Friday, March 29, 2019

San Antonio demonstrates life in the American Soviet

By banning Chik-fil-A from opening in the San Antonio Airport.  This is because Chik-fil-A demonstrates wrong-think regarding the all important LGBTQ issue.  You either conform to the liberal dogmas of sex and genitals, or it's the reeducation camps.

This should also be a warning shot to those GOP types who imagine Texas is just Red Blood Red State and a firm addition to the Republican camp.  It isn't.  A growing number of 'Conservatives' are, in fact, beginning to swing liberal, albeit slowly, when it comes to this wedge issue of all wedge issues.  Once they go down that path, to quote the wise man, forever will it dominate their lives.  It won't be long before they become liberal in all things.  I've seen it happen more than once (I'm looking at you John Kasich). 

Again, the gay issue has become the crux, the foundation for destroying the United States and the remnants of the Christian West.  When I was in school, everyone thought abortion would be the big issue that leads to civil war.  But that's too varied and complex.  The LGBTQ issue cuts straight down the line between those who hold to the traditions of a Christian creation, and those who embrace the new liberalism.  And it's being used, as San Antonio demonstrates, as the first step in making America a country with no tolerance for those who dare defy the Leftist State.

Of course it won't stop there.  Once we're comfortable with the State punishing those who embrace wrong-think about this issue, there will be many more issues added to the list.  The only thing that could stop them - a coordinated effort by those who would resist - won't work, since it's clear a growing number of those who should resist are tired of the same, and are willing to give in. 

If you think this is an over the top reaction on my part, consider when several politicians came out against Chik-fil-A some years ago.  The first time such a thing happened in terms of politicians punishing a restaurant for its religious beliefs.  Even gay rights activists protested.  See those protests now?  See anyone taking to the streets to protest this?  Hear anyone speaking out at all? 

That's how freedom dies, slow and baby steps at first.  Then it picks up steam. And the growing ease with which we accept punishing people based on skin color, religion, religious belief and failure to conform to the Left merely shows we're moving to that next stage where the freedoms begin to be lost at breakneck speed. 

Thursday, March 28, 2019

The press as enemy of the people

Reflected on at The Federalist.  What we are watching, and what we may never learn about, was the attempt to steal a valid election from the opposition party.  Leftist pundits and reporters were correct, it does make Watergate seem like a spitball contest by comparison.  But it wasn't Trump.  It was the Left, perhaps including the Obama administration, FBI, US news media, the Democratic party and even the DOJ.  I don't know.  We'll never know, because the only thing that might dig in and find the ugly truth was clearly behind the attempted coup. 

BTW, as a family member pointed out, this threat to our freedoms would be nowhere but by the support of the free market which, apparently, has read the ledgers and concluded all things sex, drugs and Marxism is the way to go, and punishing, firing, and wrecking those who dare cling to the old ways is good business sense.  So whatever economic benefits the free market brings might just come at the cost of losing everything else to have them.  Just an observation that I'm at pains to refute. 

Why we homeschool

The motto of modern education systems
As those who've followed me over the years know, we homeschool for very practical purposes. Namely that the schools had become bureaucratic messes more concerned about checking the latest requirements for goverment funding than actual education.  The content of what they were teaching or the idea of school violence were not really high on our list of considerations.

In terms of violence, the problem is clearly one of heart and soul.  Our nation rejected the Truth of Christ, and whether our religious leaders will admit it or not, that has to mean something.  Purposefully severing yourself from the light of the Gospel must have consequences.  If a nation trying to live based on at least some tenets of the Gospel could do so many things wrong, perhaps the solution wasn't rejecting the Gospel as a whole.  Hiding the boys from the results of this would only be a temporary thing.  The boys have to face a society at war with Christ eventually.

As for the content of the teaching, since our schools could have a wide variety of teachers, the content was pretty diverse.  While there weren't many down home fundamentalist types, there was enough variety to make us happy.  I never shrank from exposing my kids to other opinions or ideals, and if the teachers did the same, I was happy.

