The nitrous oxide gas used in most general anaesthetics is unsafe and should be discontinued, say Australian doctors who have found it doubles the rate of serious vomiting and pneumonia after surgery and raises the risk of wound infections. Their study of 2050 patients also showed that those who had undergone surgery were slower to recover and likely to stay in hospital longer if gases used to keep them unconscious included nitrous oxide as a base, rather than oxygen alone or oxygen and air. Paul Myles, director of anaesthesia at The Alfred Hospital in Melbourne, said: "This is going to really surprise people ... nitrous oxide is used in 80 per cent of anaesthetics. It's the stock in the stew. It's the foundation of anaesthesia and has been that way for 160 years."
*************************
People realize that blacks are more dangerous. How amazing! "Negative feelings about black people may be subconsciously learned by both white and black Americans, suggests a brain imaging study. The research is among the first to test the brain physiology of racial biases in both black and white subjects. The new study showed that both white and black people had increased activity in an area of the brain called the amygdala - which responds to fearful or threatening situations - when completing a matching task with images of black faces". Logical Meme has more.
Homosexual brains respond like female brains: "Using a brain-imaging technique, Swedish researchers have shown that men and women respond differently to two odors that may be involved in sexual arousal, and that homosexual men respond in the same way as women. The two chemicals, one a testosterone derivative produced in men's sweat and the other an estrogen-like compound found in women's urine, have long been suspected of being pheromones, chemicals emitted by one individual to trigger some behavior in another of the same species. The role of pheromones, particularly in guiding sexual behavior, has been well established in animals but experts differ as to what importance, if any, they have retained in human mating. The new research may open the way to studying human pheromones as well as the biological basis of sexual preference. The study, by Dr. Ivanka Savic and colleagues at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, is being reported in Tuesday's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences..... The report by Dr. Savic and her colleagues recalls a 1991 report by Dr. Simon LeVay that a small region of the hypothalamus was twice as large in straight men than in women or gay men."
************************************
SOME MEDICAL NOTES
A sane verdict: "A jury took less than three hours yesterday to throw out a prosecution which threatened to extend the crime of manslaughter to carers who fail to prevent suicides by people who have repeatedly made it clear that they wish to take their own lives. Jill Anderson, 49, who told police she and her pain-racked husband, Paul, had exchanged the phrase 'I love you' at least 17 times a day in his final weeks, was cleared after admitting that she had failed to dial 999 when he took the last of many overdoses at their Yorkshire country cottage .... Lawyers are assessing the implications for the use of manslaughter by gross negligence as an alternative to the Suicide Act, which applies only to people who actively assist someone to die. The prosecuting QC was the Treasury counsel David Perry, who represented the Home Office in the Diane Pretty case, arguing against her right to die, and there have been suggestions that the government has been looking for ways to tighten things up."
Organ sanity needed: "Let's put some perspective on the 'ethics' of money in transplant situations: The surgeon who performs the transplant is paid. The nurses, anesthesiologists, medical technicians and aides who assist the surgeon are paid. The company which transports the organ from its point of origin to its point of use is paid. The lady behind the counter at the hospital coffee shop who serves up a cuppa joe to the patients' families while they await word is paid. Only one party to this whole process is expected to forego payment for 'ethical' reasons -- the donor (or, if the donor is dead, the donor's estate). The result? Only 30% of Americans register to donate their organs. Hundreds of Americans die every month awaiting a transplant organ which never arrives. Thousands of transplantable organs are buried or baked every month. Nobody wins. The exclusion of market values from the organ transplant process results in death after death -- in the midst of an abundance of potential life."
Freedom and the organ shortage: "Governments cause lots of problems. Individuals solve lots of problems. When individuals try to solve a problem caused by government, they face an uphill struggle. The organ shortage is an interesting example, and since April is National Donate Life Month, the subject is worth reviewing in detail. There is a large and growing shortage of transplantable human organs in the United States. Over 88,000 Americans are now on the national waiting list, and about 40,000 more join the list every year. Over 6,000 Americans died waiting for transplant operations last year. But these deaths are not the result of any real scarcity of organs. In fact, Americans bury or cremate about 20,000 transplantable organs every year. Rather, the federal government has caused the organ shortage by bureaucratic meddling in the transfer of organs from people who no longer need them to people who do."
