Saturday, February 14, 2004


The most commonly heard "explanation" for Hitler's antisemitism is that he was "insane" or "evil". These are are however little more than the usual abuse that the Left uses in lieu or argument and explanation. Since antisemitism pervaded the whole of Northern Europe in Hitler's day (and still seems to, in fact), such explanations tend to implicate the most influential section of the human race as insane and evil. You can believe that if you like. Fortunately, it is quite easy to do better than such childish "explanations". Hitler himself explains it all at some length in the early part of Mein Kampf. It is of course true that Mein Kampf is unreliable as objective history but there can be little doubt that it is good psychological history -- i.e. it might not be a good guide to what really happened but it is a good guide to Hitler's perception of what happened.

And you might be surprised to learn that Hitler for quite a long time had a good cosmopolitan's contempt for antisemitism. He saw it as ignorant and stupid in his early years and it was quite a wrench for him when he realized "I had become an antisemite". So what changed his mind?

To answer that you first have to know the secret of why the Germans followed him so devotedly right to the bitter end. There were of course a number of factors involved in that but to any open-minded reader of Mein Kampf one answer stands out like dog's balls (forgive the Army language): The whole of Mein Kampf is in effect a love-song to the German people (Volk). Hitler loved his people and -- surprise, surprise -- they loved him back (or many did anyway). But how could Hitler love all of a people who were so bitterly divided among themselves -- who hated one another probably about as much as U.S. Democrats and Republicans do today? There was only one possible answer to that: Somebody had to be manipulating and deceiving them into fighting with one another. But who could that be? To Hitler the answer was obvious -- and it was NOT the Jews. It was the Marxists. The Austro-Hungarian Empire in which Hitler lived was in its death throes in Hitler's youth and that gave an opening for lots of radical agitation. And the military defeat of Austria in World War I only increased the radicalism. So throughout Hitler's time in Vienna the Marxists had a big following. And what were the Marxists preaching? Class warfare! They were preaching that one section of Hitler's beloved people should make war on another section of it. That was of course a horror to Hitler and he struggled to understand such folly and error. How could Germans preach such hatred of one another?

The answer came when he noticed that the prominent Marxist preachers and leaders of Marxist organizations in the Vienna of his day were just about all Jews. To this day, of course, Jews tend to the Left politically so there is no reason to doubt that there was considerable substance in what Hitler saw at that time. So that was the "out" Hitler needed to explain why Germans were so at odds with one-another -- they were being manipulated by people who were NOT really Germans. So it was his idealized and romantic love of his own German people (Volk) that caused him to see the Jews as evil and destructive manipulators who were the underminers of German strength and unity. And so he adopted the antisemitism that -- through jealousy -- was already common around him. He however saw antisemitism as a rational deduction from what he had seen and he pursued it with the zeal of a convert and the huge political passion that was characteristic of him. Tragically, he does seem to have genuinely believed that the destruction of the Jews was essential for the salvation of the German people. And he devoted his huge political talents to that end. To him, everything else became secondary to that.


There is a good cartoon here that ties in with my post yesterday about some Leftism being the outcome of low-grade psychosis.

Democrat blogger, Blogfonte has some amusing comments about the philosophy professor (See my post of 12th) who thinks that conservatives are too stupid to be philosophers. {Via Naive Humanist}. Spoons has some reasonable thoughts on it too

Good to see that the French attack on Muslim demands extends to a lot more than the rather trivial ban on headscarves.

Mustn't joke about the French: "Canada's government on Friday condemned a show by U.S. late-night television host Conan O'Brien that insulted people in French-speaking Quebec and seemed to suggest everyone in the province was homosexual."

Anti-Americanism in Iran is running out of steam, thanks to the US Army: "Iranian pilgrims returning from Iraq are spreading admiring stories of their encounters with American troops. Thousands of Iranians have visited the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala since the war ended. Many have expressed surprise at the respectful and helpful behavior of the U.S. soldiers they met along the way."

I have just put up Chris Brand's latest postings here. He notes some signs of realism on race, IQ, education and immigration in Britain.

Michael Darby has just put up a lot of new posts. Some of his headings:
Recalling 1991 - the Year of Liberty
Yet another "bank" scam
Monetary Policy in Zimbabwe.
Cathy Buckle: Deepening Disaster in Zimbabwe
Professors for Alger Hiss
The Global Warming Censors
Wise Words from Professor Flint
Archive of terrorist websites with links
Blind Alley of Nihilism
My Minute with President Bush
WMDs: 'Kay' Sera, Sera
WMDs - Helpful Quotations

I have just put up here a book review of Civilization and Its Enemies: The Next Stage of History by the straight-thinking Lee Harris.