As can be guessed, the one area where the schools were becoming more intolerant and demanding conformity under threat of retribution was the issue of sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender.  If and when America dies, it will be on the battleground below the waistline.  And it will be the gay rights movement that marked the beginning of the unraveling.  In our district's case, the schools were beginning to move toward a 'thou shalt praise the homosexual or watch yourself' mentality.  But since we were already moving to homeschool due to the stated reasons, we didn't sweat that too much.

But as I watch where education has gone, and  the off the rails train wreck that it has become, I'm thrilled we made the decision when we did. I only wish we had done it sooner.  Rod Dreher walks us through but one example of the wasteland that is Western education.  True, it's dealing with Canada and England, countries with no particular loyalty to freedom that could (and some would argue, are) turn themselves into their own versions of an Orwellian paradise.

As my nine year old plods through his Mandarin Chinese lessons, it makes me glad that he knows who Pierre is relative to War and Peace, he understands the connection between Alexander the Great and Socrates, that he understands the contributions of Medieval Scholasticism, and that he has an appreciation for old literature, the classics, and even if he's not read them yet, will do so from the point of view of a non Social Justice Warrior.  His exposure to older films has also supplemented this, and much of his exposure to the classics began with us showing him older films that helped pave the way.

Though this sort of madness Rod Dreher points out was taking off by the time my older boys were in public school, it hadn't reached this level before we pulled them out.  Therefore, as they report from college, they are ones who know who Robert Frost, Charles Dickens and even Napoleon Bonaparte* were, as opposed to a staggering number of their classmates.  When my son reported that he alone had heard of Robert Frost in his creative writing class, I thought it a fluke.  Since both have been in college, however, I've found out it's all too common.  Not that all students are like that.  Some are quite informed and broad in their knowledge of a world beyond the narrow confines of Social Media.  But considering they are all high school graduates, far too many don't know what someone my age learned merely from watching Bugs Bunny, much less from graduating high school.

Such is the result of our education systems, and given the zealots and fanatics coming out of our schools, I can't help but guess isn't not a failing of our school system, but the intended mission for things to turn out as they are.

*Really.  When told to choose various historical figures for a report, one student in my oldest's history class passed on Napoleon due to never having heard of him.  The same with Dickens and, as I said, Frost.  These are just a couple examples.  I could go on, but no sense being mean.

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Christian lawmaker attacked for her Christian prayer

Really.  From the party that over the last year produced no fewer than three US senators who told Christians their faith should preclude them from holding office, we have this.  Whether we want to haggle over having prayers or not and how it should be done is another issue.  But if you're fighting to have all people be able to have prayers in an assembly, and then turn and attack a Christian for a Christian prayer that doesn't fall in line with your politics, I can't help but guess you're less interested in everyone praying as much as you are they being allowed to use their prayers only in accordance with your politics.

But beyond that issue, which is a fair issue, note the contempt, the disdain for her prayer.  Note how they attack it and belittle it:
"On a day that should be celebrated across Pennsylvania as we see the first Muslim woman sworn into office, we instead started off with a rambling, at times incoherent prayer that consisted of weaponizing the name of Jesus while dipping into partisan rhetoric on President Donald Trump" - Jordan Harris
Does having a Muslim woman negate the ability to invoke prayer if it also prays for Trump?  But rambling?  Incoherent?  Weaponizing?

Extemporaneous prayer, BTW, is a very Evangelical thing. They are essentially attacking her religious beliefs and practices with their contempt for the style of her prayer.  Which shouldn't surprise us. Evangelical Christians who reject the Left, and especially if they are white, are about the most openly hated group in America today.

Note also, however, that the Muslim lawmaker in question declares it Islamophobia.  What, I wonder, makes it so?  Is it failing to accept a Muslim/Leftist view on things?  Would the Muslim lawmaker have been upset if someone got up and prayed for a Palestinian State?  I don't know.  I wouldn't want them to, even if I disagree with the point at hand. I understand that religion is a very personal thing, and how we see various issues can be informed by, and can inform, our beliefs.

But again, note the article.  Note the contempt, the loathing.  Note the clear demarcation between being a bigot and an aggressive hater, and being in full lockstep with the Left.  This is where we're heading.  The Democrats are making it clear this is where we're going.  And so far American Muslims, by shocking numbers, appear more than happy to see us going there.