Good thing they found out eventually: "The nitrous oxide gas used in most general anaesthetics is unsafe and should be discontinued, say Australian doctors who have found it doubles the rate of serious vomiting and pneumonia after surgery and raises the risk of wound infections. Their study of 2050 patients also showed that those who had undergone surgery were slower to recover and likely to stay in hospital longer if gases used to keep them unconscious included nitrous oxide as a base, rather than oxygen alone or oxygen and air. Paul Myles, director of anaesthesia at The Alfred Hospital in Melbourne, said: "This is going to really surprise people ... nitrous oxide is used in 80 per cent of anaesthetics. It's the stock in the stew. It's the foundation of anaesthesia and has been that way for 160 years."
*************************
ELSEWHERE
The Australian government has just brought down a tax-cutting budget for the year ahead.
Another fabricated "hate crime" in California: "A 17-year-old top wrestler at an area high school here faked a series of gay-bashing incidents that prompted a police investigation, authorities said. The rash of gay-bashing incidents at Tamalpais High School was the work of a student gay leader who claimed she was the victim of hate crimes, according to Mill Valley Police Capt. James Wickham. The teen, who heads the school's Gay-Straight Alliance, admitted to authorities that she was the perpetrator of the incidents, which included vandalizing her own car with derogatory graffiti, police said. Other incidents involved teachers who received threatening telephone messages. ``It has been determined that all the incidents have been committed by a single individual,'' Wickham said. The student was not identified by police. The girl has been suspended and could face expulsion, said Bob Ferguson, district school superintendent. ``She confessed to everything,'' Ferguson said. ``She did admit to police that it was basically for attention.''"
I have just added some more material to my reference article on Hitler. One of the things I look at is to what extent Hitler was a Christian. Most of what I have to say about that, however, is in a separate article here.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
The Australian government has just brought down a tax-cutting budget for the year ahead.
Another fabricated "hate crime" in California: "A 17-year-old top wrestler at an area high school here faked a series of gay-bashing incidents that prompted a police investigation, authorities said. The rash of gay-bashing incidents at Tamalpais High School was the work of a student gay leader who claimed she was the victim of hate crimes, according to Mill Valley Police Capt. James Wickham. The teen, who heads the school's Gay-Straight Alliance, admitted to authorities that she was the perpetrator of the incidents, which included vandalizing her own car with derogatory graffiti, police said. Other incidents involved teachers who received threatening telephone messages. ``It has been determined that all the incidents have been committed by a single individual,'' Wickham said. The student was not identified by police. The girl has been suspended and could face expulsion, said Bob Ferguson, district school superintendent. ``She confessed to everything,'' Ferguson said. ``She did admit to police that it was basically for attention.''"
I have just added some more material to my reference article on Hitler. One of the things I look at is to what extent Hitler was a Christian. Most of what I have to say about that, however, is in a separate article here.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
TUESDAY ROUNDUP
A brief version of my roundup again today
On Dissecting Leftism I argue that Christians are more tolerant than secularists
On Political Correctness Watch I note evidence that boys at school are hopelessly incorrect despite all the Leftist brainwashing they get
On Greenie Watch I note a scientific report that suggests that we need MORE air pollution to fight global warming
On Education Watch I note that economists have discovered that parenting style has little influence on how well a kid achieves but how intelligent the parent is matters greatly.
On Socialized Medicine I note cases of bureaucratic murder in Britains National Health system
On Gun Watch I note that Alaska is making life easier for gun owners
On Leftists as Elitists I reproduce some obnoxious comments from an atheist elitist
********************************
A brief version of my roundup again today
On Dissecting Leftism I argue that Christians are more tolerant than secularists
On Political Correctness Watch I note evidence that boys at school are hopelessly incorrect despite all the Leftist brainwashing they get
On Greenie Watch I note a scientific report that suggests that we need MORE air pollution to fight global warming
On Education Watch I note that economists have discovered that parenting style has little influence on how well a kid achieves but how intelligent the parent is matters greatly.