Readers will have noticed that I have just changed my font to one that is bigger and easier to read (I in fact just copied Keith Burgess-Jackson's stylesheet holus bolus). I think the new setup looks quite elegant in high resolution but in medium resolution (which I imagine a lot of readers still default to), all characters seem to come out as bold. There is no distinction between bolded and ordinary text -- which is a bit pesky. I would appreciate emails from anyone who feels strongly that I should either stay with the new or revert to the old.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Another example of Leftist dishonesty: They blame the 9/11 attacks on "poverty" in the Islamic world. Yet most of the attackers were Saudis and Saudi Arabia is one of the world's richest countries!

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


Friday, February 13, 2004


How biotech will save billions from starvation: "Today, most people around the world have access to a greater variety of nutritious and affordable foods than ever before, thanks mainly to developments in agricultural science and technology. The average human lifespan -- arguably the most important indicator of quality of life -- has increased steadily in the past century in almost every country."

Now it's parking lots: "So why are a tiny but growing number of atmospheric scientists taking a hard look at parking lots? Because, they say, land-use changes have at least as much, and perhaps even greater, impact on climate change than CO2. It's a radical idea that has heated up the scientific community and is prompting a wider look at the forces behind climate change. The effect on public policy could be enormous."

From The Federalist: "The Kyoto Protocol, that international environmental treaty to limit "greenhouse emissions," will cost Canada an estimated $1 billion this year alone, and $4,700 per taxpayer per year for the next five years, according to The Heartland Institute's Dr. Kenneth Green -- and that's to meet only the first 8% of Canada's emission-reduction requirements. "Of course, that's probably a low estimate, since some studies suggest even higher compliance costs for industry; other forms of taxation increase the cost of raising money; and it's likely to cost more for each succeeding set of reductions," says Green. "While the first 8% might cost $1 billion, the next 8% is likely to cost more, and so on with each succeeding step toward the target." The Kyoto Protocol was originally signed by then-President Clinton but was subsequently rejected by the Senate, 95-0, in an eye-popping display of bipartisanship. Now we know why." See here for the original report.

"The Food and Drug Administration has issued a new warning to pregnant women about mercury in seafood. You can 'protect your baby' from developmental harm by following three rules, the agency claimed. But there's no evidence the rules will protect anyone, and they're likely only to foster undue concern about an important part of our food supply."


A couple of days ago I noted that the weird mental gymnastics of Leftists are best explained as the outcome of a dishonest character rather than any mental defect. A reader has however emailed me to tell of an interesting case he knows where someone developed a paranoid mental disorder -- which is a type of psychosis and would normally stem from a chemical imbalance in the brain, with too much dopamine being present. Before the disorder developed, the person concerned was conservative. As his paranoia developed, however, his politics drifted to the left. He now thinks that all members of his family should pool their wealth and then re-distribute it equally. Of course, he would contribute nothing and benefit greatly. He is now very opposed to Bush even though he formerly voted for Reagan. So is an excess of dopamine in the brain generally associated with leftist political leanings? It's a testable hypothesis. I must say that some of the emails I get from Leftists do have all the hallmarks of psychotic thought disorder. It is hard to make head or tail of some of them. And loss of reality contact would seem to be characteristic of both schizophrenics and Leftist ideologues so it does seem a lively possibility to me that SOME Leftists are suffering from a low-grade psychotic disorder.

My post yesterday about the "missing" homosexuals in Britain's most recent census moved one reader to email me with the observation that there OUGHT to be very few of them: Since they channel their sexual impulses into non-reproductive behaviour, they should in fact all eventually die out. That assumes, of course, that homosexuality is passed on genetically -- which is what homosexuals themselves now seem generally to claim. Probably some homosexuality, however, is learned behaviour rather than being inevitable. In the past, fear of condemnation made many homosexuals pretend to be normal, and to prove that they married and had children, which probably accounts for there being still some of them around. Modern-day tolerance of homosexuals however has mostly removed their need to reproduce so the "born" homosexuals should die out quickly now. I have also just put up on PC Watch some good comments by Peter Hitchens that were inspired by the discovery of how few homosexual couples there in fact are in Britain.