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Andrew Sullivan speaks truth to bigotry

And gets push-back from America's leftist propaganda industry in Hollywood.  Basically Sullivan tells a room full of 'Hollywood heavyweights' (loosely defined) that they need to stop treating white people living between the coasts like subhuman bigoted scum.  This, naturally, resulted in a backlash from the bigots in the room who are quite happy with hating based on gender, race, religion and national origin - as long as those being hated are deemed evil by the Marxist Left.  Read it here

Given Hollywood's track record in accepting the bigotry of the day (see its past treatment of blacks, Hispanics, gays, Asians, and other minority groups), a good rule of thumb might be to assume whoever Hollywood is currently marginalizing might just be victims of the latest cultural blot on our nation's heart.  It certainly is enough to make me consider how I can assume, after being so wrong so often, Hollywood is finally right when it comes to who we should really despise based on the latest definition of unclean.

Saturday, March 23, 2019

March fun, heartbeat bills and a touch of the Irish

With the older boys in college, and/or working toward going to school, we don't have the family get together moments the way we used to.  And that's fine.  That's the natural way.  Those birds need to get out of the nest and fly.  In our case, they're in the nest, saving money by living with us at a much discounted rate (we don't let them live for free, as they need to understand that it costs actual money to live).  But we do it to help cut into the costs of college and hopefully diminish the need for loans.  As Mike Rowe put it, all of the outrage over the admissions scandal misses the real scandal of the cost of college in the first place. This is as professors and university elites roll in the money more than at any time in our country's history. But that's for another post.

Anyhoo, the boys had off with us over St. Patrick's Day weekend.  Given the fact that St. Patrick is recognized by both Orthodox and Catholics, we went with our oldest son - who's still Catholic - to St. Mary Catholic and met his new priest, a jovial fellow from the Church's last great hope (Africa).  We also went to a maple syrup festival at an old Lutheran camp my old elementary school used to visit.  All you can eat pancakes with fresh maple syrup.  Then, even with crazy Ohio weather, we managed to enjoy our annual St. Patrick's Day Irish Feast.  Meat pies and baked cabbage and potato and leek soup with fresh baked Irish soda bread.  And that was after an authentic Irish breakfast brought all the way from Ireland (including Black Pudding - an acquired taste). 

Before this, we had attended - as part of homeschooling field trips - the Ohio State Senate's session as it voted on and passed one of many heartbeat bills (this having hope since Republican John Kasich, who vowed opposition to anything done against abortion, finally left).  We have no illusions about its chances.  The Left will do everything to fight this just as it is fighting to move unlimited abortion into the realm of infanticide, along with euthanasia and suicide and basic mass slaughter for debauchery in the era of AIDS.  Nonetheless, I'd rather be with the side trying and failing to stop the killing of babies than with the side dedicated to killing them. After all, there's no reason to believe they won't push to eliminate others down the road when deemed no longer convenient, and that could include women, minorities, immigrants and anyone else. 

My two college boys, who finished their classes at about that time, joined us, which worked.  My oldest, no longer able to study the world of gourmet cooking due to a fatal fish allergy that coincidentally hit him shortly after a round of vaccinations, has moved to the world of political science (his second hobby).  My second oldest is planning on going into law.   Therefore being about the pillared halls of government legislation seemed a good fit.

So here's a post I've not done for many moons, fun with the family and enjoying time with the boys, and always praying for their futures and their industry as they plow forward in this life. 

That's all you can eat fresh pancakes with fresh maple syrup.  Yum!

We were there some years ago when the oldest was our youngest's size

Our youngest takes in the natural world - which is nicer than seeing it digital

That's our future police officer - gives you confidence doesn't it

My hopeful law school student, fitting in at the State House

We sat behind the Planned Parenthood group, and that's their reaction to the vote

My oldest, gazing at the horizon on the State House steps 

The boys line up outside the State House

Our Irish Breakfast (minus scones) - the Black (and White) Pudding is along the right edge

Our Irish Feast, ready to be eaten (and no weigh in this week!)

My oldest and youngest on your typical Ohio St. Patrick's day activity - catching snowflakes

A cake in the form of a beer - what could be more Irish!