On Socialized Medicine I note cases of bureaucratic murder in Britains National Health system
On Gun Watch I note that Alaska is making life easier for gun owners
On Leftists as Elitists I reproduce some obnoxious comments from an atheist elitist
********************************
ELSEWHERE
Blair depends on Scottish and Welsh votes: "The Conservatives won England in the general election, in votes but not in seats. Both the Conservatives and Labour gained more than eight million English votes, but the Conservatives finished more than 50,000 ahead. This trend is worrying for Labour. In 1997 they had a majority in England over the Conservatives of more than 3.5 million votes. In only two elections the whole of that lead has melted away. If the trend is not reversed, the Conservatives will have their own large lead in English votes at the next election. This time, the first-past-the-post system has worked in Labour’s favour, against the Conservatives and against the Lib Dems. In 2005, although they were behind in votes, Labour led in seats by 286 to 193. But there will be comprehensive boundary changes in the course of this Parliament; Labour will not again enjoy such an excessive advantage"
Islamic terrorism draws on European and American thinking: "We know that not every political movement has created a terrorist splinter group, or served as an excuse for terrorism. Actually, terrorism has been the favourite method of extreme socialists only - both of the (left-wing) international, and the (right-wing) national varieties. Since the Jacobins of the French revolution held a "Reign of Terror" in 1794, the international socialists (communists) and national socialists (fascists) have shared a common tendency to use terrorism. Modern terrorism was born within a year, 1967-1968. International socialists (communists) started the fashion all over the world simultaneously, which should make us suspicious about the common roots. National socialists followed suit, turning Marxists of Muslim origin into Islamists of Marxist origin".
David Brooks on "Global governance" nonsense: "The people who talk about global governance begin with the same premises as the world government types: the belief that a world of separate nations, living by the law of the jungle, will inevitably be a violent world. Instead, these people believe, some supranational authority should be set up to settle international disputes by rule of law. They know we're not close to a global version of the European superstate. So they are content to champion creeping institutions like the International Criminal Court. They treat U.N. General Assembly resolutions as an emerging body of international law. They seek to foment a social atmosphere in which positions taken by multilateral organizations are deemed to have more "legitimacy" than positions taken by democratic nations.... We'll never accept it, first, because it is undemocratic. It is impossible to set up legitimate global authorities because there is no global democracy, no sense of common peoplehood and trust. So multilateral organizations can never look like legislatures, with open debate, up or down votes and the losers accepting majority decisions. Instead, they look like meetings of unelected elites, of technocrats who make decisions in secret and who rely upon intentionally impenetrable language, who settle differences through arcane fudges. Americans, like most peoples, will never surrender even a bit of their national democracy for the sake of multilateral technocracy".
Home-ownership should be a GOP priority: "The issue is the proposed transformation of the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, commonly known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those Republicans who say that they wish to "reform" Fannie and Freddie put their party at risk, their own careers at risk, and the American Dream at risk. Yet amazingly, their effort to destroy the ownership-expanding function of Fannie and Freddie is gaining momentum. Their argument is that Fannie and Freddie, as private institutions with implicit public support, are interfering with the pure private free market in home mortgages, because they deliberately subsidize low- and moderate-income home buyers. Greenspan, Baker, and Shelby see such ownership-fostering as the devil's work of too much big government and also as a distortion of the housing market. Beyond those concerns -- to the politico-historical reality that home ownership is public good as well as a private good -- they simply cannot see. Some Republicans, happily, defended the pragmatic idea of widespread private ownership against the onslaught of ideologues. Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky, for example, declared, "We must make sure the institutions are financially sound, but we must also make sure that we do not do anything to jeopardize the American dream of homeownership." The American Dream: that's the key idea here".