The widely-read Chronicle of Higher Education has at last given coverage to the problem of Leftist bias in academe and what David Horowitz is doing to overcome it. There is also a site here run by students themselves which gives even more information on how huge the problem is. There is an article from last year here by David Horowitz that makes clear that there is actually what amounts to a blacklist against hiring conservative professors at almost all U.S. universities. The Chronicle has an attempted reply by a Leftist to Horowitz which admits that the Left "have won the curricular battle" (meaning that what is taught at U.S. universities is Leftist) but goes on to such absurdities as claiming that political correctness is used by Leftists as "irony". He must be the only one in the world who thinks it is a joke!

John Kerry's anti-American activities during the Vietnam war era are outlined here

And John Kerry shows the usual Leftist hypocrisy and lack of any principles. As Jeff Jacoby writes: "In the 2004 presidential field, there is a candidate for nearly every point of view. His name is John Kerry. Equivocating politicians are sometimes accused of trying to be "all things to all people," but few have taken the practice of expedience and shifty opportunism to Kerry's level. Massachusetts residents have known this about their junior senator for a long time. Now the rest of the country is going to find out..... "

Scientifically-assisted production of a real living human clone seems to be a way off yet but when one comes I will welcome it. Why the random cloning of nature (twins) is OK but scientifically assisted cloning is not has always escaped me. But as the father of an IVF child I have a bias there perhaps. That conception too was scientifically assisted and I am profoundly grateful for it. But I think that good people will always differ over the use of cloning to produce "spare parts" -- which is what the latest announcement is about. People who favour abortion, however could have no rational objection to it so the only debate SHOULD be among conservatives. No doubt, however, Leftists -- with their usual rubbery principles -- will try to get mileage out of it.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Another example of Leftist dishonesty: They blame the 9/11 attacks on "poverty" in the Islamic world. Yet most of the attackers were Saudis and Saudi Arabia is one of the world's richest countries!

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


Thursday, February 12, 2004


More deceitful "education" being practiced on High School students: A group of students were shown how to examine one particular genetic marker that was already known to be widespread among different races. When they found that people of all different races in their class had the marker, that was presented as "proof" that there is no such thing as racial differences. Pity about all the OTHER millions of genetic markers that were NOT examined! The old nonsense about all races sharing more than 99% of their genes was also trotted out as proving that there is no such thing as race biologically. Somehow they forgot to mention that we share nearly as high a percentage of genes with chimpanzees. So by that reasoning humans and chimps are really the same too. Let's reserve more college places for chimps! Down with chimpism! The truth of course is that percentage of shared genes is a total red herring. Differences in just ONE critical gene out of millions of genes can make a huge difference to one's life -- as many people with genetic illnesses have sadly found. The students were also apparently told that "scientists know that traditional notions of race no longer hold up". I guess they must have just overlooked what these geneticists found! There are a lot of comments on the matter on the Joanne Jacobs site for anybody who thinks there is anything more worth saying about such nonsense.

Interested participant is very sarcastic in reporting a story of fighting between two groups of blacks: "The cause of the whole circumstance is inexplicable. Since the tension is between two African-American student populations, it can't be racially motivated. And, since it's generally recognized that only white people are capable of intolerance, this can't be a case of intolerance. It also can't be a case of lack of diversity since everyone involved is African-American which would indicate total diversity." Joking aside, there is in fact an interesting aspect to the story. The fighting is between Afro-Americans of slave descent and people of Somali origin -- i.e. people who are racially West African versus people who are racially East African. Aside from their common blackness, the two groups do differ quite visibly. East Africans tend to be tall and thin with thin lips whereas West Africans tend to be heavily built with highly everted lips. So the fact that they don't get on well with one-another is, I am afraid, all too human. Not that races exist, of course.

"Reparations" hypocrisy: "The rally was significant for no other reason other than it provided an indication of the real motives and objectives of the reparations movement - cash. No matter what else is said reparations are not about black civil rights or social justice. Reparations are about green dollars."


A stupid philosopher: This bit of wisdom is from a Duke University philosophy professor -- commenting on why he does not hire conservatives to teach philosophy: "We try to hire the best, smartest people available," Brandon said of his philosophy hires. "If, as John Stuart Mill said, stupid people are generally conservative, then there are lots of conservatives we will never hire. Mill's analysis may go some way towards explaining the power of the Republican party in our society and the relative scarcity of Republicans in academia". So he takes an attack by Mill on his political opponents that Mill made in Victorian-era Britain and treats it as good information about the USA today. And even if that were a reasonable thing to do, note the non sequitur: Even if stupid people are generally conservative (and there is no EVIDENCE offered of that; I have met a lot of stupid Left-voters in my time), it does not follow that conservatives generally are stupid. Note the usual Leftist elitism too. Brandon is clearly implying that society generally is stupid. Nice type! Just to REALLY ruin Brandon's party, however, let the FACT be noted that the correlation in the general population between anti-authority attitudes (which Leftists pride themselves on) and low IQ is quite substantial. Survey research shows that it is in fact Leftist attitudes that are associated with stupidity!.