And just because it's made the rounds and is, as usual, delightfully accurate, those Lutheran sages put together a ballad to the actual purpose for the celebration, lest we forget:

BTW, the emphasis on Patrick's desire to love and preach to his former slave owners stands in stark contrast to the modern Marxists' sowing of hatred and bitterness based on the sins of the past that defines modern Identity Politics.  But again, that's really for another post. 

Friday, March 22, 2019

J.K.Rowling and the leftist Wizard hunts

J.K. Rowling is nothing if not goofy.  As my sons - my resident Potter fans - once said, you could tell when she went from writing delightful children's stories to attempting to produce the epic of the ages.  Largely because she wrote within the fishbowl of Pottermania and the growing HP Inc. Corporation, her novels quickly became 'How to have a series end as bad as it looked like it would when Harry died to save humanity without killing our Brand Icon.'  As a result, the later novels are often bloated, tiring, convoluted and, quite frankly, dull.   The Goblet of Fire, per my sons, is the turning point where you can see the works pander more to the Corporate and fan base interests than the original story line.  My second oldest said it best when he said she ended up building a fantasy universe too large for her skills and talents to fill.

Anyhoo, as a fair children's book author, she nonetheless showed herself to be rather keen at tapping into the fanboy fan base culture at the dawn of the global Internet market.  Thanks to the GIM, even the most worthless piece of crap produced can rake in a hundred million dollars.  A little better than crap and you can have hundreds of millions in global revenues.  Get a name for yourself, and even your limpest efforts can produce sales that would have made The Beatles blush.

You must be careful, however.  Seeds planted in firm liberal soil today can choke you with leftist thorns tomorrow.  In those ancient of days, for example, before the ascension of the radical Left to global prominence, she had to contend with the possibility of backlash from the Conservative Christian front.  How did she handle this?  Easy.  She insisted, in addition to there ever and only being seven books about Harry Potter, that she was a down home Christian girl herself, and the final book was going to be awash in Christian themes.  She couldn't say how - that was secret.  If she spoke too much of her religion, it would give away the ending.

When the day of reckoning came, and Deathly Hallows was released, it was easy to see the rather blatant Christian imagery she utilized, from grave markers to the obvious death and resurrection motif.  That made all those Christian Potter fans say, "See!  Told ya!".  Mark Shea declared the Potter series a complete unpacking of the Passion Narratives.  Any criticism or curiosity about things like the series' consequentialist tendencies was met which charges of being an idiot or not spiritual enough.  This was, remember, the fantasy fan-boy fan base - Christian or otherwise - which Rowling seemed to understand so well.

Nonetheless, to avoid alienating the non-Christian/leftist fans who picked up on her more liberal themes of individualism, down with authority, and diversity based on liberal principles, she blurted out, a day or so after the book's release, that Dumbledore was, in fact, gay.  What?  Where was that ever said?  Did anyone reading the books ever conclude that?  But before those important Christian fans (of which there were many) lost faith in the gospel of Potter, she turned on her heals and insisted that Dumbledore never actually did anything physical about it.  Huh?  What does this even mean?

It meant nothing of course.  She was merely throwing out whatever to keep the sales going and the rather diverse global fan base happy.  She was finding ways to talk out of all sides of her mouth.  In those days, many of the Christians who were Potter fans (who would eventually become full-blown leftists) were not leftists yet.  And the thought of injecting homosexuality into kids' books would have caused problems.  But in the face of the growing anti-Christian sentiments of the leftist fan base, her constant appeals to this or that Christian theme or imagery was also bothersome.  She did what she had to do.

But over the years, her talents for just about anything - including writing - have come into serious question.  Her wading into the issues of the day shows that she spends about as much time thinking on the issues of the day as Lewis or Tolkien (the ones she was constantly compared to) likely did about whale gutting in the arctic.  But whereas Tolkien and Lewis were geniuses in their fields, as well as profound thinkers about other subjects such as mythology, religion and ethics and the field of fantasy literature, Rowling comes across as a rank amateur at best.

So now, in the wake of the Left's growing anti-"cis" White witch hunts, despite all attempts to be as diverse as possible, Rowling has been charged with not being diverse enough.  By that, the leftist lynch mob means Harry and the main characters were white and not having sweaty gay sex, and that's all they need to know.  To counter this juggernaut, Rowling has done what her meager abilities and insights on such topics allow, and that's come out with more incoherent ramblings.  She's tried to insist that in her world, all things gay and diversity dominate the Hogwarts universe - it's just a small microcosm of nasty cis-white people happened to be in the middle of the stories.