You lose money when you save: "Today, a typical money market yield (I use the figure for Merrill Lynch Ready Assets Trust) is 2.13%: if you invest $1,000 at 2.13%, you will get $21.30 in interest over the course of a year. But you won't receive the full $21.30. You'll have to pay taxes on that amount. Currently, the marginal federal income tax rate is 35%, which reduces the yield to $13.85. But thanks to persistent inflation, the value of both the interest you earn and the money that you saved declines. Currently, the Consumer Price Index stands at 3.0%, which means that the $1,000 you invest at 2.13% will be $970 at the end of a year, and the $13.85 after-tax income you receive amounts to $13.43. So the $1,000 you saved, with the interest that it nominally earned, has purchasing power at the end of a year of $983.42. Your actual yield is -1.66%. That's right: you lose money when you save."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Blair depends on Scottish and Welsh votes: "The Conservatives won England in the general election, in votes but not in seats. Both the Conservatives and Labour gained more than eight million English votes, but the Conservatives finished more than 50,000 ahead. This trend is worrying for Labour. In 1997 they had a majority in England over the Conservatives of more than 3.5 million votes. In only two elections the whole of that lead has melted away. If the trend is not reversed, the Conservatives will have their own large lead in English votes at the next election. This time, the first-past-the-post system has worked in Labour’s favour, against the Conservatives and against the Lib Dems. In 2005, although they were behind in votes, Labour led in seats by 286 to 193. But there will be comprehensive boundary changes in the course of this Parliament; Labour will not again enjoy such an excessive advantage"
Islamic terrorism draws on European and American thinking: "We know that not every political movement has created a terrorist splinter group, or served as an excuse for terrorism. Actually, terrorism has been the favourite method of extreme socialists only - both of the (left-wing) international, and the (right-wing) national varieties. Since the Jacobins of the French revolution held a "Reign of Terror" in 1794, the international socialists (communists) and national socialists (fascists) have shared a common tendency to use terrorism. Modern terrorism was born within a year, 1967-1968. International socialists (communists) started the fashion all over the world simultaneously, which should make us suspicious about the common roots. National socialists followed suit, turning Marxists of Muslim origin into Islamists of Marxist origin".
David Brooks on "Global governance" nonsense: "The people who talk about global governance begin with the same premises as the world government types: the belief that a world of separate nations, living by the law of the jungle, will inevitably be a violent world. Instead, these people believe, some supranational authority should be set up to settle international disputes by rule of law. They know we're not close to a global version of the European superstate. So they are content to champion creeping institutions like the International Criminal Court. They treat U.N. General Assembly resolutions as an emerging body of international law. They seek to foment a social atmosphere in which positions taken by multilateral organizations are deemed to have more "legitimacy" than positions taken by democratic nations.... We'll never accept it, first, because it is undemocratic. It is impossible to set up legitimate global authorities because there is no global democracy, no sense of common peoplehood and trust. So multilateral organizations can never look like legislatures, with open debate, up or down votes and the losers accepting majority decisions. Instead, they look like meetings of unelected elites, of technocrats who make decisions in secret and who rely upon intentionally impenetrable language, who settle differences through arcane fudges. Americans, like most peoples, will never surrender even a bit of their national democracy for the sake of multilateral technocracy".
Home-ownership should be a GOP priority: "The issue is the proposed transformation of the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, commonly known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those Republicans who say that they wish to "reform" Fannie and Freddie put their party at risk, their own careers at risk, and the American Dream at risk. Yet amazingly, their effort to destroy the ownership-expanding function of Fannie and Freddie is gaining momentum. Their argument is that Fannie and Freddie, as private institutions with implicit public support, are interfering with the pure private free market in home mortgages, because they deliberately subsidize low- and moderate-income home buyers. Greenspan, Baker, and Shelby see such ownership-fostering as the devil's work of too much big government and also as a distortion of the housing market. Beyond those concerns -- to the politico-historical reality that home ownership is public good as well as a private good -- they simply cannot see. Some Republicans, happily, defended the pragmatic idea of widespread private ownership against the onslaught of ideologues. Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky, for example, declared, "We must make sure the institutions are financially sound, but we must also make sure that we do not do anything to jeopardize the American dream of homeownership." The American Dream: that's the key idea here".