Federal Communications Commission a useless "New Deal" monstrosity: Some of the most significant "accomplishments" of the FCC include protecting AT&T from competition for decades by granting the company monopoly privileges, similarly protecting television broadcasters for years by restraining cable television, and delaying the entrance of cellular phones into the marketplace for more than a decade. Such bureaucratically inflicted stagnation on the communications industry has cost the economy tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars. Bringing the cumbersome FCC into the mix is unnecessary in the Timberlake-Jackson controversy. If the pop stars defied a contract with CBS in their salaciousness, the market will handle it in the best possible way and CBS can always seek legal damages. It is not in the network's interest to offend viewers or to pull so much attention away from the game itself, which happened to be quite exciting this year. Contractual promises and fear of losing work will have more influence on celebrities than will government harassment of the networks on which they appear

The strange case of the missing homosexuals: The recent UK census indicated that the homosexual population is tiny -- only one 750th of the 10% that is sometimes quoted. The homosexual activist response to the low count is that it indicates most homosexuals are still afraid to come out of the closet. Ticking a box on a confidential census form is coming out of the closet? Definitely one for Sherlock Holmes.

Fleeing socialism: "Germany's brightest and best qualified young professionals are leaving the country in droves and securing lucrative positions abroad. ...Every seventh person with a doctorate in science leaves Germany for the United States, The Scientist magazine has reported. Three of the four German Nobel Prize winners work in the United States".

Porphyrogenitus has an analysis of Leftist psychology that is similar to mine but he thinks there is still some life in the old story that some U.S. "liberals" are not Leftists. I am sorry to say that I think he has been had on that one. Are there ANY "liberals" who don't believe in using government coercion to increase "equality"? If they do believe in it they are just slowed-down Communists and if they don't believe in it they are conservatives as far as I can see.

Keith Burgess-Jackson has put up a good letter from the NYT about the "Bush lied" chant.

Carnival of the Vanities is up again with its usual big range of selected reading.

True love is forever? Diamonds are forever? The Wicked one says that only herpes is forever.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Another example of Leftist dishonesty: They blame the 9/11 attacks on "poverty" in the Islamic world. Yet most of the attackers were Saudis and Saudi Arabia is one of the world's richest countries!

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


Wednesday, February 11, 2004


I get a lot of email in connection with this blog and my other writings. Most of it is from fellow conservatives and most of it is highly supportive -- which I appreciate very much. One theme that I often notice in the emails I get is how crazy and incomprehensible my readers find Leftists to be so I thought I might make a brief comment on that here. For instance, an email I received recently said in part:

"I noticed certain "errors of thought" occuring with those to the left of me -- logical errors, or a disinterest in fact, and quick switches to emotionally-based arguments. I wondered if there was actually some kind of thinking impairment going on, if there was some kind of brain defect or differing cognitive structure.

I replied

You are right that Leftists SEEM to think differently but they don't really. They are just dishonest about what they think. Arriving at a self-serving conclusion is all that they care about and they will slip and slide all over the place to do that. Their defect is of character, not of the mind. They know perfectly well what they are doing but their own ego matters more to them than the truth.

In other words, puffing themselves up as wise and benevolent is their overriding aim -- not confronting and dealing realistically with harsh facts -- and they will duck and weave and say anything convenient that occurs to them to achieve their aim. So most of the time it is pointless even to argue with them. They are just not interested in the facts -- only in their own warm inner glow of righteousness and wisdom. They will allow nothing to threaten that. It is generally only middle of the road people who have been hoodwinked by the Left who are worth your breath.

I do also get some email from Leftists and a recurrent theme in that is to say that I overgeneralize. They that say that not all Leftists are as nasty as Stalin, Hitler, Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, Kim Jong Il and all the other lovely "socialists" who have gained unrestricted power. Some American "liberals" even say (through gritted teeth?) that they hate such "totalitarians" or "authoritarians". I have dealt with that argument at some length elsewhere so I will just mention the basics here. Perhaps the easiest answer is that if "liberals" hate Communists, how come they were apologizing for the Soviets and praising them and trying to protect them almost up to the day that the Soviet Union imploded? Even to this day, to have been a Communist in the past is treated most indulgently in "liberal" intellectual circles -- as no more than excessive idealism or as having been "a liberal in a hurry". And what American "liberal" has ever said a bad word about Castro? I got an email from a Leftist just a few days ago saying what a good and wise man Castro is -- despite his police State, his political prisons, his political executions and his suppression of free speech and any opposition. So it is "liberals" themselves who make it clear that the only real difference between Communists and themselves is how much power they have. U.S. "liberalism" is just an attempt to achieve the old Communist goal of enforced "equality" in a gradual, step-by-step way. They are just "slowed down" Communists and like the Communists, their real motive for seeking equality is not "compassion" but hatred of other people's success.