Ten years ago that would have flown, no matter how lame. The Left (and Christian fans) would have felt compelled to accept such dribble, even though they knew it was dribble.  But not now.  The leftist mob is now comfortable in its power and belief that, after a few more election cycles in America and abroad, it will finally have the power it wants to exterminate all who fail to conform to its demands.  Simply rolling out some weird 'trust me (wink, wink) it's there' won't cut it.  If you don't openly and loudly denounce Christians, Conservatives, Whites, Men, Heterosexuals, non-conforming Minorities, Americans and anyone else deemed an enemy of the Leftist State, while celebrating the latest leftist dogmas, you're in for it.  No amount of BS or wiggle room with stupid and transparent bilge will do.

I must admit, there's a bit of guilty pleasure I feel in watching the growing number of old and older liberals being consumed by the raging flames of the Millennial socialist and leftist wildfires.  These Frankenstein monsters the Left created are pure ideologues.  They will not put up with old word drool and politics as usual and talking points that score a few runs here or down the road.  They are armed with torches and swords, and have every intention of destroying anything and anyone that doesn't live up to their latest daily standards.  And that might even include each other.

The old Boomer liberals, or even leftists of my generation, might have been content with obvious BS that could advance the leftist agenda, but not these  youngsters.  They are pure dog soldiers for the Left.  You either brazenly fall into line with the Left 100% of the time, or it's the torch.  That will not only include any books, movies, shows or art deemed retroactively unacceptable, but it will also include those individuals and groups deemed past their sell by date and no longer of any use to the leftist Cause.

Thursday, March 21, 2019

The most feared man in the Republican party today

Dan  Crenshaw.  The reason I'm opposing the sudden interest in digging into Beto O'Rourke's past, his college days, his childhood, in order to mock him and attack him and possibly destroy him is that we are therefore giving approval to the Left to do the same to the likes of Crenshaw.  Even if it would be a counter to the press's gushing praise and worship of O'Rourke, I think it's better to stand on principles at this point.

I know, I know.  The Left will do it anyway.  But if we support digging into people's past, then they'll have the completely justifiable accusation of hypocrisy, and with a sympathetic propaganda ministry to back them up, will be able to derail the opposition accordingly.

Right now the Leftist rags are doing the usual Leftist/Troll/Bilge of finding anything at all they can attack Crenshaw over - usually simply the fact that Crewshaw isn't a leftist.  That means he must be stupid and dumb and stupid and things like dumb.  In fact, the flurry of attack pieces aimed at him whenever he opens his mouth or tweets strongly suggests they're worried.

But Crenshaw himself has proven remarkably resilient.  Sure, he's merely a Representative.  What could someone who's only a Rep. do in the national spotlight?  Heh.  But he scares them, that much I can see.  I'll be watching him in the upcoming years.

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

The hypocrisy and racism of the Left made simple

In a tweet comparison:

And in a statement.  Basically, it's racism to condemn an entire ethnic group based on the actions of a lone individual.  Except Whites. All Whites are evil racists by genetics and therefore bear the blood-guilt of all Whites who are evil racists by genetics.  What the Nazis said was spot on, they just aimed at the wrong demographic.  Likewise Jim Crow was onto something, but again had the wrong skin color. 

It's racism and it's evil.  Those advocating for this socially acceptable racism would likely have done the same in Germany in the 1930s, or the Colonies in the 18th century.  Just not against whites. Those who would reject the worst elements of this nakedly obvious racism, but will still go along with the premise that you can at least assume some whites deserve condemnation because of their skin color, are the ones who might not have been Nazis, but they knew about those Jews nonetheless, and when the time came, turned a blind eye.  Christians leaders, I'm looking at you.

Don't expect to reason with the white liberals who make up the lion's share of those racists who call down wrath and hatred on all whites for the sins of all whites.  That's like reasoning with someone on a suicide-murder spree.  They are hellbent on killing themselves due to warped thinking and demonic influence, they're just going to take as many others with them as possible. 