You lose money when you save: "Today, a typical money market yield (I use the figure for Merrill Lynch Ready Assets Trust) is 2.13%: if you invest $1,000 at 2.13%, you will get $21.30 in interest over the course of a year. But you won't receive the full $21.30. You'll have to pay taxes on that amount. Currently, the marginal federal income tax rate is 35%, which reduces the yield to $13.85. But thanks to persistent inflation, the value of both the interest you earn and the money that you saved declines. Currently, the Consumer Price Index stands at 3.0%, which means that the $1,000 you invest at 2.13% will be $970 at the end of a year, and the $13.85 after-tax income you receive amounts to $13.43. So the $1,000 you saved, with the interest that it nominally earned, has purchasing power at the end of a year of $983.42. Your actual yield is -1.66%. That's right: you lose money when you save."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Monday, May 09, 2005
CHRISTIANITY AND TOLERANCE REVISITED
A couple of days ago I commented on the preposterous claim by Christopher Hitchens to the effect that Christianity is intrinsically intolerant and that secularism is the path to tolerance. One only needs to point to the wonderful "tolerance" of atheistic Communism to see how absurd that proposition is. What PID says about Christianity and politics set me to thinking about the topic again, however. PID points out that for around a century now the theologically "modernist" churches -- which mostly means the established churches -- have been supporters of the political Left -- including such unsavoury and intolerant Leftists as Communists. So I think one could in fact argue the opposite of what Hitchens does. I think it is the LEFTIST churches that are most intolerant. Like all Leftists, they are would-be dictators and they support authoritarian and control-freak policies with great regularity. For more details, see today's post on LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS.
And when we look at history, who is the most raving Christian fundamentalist who has ever had significant political power? I think it would have to be Britain's Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658). And what did he do? Did he ruthlessly destroy all who disagreed with his doctrines? What did he do about the Jews in particular? No group could be a bigger challenge to Cromwell's theology than the Jews. They didn't even accept Jesus as the Messiah, let alone any of the other doctrines of Protestantism. You know what I am going to say, don't you? Far from persecuting the Jews, it was Cromwell who allowed them back into England -- for the first time since Edward I expelled them all in 1290. That nasty intolerant old fundamentalist Protestant!
Cromwell was no saint. He massacred those who opposed him militarily (such as the Irish) but after the holocausts unleashed on Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki under the aegis of FDR and Truman, I don't think the Left have much room to condemn Cromwell for that.
The basic point I am making is once again the perennial conservative warning about the complexity of human affairs. Simple generalizations (such as "secularism leads to tolerance") just will not do. Those who preach tolerance are often the most tyrannical and those who want to impose minor restrictions -- as Christian conservatives certainly do on things like homosexual marriage -- may nonetheless be the most tolerant overall.
*******************************
A couple of days ago I commented on the preposterous claim by Christopher Hitchens to the effect that Christianity is intrinsically intolerant and that secularism is the path to tolerance. One only needs to point to the wonderful "tolerance" of atheistic Communism to see how absurd that proposition is. What PID says about Christianity and politics set me to thinking about the topic again, however. PID points out that for around a century now the theologically "modernist" churches -- which mostly means the established churches -- have been supporters of the political Left -- including such unsavoury and intolerant Leftists as Communists. So I think one could in fact argue the opposite of what Hitchens does. I think it is the LEFTIST churches that are most intolerant. Like all Leftists, they are would-be dictators and they support authoritarian and control-freak policies with great regularity. For more details, see today's post on LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS.
And when we look at history, who is the most raving Christian fundamentalist who has ever had significant political power? I think it would have to be Britain's Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658). And what did he do? Did he ruthlessly destroy all who disagreed with his doctrines? What did he do about the Jews in particular? No group could be a bigger challenge to Cromwell's theology than the Jews. They didn't even accept Jesus as the Messiah, let alone any of the other doctrines of Protestantism. You know what I am going to say, don't you? Far from persecuting the Jews, it was Cromwell who allowed them back into England -- for the first time since Edward I expelled them all in 1290. That nasty intolerant old fundamentalist Protestant!
Cromwell was no saint. He massacred those who opposed him militarily (such as the Irish) but after the holocausts unleashed on Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki under the aegis of FDR and Truman, I don't think the Left have much room to condemn Cromwell for that.