Aside from that, the public opinion survey data I have gathered over the years also make clear that there is only one Left/Right dimension -- with people differing on it only in matters of degree. See here


I normally agree with Jeff Jacoby but I have a lot of problems with his latest posting. He is undoubtedly right that what is going on in North Korea at the moment rivals what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany but where I have the problem is with his conclusion that the USA should "do something" about it. Why does it always have to be the USA? Is there no humanity left anywhere else in the world? America is having big problems at the moment with ensuring its own security against the Islamic madmen without taking on any more of the world's probems. Who made it the world's policeman? And it never gets thanked for anything it does anyway. I personally think that what America should be doing about North Korea at the moment is hectoring Europe to live up to its supposedly "humanitarian" ideals and offering them support if they do decide to do something. Europe killed millions of Jews (and don't forget that most of Europe helped the Nazis out with that) so let them make up for that by saving millions of Koreans. Russia alone could push North Korea over in a day if it wanted to -- and they are North Korea's neighbours -- unlike the USA.

Amusing: A Leftist blogger (of all people) has recently criticized me for being an atheist! Of the more than 200 conservative bloggers who have linked to me (many of whom I know to be Christians) not one has to my knowledge ever criticized me in that way. It's another example of the hypocritical way the Left will seize on and advocate anything no matter what they themselves personally believe (if anything). His ground for criticizing my atheism is that "you cannot prove a negative". Presumably he argues that people who refuse to believe in unicorns are being foolishly dogmatic too! As I have said before, all the Christians I know have given great thought to their beliefs and think that there is overwhelming evidence for them. They have clearly considered the evidence carefully -- even if I personally think they have come to the wrong conclusion. Unlike Leftists, I do not have to agree with their conclusion to respect it. I think it is the anti-religion people like Richard Dawkins who are the true dogmatists. To me it seems obvious that religions can be good or bad -- depending on what is believed.

Legalize incest! "So, in redefining marriage to mean something brand new, why didn't the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court say prohibiting brothers and sisters from marrying would 'have the effect of maintaining and fostering a stigma of exclusion?' Or parent and child? If you are going to change an ages-old meaning of an institution, why not also mandate that a legislature allow polygamy?"

An interesting article here about people going overseas for cheaper surgery. A lot of people come to Australia for surgery too -- particularly from Japan. A common example: a boob job in one of Australia's resort areas costs about $3,500 in U.S. dollars.

I love it! "Dr. Atkins, the founder of the Atkins diet was apparently obese when he died (aged 72)".

The Wicked one has a post about the Swiss getting tough on crime.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Another example of Leftist dishonesty: They blame the 9/11 attacks on "poverty" in the Islamic world. Yet most of the attackers were Saudis and Saudi Arabia is one of the world's richest countries!

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


Tuesday, February 10, 2004


Bush's deficit: fact and fiction The increasing ratio of spending and taxation to GDP has given many politicians the impression that the US economy can accommodate significant and permanent increases in government spending without impairing economic growth. This is a dangerous delusion.
Richard Dreyfus and Hollywood's hateful left There are two Americas: there is one that believes in the constitution and the inherent goodness of America; then there is the other 'America' that would trash our constitution and our traditions in the belief that our America is a racist, sexist, unjust and exploitative society.
Why Beijing will not attack Taiwan Beijing's continued sabre rattling should be seen for what it is - sabre rattling. Beijing has no intention of launching an attack on Taiwan, at least not for some considerable time. The name of one almost forgotten island tells it all - Iwo Jima.
President Bush is a victim of America's political civil war The length, intensity and moral turpitude of the Democrats' hate Bush campaign is probably unprecedented in American history, and reveals the Democrats' hateful intolerance of conservatives.
Murdoch's resident Bush-hater sticks it to Steyn and sucks up to Kerry the Quisling Stephen Romei from Rupert Murdoch's Australian is at it again, sucking up to Sen. Quisling Kerry, sliming Bush and targeting Mark Steyn.
The Age maligns Bush's NMD proposal Why are reporters bitterly opposed to President Bush's national missile defence proposals and where do they get their phony facts?