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Meanwhile in Nigeria

While the horrific Christchurch shooting brings those on the Left together with Muslims to sound the alarm bells about Islamophobia, white supremacy and of course the need for tighter gun control, in Nigeria we have ongoing slaughter of Christians by Muslims to the tune of some 6000 victims and counting.  Here is the story.

I usually don't link to something as obviously invested in the story, but there was a dearth of stories in the national and international press covering this little corner of the world.

PREEMPTIVE UPDATE: Anyone notice that the whole 'Global White Nationalism/Islamophobia Threat' emphasis has sort of died out.  As I looked about for examples of that emphasis, I noticed that now it's mostly just about gun control.  Almost immediately following the Christchurch shooting, the gun control issue was side by side with the rising global threat of white extremism and racism and the global plague of Islamophobia.  But it's been a couple days since I saw or heard that particular angle, and most cases I found were dated a couple days ago.  I'm sure it's there, but it's not the top emphasis the way it was.  Clearly the case could be made based on the shooter and what he had to say.  I wonder why it hasn't continued like the racist angle of, say, the Charleston church shooting.  I've learned that when trends like this happen across the press/punditry circles, it's seldom a coincidence. 

Monday, March 18, 2019


Shame on me:

At last the focus on the Christchurch massacre is consistent

When a white man goes into a mosque and murders dozens of innocent Muslims, the conversation and focus immediately turn to gun control and the global threat of Islamophobia and white nationalism.  When a Muslim goes into an Orlando bar or a California business office and massacres dozens of innocent people, the conversation and focus immediate turn to gun control and the global threat of Islamophobia and white nationalism.  Consistency is worth something I suppose.

At least it's focused on.  Unlike the dozens of African Christians gunned down a couple weeks ago by Muslim gunmen.  They received a couple days limited coverage and then back to page thirty behind the grocery ads - before being dropped altogether.  So I'll take the focus, at least there is a chance people of good will can retake the narrative and actually focus on the heart and soul of the problems behind such horrific violence.

BTW, this clear and obvious bias and exploitation of human suffering is likely at the heart of much of the hatred and vitriol out there today.  Would that Christians would be courageous enough to stand up and put a halt to this, and begin proclaiming the Gospel to the world, instead of submitting the Gospel to the world.

Friday, March 15, 2019

Thoughts and prayers for the victims of Christchurch

What horrible news is coming out of New Zealand.  Dozens of innocent worshipers were brutally gunned down in at least two different mosques.  We don't have to wonder about the motive, if it matters now.  Right now, thinking on those poor victims who had no idea this would be their last day on earth, as well as their loved ones, friends, and all who will be left vacant in the wake of this evil slaughter. 

I will not plow forward to make political hay, nor will I point fingers hither and yon, trying to score ideological points by using such a horrific massacre.  There will be time in the future to truly look at the blackness of hearts that have pushed us to where we are.  I'll leave it right now with prayers for all touched, and for peace and strength for them to bear the awfulness of the upcoming weeks and months.  I also pray for peace and a calm and that we pull back from the terrible brink toward which we appear to be rushing. 

I'll merely note that perhaps the fact that my offering thoughts and prayers would have become itself a controversial and counter-cultural stance to take, even condemned by followers of Christ Himself, might be a clue as to where we need to look before more such murderous and demonic hate claims yet other victims. 

Thursday, March 7, 2019

I would have bought one

Had I known:

Truth be told, I wasn't into the Star Wars toy line back in those crazy, hazy days of Star Wars mania.  I preferred a now obscure toy line called Micronauts.  That's "The Interchangeable World of" the Micronauts.  The infinite combinations that you could build with Micronauts attracted me more than the rather stiff and unwieldy Kenner selection for Star Wars.

Nonetheless, knowing what I know today, I'd have scoured the earth if they had such a thing. 

Global Warming will wipe entire nations off the map in ten years

If we don't take drastic measures now to stop it.  So says this AP piece reporting a UN prediction from 1989.  The ten year mark for the climate apocalypse, BTW, was 2000.  That must have been assuming Y2K didn't get us first.