The basic point I am making is once again the perennial conservative warning about the complexity of human affairs. Simple generalizations (such as "secularism leads to tolerance") just will not do. Those who preach tolerance are often the most tyrannical and those who want to impose minor restrictions -- as Christian conservatives certainly do on things like homosexual marriage -- may nonetheless be the most tolerant overall.
*******************************
ELSEWHERE
LOL: "Planned Parenthood has launched a campaign to motivate all of its members and supporters, nominal Catholics and non-Catholics, to send letters to the editor, requesting that Pope Benedict XVI reconsider his "backward views" and change his opinion on sexual morality."
GWB has called the Democrats' bluff: "By embracing the progressive indexing of Social Security benefits, the president has asked us to make a shared sacrifice for the common good. He's asking middle- and upper-class folks to accept benefit cuts so there will be money for the people who are really facing poverty. He has asked us to redistribute money down the income scale. Why should programs for children and families be strangled so Donald Trump can get bigger benefit checks? He has made the hard choices.... So how has the St. Francis of Assisi wing of the Democratic Party responded to Bush's challenge? Does it applaud him for doing what it has spent the past years telling him he should do? Of course not. The Democratic leadership has dropped all that shared sacrifice talk and started making demagogic appeals to people's narrow self-interest. ... For two decades they've been courageously saying we need to means-test Social Security, so we can focus our resources on those who need it. Now Bush has embraced their view. Are they saying that since Bush has moved so far in a redistributionist direction that perhaps the Democrats should budge slightly, too? Of course not. They're inventing lame reasons to explain why they shouldn't be for the policy they have been for over the past 20 years."
Democrats discovering free speech: "Something remarkable is happening as a Republican Congress and president move to crackdown on 527 groups like the MoveOn.org Voter Fund and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: Liberals are realizing that something's fishy. Three years after the passage of McCain-Feingold (a.k.a. the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, a.k.a. the End of Free Speech As We Know It), a smattering of Democrats and liberal activists are slowly coming to the conclusion that maybe it wasn't such a good idea to let the government decide who can and cannot engage in political speech."
Conservative law schools growing: "In the past few years, religious conservatives have realized what their liberal counterparts saw long ago: The place where the culture wars are won or lost is in the courtroom. Some religious leaders, including Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, have set up schools to train their own battalion of lawyers..... the students at these schools were very bright and they were turning down good, well-known -- sometimes Ivy League -- schools to attend these instead..... Both schools seemed determined not to turn into religious ghettos. Rather, they wanted their graduates to really go out into the culture and change it from the inside... schools like Patrick Henry and Ave Maria [are] growing at a very rapid pace (Evangelical college enrollment grew 60 percent between 1990 and 2002, while enrollment at other private and public schools remained stagnant)."
Immigration: Sowell sums it up: "Social Security used to be called the third rail of politics but illegal immigration is the real third rail that both political parties are afraid to touch. Cops who find illegal aliens are under orders not to turn them in to the feds. And the federal government's own border guards have their hands tied by the higher-ups as well. Now that Hispanics are the largest minority in the country, and with the country closely divided politically, neither party wants to risk alienating the Hispanic vote by enforcing immigration laws. Many other Americans may be outraged at the way illegal aliens are handled with kid gloves -- and, in some places, even given rights normally reserved for citizens -- but so long as this outrage is directed at both parties, neither party wants to be the one to risk losing the Hispanic vote."
The Left don't want the poor to get rich: "In recent years, the idea of development - in the sense of economic modernisation - has come to be seen as not feasible, or even desirable. A landmark here was the United Nations Brundtland Report of 1987, which promoted the idea of 'sustainable development' - defined as giving overriding priority to 'the essential needs of the world's poor'. In other words, the sole focus should be on the most basic needs of the poor. Even worse, the report argued that technology and social organisation put limits on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs - so suggesting that the environment places natural limits on development"
Attacks on McDonalds are really attacks on people who eat there: "Some people aren't very sensible or conventional. But of course, the people making a federal case of the McDonald's enthusiasm will not accept this as fact. They need an American villain, some typically American institution, like big business, so they can then denounce not the stupid or peculiar people who are overeating of their own free will but the McDonald's big business people who are, you guessed it, coercing them all to come and eat there."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
LOL: "Planned Parenthood has launched a campaign to motivate all of its members and supporters, nominal Catholics and non-Catholics, to send letters to the editor, requesting that Pope Benedict XVI reconsider his "backward views" and change his opinion on sexual morality."