Details here


Men are people too: "In the age of feminism, she argues, we have paid a lot of attention to women's complaints about men and criticized men for not meeting women's needs -- but we've forgotten that men too have needs and women too have faults. Somehow, we've even developed the notion that a woman who seeks to meet her husband's needs is subservient (but a husband who fails to meet his wife's needs is a pig)."

When will we get affirmative action for men? "Here is a consequence of egalitarianism. According to the Statistical Abstract of the United States, men's life expectancy is on the average about 7 years less than women's. There is thus an inequality between men and women....Egalitarians, thus must see it as a requirement of justice to equalize the life expectancy of men and women. This can be done, for instance, by men having more and better health care than women; by employing fewer men and more women in stressful or hazardous jobs; and by men having shorter work days and longer vacations than women..."

Oh boy! It doesn't take long for my prophecies to come true. Just two days ago I predicted that Yale's Skull and Bones society would appeal to conspiracy theorists and what do I read now? -- "The Order of the Skull and Bones is far from the fratty, fun-and- games milieu that uninformed people think it is. The fact is, Skull and Bones may be the world's most bizarre, and exclusive, secret society. Therefore, if both the President of the United States and the top Democratic contender for the job are devoted members of this Order, and they are, the American public ought to know more..... "

The most popular cry at Democratic rallies was against 'special interests'. Thomas Sowell asks about the Dems' own special interests: "When Senator Kerry gives examples of special interests, do not look to see the teachers unions included. When Senator Kerry votes against school vouchers, sacrificing the future of millions of children for the greater glory of the National Education Association, that is not called serving special interests because the NEA supports Democrats. Still less will the trial lawyers be called special interests. Presidential candidate Senator John Edwards made his fortune as a trial lawyer, winning huge damage awards from doctors and hospitals, thereby contributing to the rising costs of medical care, which he now so much laments".

Leftist financier George Soros first says Bush is another Hitler -- then denies it when he realizes how stupid it makes him look. So he's he's a fruitcake and a liar as well as a parasite. No wonder he's a Leftist!

Sounds like a Fox News convert: "If you believe in limited government; if you argue that lower taxes spur economic growth; if you want our borders protected; and if you are a white man ... then, according to the media elite, you are the source of all that is wrong with America... We don't like to switch on TV and hear everything that we value somehow put down and vilified. We don't like you trying to make us feel stupid because we believe in God, freedom, family and the flag. That's why we're taking our remote control and turning you off."

Vin Ferrari has a post noting how much bloggers rely on traditional news media for their information. He is pretty right but not totally. I myself have on occasions put up news that has come to me in emails from my correspondents and Instapundit seems to do it often. It is early days yet but I do think blogs are evolving into being a SOURCE of news as well as giving commentary on it. And blogs of course can draw worldwide attention to stories that might otherwise lapse into obscurity.

PID points out that the comic-book hero Tin-Tin was exposing the evils of the old Soviet system at the same time as the New York Times was covering up the same evils. It rather reminds me of the way Homer Simpson gives political incorrectness a wide audience that it would not otherwise have. I think the lesson is that only a wide diversity of information sources will stymie the Left's incessant attempts to control the information that reaches us. Viva blogs!

In the Germany of Hitler's day it was quite common for young political thugs to change allegiances from the Communists to the Nazis. A bad attitude to other people cloaked in a rhetoric of loving the worker was the obvious common denominator. According to David's Medienkritik, it happens in modern-day Germany too.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Another example of Leftist dishonesty: They blame the 9/11 attacks on "poverty" in the Islamic world. Yet most of the attackers were Saudis and Saudi Arabia is one of the world's richest countries!

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


Monday, February 09, 2004


I have never feared to investigate anything political or religious or to speak the unvarnished truth about what I find as the result of my investigations -- and that means I get a lot of abuse and false accusations -- most of which merely amuse me. I took an interest in politics from an early age and read some of the works of Karl Marx in my junior High School years. I was therefore at that time known as "Commo John". Since then I have joined or associated with almost any political group I could find in the hope of getting to understand them better and find out what I could from them. That neo-Nazis were among the groups concerned has of course at times given Leftists an excuse to call me a Nazi. At the same time as I was attending neo-Nazi gatherings (in the 60s) I was however also attending meetings of my local far-Left student activist group (called SDA after the American SDS) and was also attending meetings of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society. So anyone who claims to infer my sympathies from my associations is pissing into the wind. In fact, my only real passion is for rationality and I just don't find much of that on the Left. To make clear the broadness of my background, I have just added a few of my former interests at the top of the green column over to the left of my blogspot page. I have no formal political affiliations at all these days.