Make this another reason in a long list demonstrating why I reject the MMGW (that's Man Made Global Warming) narrative.  Do I think the last couple centuries of over reliance on STEM has had a detrimental impact on our environment including, but not limited to, our climate?  Sure.  Why not?  Half of the problems we hear about today were caused by STEM based inventions and initiatives that were supposed to fix other problems generations ago.  Obviously 'Science!' is not the magic wand that solves everything if you only give science and technology a blank check.

Nonetheless, I also think the issue of climate change is a molehill of science upon which a Himalayan mountain range of agendas and biases and politics has been piled.   One thing that helps me sleep good a night with such a counter-cultural view is just going back and looking at all the times we were already supposed to be dead because of Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption.

The problem is that I'm all for conservation and being good stewards of the world God created.  I'm also willing to look at the negatives of always rushing to 'Science!' as our first line of anything when there is a problem.  It's just that you can't dare acknowledge a problem regarding our environment without people assuming you buy into the laughably partisan and self serving narratives that dominate the climate conversation today.

Monday, March 4, 2019

Celebrating Gone With the Wind

Someday I'll unpack a full list of reasons why I'm always amazed when I take time to watch this classic.  Today, of course, it is under assault along with the rest of the United States.  Per the goosestepping Bolsheviks, it is a racist movie made by racists to celebrate a racist part of a racist nation founded upon a racist document.   That's the American Bolsheviks.

They should be a rather small minority, but they are buttressed by the press, the entertainment industry (to a point, Hollywood still seems a bit squeamish about the waves of censorship and digital film and book burnings sweeping the Left's quarters), and our educational institutions.  Because of that, the Left's equivalent of white supremacist militiamen holed up in a log cabin in the foothills of Montana are given a loud megaphone, and social, legal and political power. 

Of course I reject the racist notion that you can judge a racist by the color of his skin, that all whites are and were nothing but racist, and that America was Nazi racist from sea to shining sea.  I also follow the old idea that presentism is a horrible way to do history and can lead to the arrogance that underlies much of the horrors of human history.  Remember, it was arrogant political and economic philosophies and ideologies, not racism, that were the biggest killers of the 20th century.  That is largely based on the idea of knowing I'm so right, of course those who disagree are stupid, evil and a threat to the motherland. 

Because of this, I get to enjoy a wonderful movie made on the grandest of scales, and appreciate all of its complexities, especially when set against the cinematic dribble and bilge that is vomited out of the movie industry today.  In most cases, movies today are either one dimensional CGI fodder with occasional (and often shallow) human interaction, or they are Leftist sermonettes in movie form.  In either case, the important thing for a movie today is to check a laundry list of demographic labels and categories and make sure the characters conform to the Leftist narratives and agendas.  It's like making a movie based on the ingredients list of a cereal box. 

Compared to that, the complexity and depth of GWTW's characters (even if already watered down from the book), soars high.  It looks like a movie about people in an age when, even in the shadows of something like the Civil War, most of the drama involves personal lives, loves, and loss.  Unlike today, where more Americans see politics as the all-god, the end to all, the first and last, this is a time when people were still people, and there were other things to think on than the latest political or social issue. 

Not only do the characters, but the people who made the film, exemplify this.  If you haven't noticed, one of the macro-threads of modern criticism from the Left is the condemnation of any artist, musician, author, filmmaker or thinker dared to produce anything without focusing exclusively on the socio-political topics we obsess about today.  Not only are they condemned for not being up to our stellar brilliance and moral perfection, but they didn't even make movies focusing on the politics and social issues of the day.  Or at least, they didn't so do with all the subtly of a cement block, which is what films want today.  

No, we watched it last night for my Mom.  The boys call gathered together to watch it with her.  We were going to take her to the showings at the cinema, but she felt she wouldn't be able to sit through the whole movie in a theater.  So with the miracle of an old big screen TV, we brought the theater to Mom.  Popcorn and all.  Of course she loved it, since it's her favorite movie.  My boys talked once again about how good it is, how tough, how brutal at times.  How real.  They've labeled the last ten minutes the most heart wrenching ten minutes in movie history.  That's because it was about real people, not cardboard cutouts meant to appease a movement that would be nice not to give a damn about. 