GWB has called the Democrats' bluff: "By embracing the progressive indexing of Social Security benefits, the president has asked us to make a shared sacrifice for the common good. He's asking middle- and upper-class folks to accept benefit cuts so there will be money for the people who are really facing poverty. He has asked us to redistribute money down the income scale. Why should programs for children and families be strangled so Donald Trump can get bigger benefit checks? He has made the hard choices.... So how has the St. Francis of Assisi wing of the Democratic Party responded to Bush's challenge? Does it applaud him for doing what it has spent the past years telling him he should do? Of course not. The Democratic leadership has dropped all that shared sacrifice talk and started making demagogic appeals to people's narrow self-interest. ... For two decades they've been courageously saying we need to means-test Social Security, so we can focus our resources on those who need it. Now Bush has embraced their view. Are they saying that since Bush has moved so far in a redistributionist direction that perhaps the Democrats should budge slightly, too? Of course not. They're inventing lame reasons to explain why they shouldn't be for the policy they have been for over the past 20 years."
Democrats discovering free speech: "Something remarkable is happening as a Republican Congress and president move to crackdown on 527 groups like the MoveOn.org Voter Fund and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: Liberals are realizing that something's fishy. Three years after the passage of McCain-Feingold (a.k.a. the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, a.k.a. the End of Free Speech As We Know It), a smattering of Democrats and liberal activists are slowly coming to the conclusion that maybe it wasn't such a good idea to let the government decide who can and cannot engage in political speech."
Conservative law schools growing: "In the past few years, religious conservatives have realized what their liberal counterparts saw long ago: The place where the culture wars are won or lost is in the courtroom. Some religious leaders, including Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, have set up schools to train their own battalion of lawyers..... the students at these schools were very bright and they were turning down good, well-known -- sometimes Ivy League -- schools to attend these instead..... Both schools seemed determined not to turn into religious ghettos. Rather, they wanted their graduates to really go out into the culture and change it from the inside... schools like Patrick Henry and Ave Maria [are] growing at a very rapid pace (Evangelical college enrollment grew 60 percent between 1990 and 2002, while enrollment at other private and public schools remained stagnant)."
Immigration: Sowell sums it up: "Social Security used to be called the third rail of politics but illegal immigration is the real third rail that both political parties are afraid to touch. Cops who find illegal aliens are under orders not to turn them in to the feds. And the federal government's own border guards have their hands tied by the higher-ups as well. Now that Hispanics are the largest minority in the country, and with the country closely divided politically, neither party wants to risk alienating the Hispanic vote by enforcing immigration laws. Many other Americans may be outraged at the way illegal aliens are handled with kid gloves -- and, in some places, even given rights normally reserved for citizens -- but so long as this outrage is directed at both parties, neither party wants to be the one to risk losing the Hispanic vote."
The Left don't want the poor to get rich: "In recent years, the idea of development - in the sense of economic modernisation - has come to be seen as not feasible, or even desirable. A landmark here was the United Nations Brundtland Report of 1987, which promoted the idea of 'sustainable development' - defined as giving overriding priority to 'the essential needs of the world's poor'. In other words, the sole focus should be on the most basic needs of the poor. Even worse, the report argued that technology and social organisation put limits on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs - so suggesting that the environment places natural limits on development"
Attacks on McDonalds are really attacks on people who eat there: "Some people aren't very sensible or conventional. But of course, the people making a federal case of the McDonald's enthusiasm will not accept this as fact. They need an American villain, some typically American institution, like big business, so they can then denounce not the stupid or peculiar people who are overeating of their own free will but the McDonald's big business people who are, you guessed it, coercing them all to come and eat there."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Sunday, May 08, 2005
ONE CHEER FOR MR. BLAIR
Now that Tony Blair will be in charge of Britain for a few more years, perhaps it behooves us to see where he fits into political history. His situation certainly seems a curious one: His party seems as Leftist as ever but he has always been to the Right of his party. So to what extent is he a conservative?