The Australia-Soviet Friendship Society was particularly amusing. Most of the members were what Australians call "wharfies" ("longshoremen" in the USA, "dockers" in the UK) -- as wharfies were almost all Communist sympathizers at that time -- but there were a few extreme Leftists from the university there too. But their way of running meetings was pure wharfie. There were no majority votes about anything. One of the organizers would put up a proposal but instead of votes being called for the question was: "Any objections?". I cannot remember there ever being any!

Because I made no secret of the variety of my associations, I was always suspected of being a police spy wherever I went -- which indeed I was -- but I always just laughed off such accusations (e.g. by saying "testing, testing" into my lapel) so it is rather amazing how much I was given the benefit of the doubt. It's amazing how "brass" carries the day. I guess the members of extremist groups WANT to believe that their arguments are overwhelming so are willing to tell all to almost any listening ear. The police were certainly interested to hear much of what I could tell them of both the neo-Nazis and the student Left.

Because I went straight from being a fundamentalist Christian to complete atheism in my late teens, one type of belief I have never taken the slightest interest in is the "The Occult". I would just not be able to keep a straight face long enough. But I gather that as part of the general Nazi fascination with Germany's pagan past, Hitler did take some interest in it so maybe my studies of Nazi history are incomplete without taking some account of such beliefs. This book gives an occultist's interpretation of Hitler's actions and says that he won the war that he was REALLY fighting. I think there is a grain of truth in that. Hitler went from being a superb strategist in the early part of his rule to being his own worst enemy later on. Why? I think part of the answer to that is that he DID have a higher priority than defeating the Allies. But I don't think we need to suggest any occult motives. Hitler himself could not have made it plainer. Wiping out the Jews from anywhere under his control was his no. 1 aim and he DID win that war -- tragically.


Well how about that! Australia and the USA have signed a free-trade agreement. It leaves out the one thing that would have benefited Americans most -- much cheaper Australian sugar -- but "protecting" the local farmers seems to be an almost universal human folly and America's folly in that regard is about average. India has set up a local free trade zone too but Muslim Bangladesh has of course shafted itself by staying out of it.

I think this is pretty silly but since I myself wear the kilt on Scottish occasions, perhaps I should shut up about it: "In what future generations may look back on as the birth of the Male Unbifurcated Garment movement, about 100 men in skirts marched in Manhattan to proclaim their right to wear women's clothing. "We're not transvestites, homosexuals or cross-dressers," David Johnson, a retired teacher, said. "We don't want you to call us Jean or Sally. We're men. Men who want the right to wear a skirt."

US budget: If you took all our government spend divided it evenly among all families of four in America, each family would be more than $50,000 richer. This is double the level of spending in 1960 and fourteen times the amount government spent in 1900, even after adjusting for inflation. The question American taxpayers need to ask is this: Does my family really get anywhere near $50,000 worth of services every year from city hall, state government, and Uncle Sam, Inc.? ...and...In 1935 there were 4,000 pages of federal regulations in the Federal Register. Now there are 68,000 pages. That's a 17-fold increase in sixty-five years. Since 1970 the number of federal regulators nearly doubled from 69,000 to 130,000. We work almost half our lives now complying with government rules, edicts, levies, paperwork requirements, taxes, and fees.

Arlene Peck disagrees with Ariel Sharon's policy of relocating Jews to Jewish areas and Arabs to Arab areas within Israel. For once I think she is wrong. Separating the two communities seems to be an elementary security measure to me.

Maybe I shouldn't laugh but this is a good one: Making a police speed camera issue fines to itself!. What class! Via Sam Ward. If it's true it's a good example of Australian irreverence for authority.

I have just put up Chris Brand's latest postings here. He is very amused at the attempt by Gabon's President Bongo to seduce Miss Peru and has some nice pictures of her.

The Wicked one defends stockmarket insider trading.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Another example of Leftist dishonesty: They blame the 9/11 attacks on "poverty" in the Islamic world. Yet most of the attackers were Saudis and Saudi Arabia is one of the world's richest countries!