Me Generation Socialism

So my oldest boys had a sit down dinner with us recently.  With their college and work schedules, that doesn't happen much.  Our third is also getting busier, being active in the Police Explorers program and working, while also searching for a job more akin to a career in law enforcement.

Nonetheless, we're still homeschooling our youngest and use such times to educate through conversation.  Being in fourth grade, we felt it was time for him to learn some things about the different macro-issues and terminology he might hear about on the news, such as what people mean when they say things like Free Market, or Socialism, or Communism, Fascism, Capitalism, Totalitarianism and so forth.

While doing that dinner time lesson, one of my boys brought up an interesting observation.  It's likely not original, but it made me think.  When talking about Socialism, it was mentioned that proponents of a new, Democratic Socialism often object to being linked to old forms of Socialism that led to things like Communism, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.  That was National Socialism, they insist, not to be confused with the brand being peddled today.

My son pointed out that it's really not accurate to call it Democratic either.  It sounds more like 'Individualist Socialism' (not to be confused with Libertarian Socialism) than anything Democratic.  He meant that in a way similar to how Socialism of the 19th and 20th centuries hitched up with the wave of Nationalist fervor of those times, so this Socialism seems to have glommed onto the radical Me Generation/Millennial individualism of today.

Whereas the old socialists linked to nationalism, patriotism, love of country, devotion to the Fatherland, all for Mother Russia, and similar sentiments, today it seems to be about promising the world to Me.  I get everything free.  I get sex, money, smartphones, legal drugs; I get free college, housing, healthcare; I get to have more opportunities to eliminate people who are inconvenient through such things as euthanasia, assisted suicide and abortion/infanticide; and if I want to be Napoleon, no more trips to the funny farm, they'll just see to it that the definition of Napoleon is changed.

Is this done for a greater social or national ideal?  Is it for the Fatherland?  Is it for our good old Uncle Sam?  No, it's for me.  Me alone.  And if others fall through the cracks or have to be hurt because they're challenging my right to have whatever I want, whenever I want, with whomever I want, free of charge?  Well, that's were getting rid of pesky things like due process is concerned.  And those who are hurt or fall through the cracks?  Screw'em.

I've said how, when I first went to Patheos, I blogged that many Americans were still being left behind Obama's great economic recovery.  I said there were plenty out there hurting, and being lost in the dust.  The overwhelming response from the majority progressive/millennial readers?  Screw'em, I'm fine.  I'm making money.  I'm doing just swell.  What do I care?  And when I tried to point out that my parents' generation in the 70s, even if they personally were doing well, still had a link to other Americans and didn't like the fact that others, and the country, were still struggling?  The Patheos reader response:  Screw the past.  Who cares?

That's the modern attitude, and it's not confined to economics or Patheos.  Terrorism, falling behind in the rush to globalization, eradicating due process and presumption of innocence, suppressing free speech, AIDS and overdosing through sex and drugs - are all of it is based on the idea that as long as it happens to others, it's the sacrifice I'm willing to make.  Because Me.  Martyrdom by proxy and all. It's why Europeans just shrug their shoulders when the prospect of their civilization's inevitable death is brought up, but the first mention of austerity measures causes them to go batshit and riot and destroy and attack and burn.

And that's the mentality, the generational distinctive, that this new incarnation of Socialism is trying to appeal to.  Don't worry about your neighbor (heck, fear and despise your neighbor, depending on his gender, religion, national origin, skin color or politics).  Whatever happens, happens.  Omelets and broken eggs after all.  But you'll be fine, awesome and always have enough for the next smartphone.  After all, we gave you trophies when you lost and let you take tests over and over until you passed.

Socialist Individualism maybe?  Me Socialism? Selfish Socialism?  Whatever we call it, no more National, and certainly not sounding overly Democratic.  A new Socialism to appeal to the radical self-serving individualism sweeping our country, and the West, today.

Hmmmm.  I'll think on that.  As I've said many times, I'm no economist or economic theorist, but I believe he might be onto something.  He is coming from the vantage point of his own Facebook and post-Millennial generations after all.  Again, I'm sure he didn't come up with that out of the blue.  But it seems credible to me, especially given what we've seen here and across the ocean in Europe.  It also seems, just based on what we're witnessing, every bit as deadly as the National brand of Socialism from all those years ago.