Many people have pointed to pragmatism and compromise as characteristic of conservatives and that is undoubtedly true as a statement about British political history (Norton & Aughey, 1981; Gilmour, 1978; Feiling, 1953; Standish, 1990) but it would seem to lead to the view that democracy is inherently conservative -- in that any political party wishing to gain power in a democracy has to keep pretty close to the centre.
And a man who hews very much to the centre in his rhetoric is the electorally very successful Tony Blair. So much so, that the chief opposition to many of his policies seems to come from his own Labour party rather than from the opposition Conservatives. This has led some people to describe him as the best Conservative Prime Minister that Britain never had. And that, in a way is the point: A pragmatic centrist is rightly seen as conservative. But the reason why he is in fact the leader of a historically very Leftist political party is instructive. Note his own summary of his thinking here:
"At the heart of my politics has always been the value of community, the belief that we are not merely individuals struggling in isolation from each other, but members of a community who depend on each other, who benefit from each other's help, who owe obligations to each other. From that everything stems: solidarity, social justice, equality, freedom. We are what we are, in part, because of the other. I apply that idea here in Britain. I try to apply it abroad."
I cannot help compare that statement with a similar statement by a very different Socialist:
"The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good."
And contrast both statements with this summary of historic British Conservative party thinking:
"They distrust general notions such as "the community" and would argue that the despotism of reason may cloak as much sinister self-interest and self-deception as any other tyranny."
The summary of Conservative thinking is by Feiling, an historian of the British Conservative party. The second quote above is from Adolf Hitler.
I have no doubt that Mr Blair is a genuinely compassionate man (something I would say of few Leftist leaders, though it is true of many Leftist followers) but, in good Leftist fashion, he is in love with the community rather than with the individual and that endears him to his party. From the rest of his speech we also note that, also in good Leftist fashion, he sees government as the best way to accomplish his goals, though he also acknowledges the limitations of government -- a rare thing on the Left and something again that marks him out as unusually conservative for a leader of his party.
That a Leftist party can give birth to conservative thinking is probably most clearly seen in the Australian case. Neville Wran, a Queen's Counsel of working class origins, was Labor party Premier of Australia's most populous state (New South Wales) from 1976 to 1986 and during his tenure introduced his party to conservatism (though not under that name of course). The electoral success of his approach was noted on the Federal level and was put into practice on the Federal level with the accession to power of Bob Hawke. Prior to his career in Parliament, Hawke was known as the king of compromises in the field of disputes between unions and business. As Prime Minster (1983-1981) he of course continued that approach and was in addition remarkably pragmatic on economic matters -- largely traceable, no doubt, to his degree in economics. It was he who initiated large scale privatizations of government enterprises in Australia -- very much akin to what Margaret Thatcher did in England.
So whether any given government can be identified as conservative or not is clearly a matter of degree -- a matter of how much the individual person is respected, a matter of how much government is trusted and a matter of how much compromise and pragmatism is resorted to -- but broadly conservative government can clearly arise from parties that are either nominally Leftist or nominally Rightist. In the Australian case matters have progressed to the point where the major choice on offer is between two conservative parties -- though there are of course also various minor parties (Greens, Democrats) that lean well to the Left. In the case of Tony Blair one would have to say that his conservative inclinations have generally led to little in the way of conservative results because of his trust in bureaucracy as a way of achieving his goals.
References:
Feiling, K. (1953) Principles of conservatism. Political Quarterly, 24, 129-133.
Gilmour, I.H.J.L. (1978) Inside right. London: Quartet.
Norton, P. & Aughey, A. (1981) Conservatives and conservatism. London: Temple Smith
Standish, J.F. (1990) Whither conservatism? Contemporary Review 256, 299-301.
*****************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