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


Sunday, February 08, 2004


This writer is understandably confused about the disagreement among scientists about whether there is any global warming going on. But the fanaticism of its advocates persuades him that it is no more than an ego-serving cult: "Last week's London snowstorm was the last straw. With no particular scientific evidence in hand, I have come to the conclusion that global warming is a looney cult... The scientific controversy is beyond me, but I can recognize the fixed stare, the strained voice-throb and the rigid jaw of a madman at a hundred paces. The Greens hector us about the impending end of the world. I put it to them: perhaps it is not the end of the world, but just the end of you. Analysis of global temperature is a subtle issue about which reasonable men might in good faith reach different conclusions. The evangelical zealotry that motivates the global-warmers has a different source than the facts.... The sense of the transcendent they derive from contemplating nature is of desperate importance. "It is not that I will pass from the earth without leaving so much as a grease spot to mark my stay," thinks the Green. "It is the earth herself who is in danger. The rain forests will vanish! The whales will become extinct! The German forest is dying! The ice caps are melting!"

Denis Dutton on skepticism and science and environmentalism: "In the post-Enlightenment West, religions have diminished power, but they are being supplanted by nontheological belief systems that follow patterns of religion. It is clear from Hecht's history that religions have a knack for drawing vast, cosmic conclusions from scattered and marginal evidence, such as the dreams of seers or reports from ancient, uncorroborated texts.... Today, environmentalism is my pick as the best candidate for a belief system needing dollops of the kind of doubt formerly applied to religion. Like most traditional religions, environmentalism can do a power of good. But watch out for the dodgy data and the hysterical insistence that, unless we repent and change our ways, we and our children are doomed"

A moving tribute to the late John Daly on Number watch: "Daly was the epitome of a new phenomenon of the post-scientific age, a lone scholar with all the traditions of meticulous attention to detail and truth that the word implies, with limited means upholding the principles of the scientific method in the face of adversaries with vast resources. He usually won, but the establishment media ensured that the world never got to hear of it... He made mistakes, inevitable for the lone scholar, but they were vastly outweighed by his triumphs. He spotted the fiddled graphics, the unforgivably careless publication of contradictory numbers and the sheer failures of logic that go to prop up the eco-theological morass that is the modern substitute for real science. Most of his admirers around the world never met him, but nevertheless held him in great esteem, simply on the basis of his writings. Forget all the pornographers, mass mailers and virus producers; one Daly is sufficient justification for the existence of the World Wide Web.

Wow! Is this going to be the big new Greenie campaign now that Russia seems to have killed off the Kyoto treaty? Apparently glass windows kill birds because birds don't recognize them and run into them. The solution? Change all the world's window glass to a type that birds can see! Can you imagine what a huge upheaval that would be? Don't laugh. Give the Greenies time and it will come to a window near you! I have myself seen lots of birds run into window glass but they only ever look embarrassed by it. {Thanks to Matthew Cowie for the link}


There is an absolutely ludicrous furore going on in Britain at the moment about racism in their mental hospitals. A violent schizophrenic Rastafarian died in one of them while being held down to restrain him and it is all said to be the fault of "racism" -- and black people generally are said to be mistreated in such hospitals. But most of the staff in such hospitals are themselves black! So who are the racists? Don't tell me that the British are finally recognizing that blacks can be racists too! No such luck I am afraid. It is obviously the overworked white staff doing a near impossible job under the politically correct rules they are subjected to who are being scapegoated.

French culture in crisis? "Concern over France's diminishing importance in world cuisine has prompted the government to create a gourmet university, which it yesterday promised will be nothing less than the "Harvard for the art of French cooking"... London is now a more interesting dining spot than Paris. The core problems involve an overregulated French labor market and excessively high French taxes." Interested that they used Harvard as a metaphor for excellence. A "Sorbonne" for French cooking would not impress? How humiliating!

It appears that John Kerry is about as opposite to a man of the people as you could get. A super-privileged freeloader would be more like it: Another Leftist elitist pretending to be what he is not.

It is rather surprising that the conspiracy theorists have not made more of a song and a dance about Yale University's "Skull and Bones" secret society. Like his father and grandfather before him, GWB is a "bonesman" and he has appointed a lot of fellow "bonesmen" to senior posts in his administration. The fact that John Kerry is also a "bonesman" is probably a bit of a fly in the ointment but any conspiracy theorist worth his salt should be able to leap past inconvenient facts like that with one bound.

A few people had trouble getting on to a site that I mentioned yesterday as containing my reply to some old Leftist accusations about my being a Nazi. The site does seem to be a bit buggy so I have reposted the reply here and here as well.

This article by Israel's deputy Prime Minister on Israel's security fence and the U.N. has a good quote from Abba Eban [Israeli foreign minister, 1966-1974] saying that "if Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the Earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions."

The Wicked one has some funnies up for old and young.


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

Comments? Email me here or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.