Categories
Life

Notebook.

Well, we had our local body elections and the left officially won. I always question this, as there was a flood of voting in the last minute on what is supposed to be a postal vote. So we will be made to care about the green issues and being progressive. Yeah, right.

Any Monday when the papers (all of them) are full of Scotland losing to Japan in Rugby and do not mention that over 30 people died in the typhoon that cancelled half the rugby games and postponed formula one has its priorities round the wrong way. I don’t pay for streaming rugby. I’m now over it. Completely.

The first crisis of the week

Turns out the win was a consequence of the Dunedin City Council using STV. The Green would have lost on a first past the post election.

So much happening in the world right now that the hawt chicks & links almost doesn’t know where to turn. Trump pulls out of Syria, the Turks invade or something, and OH MY GOD, THE KURDS!! Can anyone explain to me why the Kurds are so important? I thought that kurds was something that you’d find next to your whey. I don’t care about the Kurds just the same way that I don’t care about the Turks; they’re not my people. Let them sort out their own problems. Some of them die sorting out their own problems? Why is that our problem, let alone our own fault? Nobody cares. We didn’t care about the Hutus or the Tutsis either. Nobody knew who the hell they were. And know that we know, we wish that we didn’t. Just like the Kurds. Stop pretending to think that the rest of us give a shit. I couldn’t care less. They could all die in a gigantic grease fire as far as I’m concerned and I wouldn’t bat an eyelid. Boo-fucking-hoo. I wouldn’t even pretend to make polite conversation about it at the coffee machine at work.

“Oooh, isn’t it tragic about those Kurds?”

“No, it’s not. Now get out of my way so I can get a coffee.”

I don’t appreciate the attempts to manipulate me into caring about some group with whom I know nothing about, care nothing about and have nothing in common.

Adam Piggott

One of the commentators linked to Kratman, now a good author of manuals on how to terrorize the globalists into submission. (All his books have high body counts). However, this is an old link, back to when the Kratman was a grunt, and not a failed lawyer. The Kurds have good terrain: the Turks want it for defensive reasons. And the Kurds are in it for themselves.

Sitting next to me is a Staff Sergeant Farnsworth. Farnsworth and I are both grunts, so we’re doing what grunts do when there’s nothing better to do and neither sleep nor playing cards nor reading are possible; we’re analyzing the terrain. It is fiercely rugged, with winding roads going through narrow passes between hills and mountains difficult enough to climb on foot and impossible for vehicles. Reverse slopes were of such an angle as would make defenders largely invulnerable to artillery and would make even high angle mortar fire of much reduced effect. In any case, at a certain point, looking over a particularly defensible pass, Farnsworth and I looked at each other. I no longer remember who spoke first but the conversation went like this: “If the Kurds­“ “­couldn’t defend themselves­“ “­in this kind of terrain­“ “­they don’t deserve­“ “­their own country.” And that was before we even knew how much they used mines.

A little digression is in order here. As mentioned previously, Kurdish kids are adorable. (The women are also quite fetching, right up until they’re worn out, usually by age twenty-­four or so, from being used like mules, which is to say, beasts of burden, but who, unlike mules, can still bear young…and must.) Most people shy away from or are at least ignorant of the reason so many of those adorable kids died. It’s simple; the Kurds starved them to death themselves. It’s a cultural imperative among them, when times get hard, to let the little girls die of starvation (first, of course), and then the little boys. Good guess, dear reader; why, no, I didn’t like that for beans. As a matter of fact, now that you ask, I’m not much for multiculturalism, in general, either.

Interestingly, before we even arrived in our area, there had been an incident – a firefight resulting in several Iraqi dead – between the British Marines and some Iraqi troops guarding one of Hussein’s palaces in that part of Iraq. I asked a British officer about it and his answer was to the effect that, “As near as we can figure, as one of our patrols was passing, two Kurds, from different positions but surely with coordination, took a shot each, close to simultaneously. One shot was at our patrol, the other at the Iraqi on the gate to the palace. Both shots missed, but the Iraqis and our men, thinking they were under attack, reacted as one would expect. We were just a lot better shots, better led, than they were. Poor bastards. One of the reasons we’re quite sure that the Iraqis didn’t shoot first was that, as our men passed, they waved at each other, as soldiers will who have no particular reasons for enmity.”

Tom Kratman

I am not a fan of multiculturalism, globalism or moving beyond national interests. I don’t expect other nations to play fair. The French once blew a greenpeace ship in Auckland, where I lived most of my life.

If the Kurds want their homeland, let them take it and let’s keep out of the inevitable, delayed sorting of the Middle east into tribal nation-states. (Or the Umma). NZ needs a good blue water navy and an army trained in marine tactics, to preserve our interests in the Pacific.

I don’t watch the news for reasons. Peservation of the TV and regulation of my blood pressure are among them. The candidate I supported, after a dirty campaign which he lost, went to a street party to listen to the music. So shall it be. The Throne is debased: life moves on.

You have to watch for the sensitive and the offended and the triggered; for they want to regulate speech (at least in Canada). The correct response to that is to be triggering and problematic.

I note that the progressives have significant problems with those they consider problematic, and not infrequently get them sacked, fellow travelers included.

Anyway, the usual places are up: I’ve already linked to Adam in the first quote, the week in Doom is here and the Woodpile Report is here.

Alternative West

There is a metaphor I often use, stolen initially from Charles Stross (don’t complain, Charlie, you stole it from Lovecrof). Cthulhu always swims left. Cthulhu is evil, degeneration, chaos and despair. The West, now the alternative west, stand against us. But all media is advertising, and advertisers will sell evil if evil pays well…

The Dark Lord is called that by those who have converged with Chulthu and think that they are children of light, when Darkness and Chaos are his fruit. As a child, he was not able to see the evil in front of his eyes. But it was there. It was there.

Many complain about the church when the vector for abuse is more likely the wish to be famous.

Be it the Minneapolis Children’s Theatre or the Mousketeers.

My parents were patrons of the Children’s Theatre and we attended every show there for years, including at the height of this period of rapacious abuse. Neither they nor I had any idea about any of this, of course; I knew nothing of it until Spacebunny brought my attention to it this weekend.

And it is an object lesson in understanding that the murky depths of evil may lurk considerably closer to you than you would ever assume.

Vox Day, Vox Popoli

Money can corrupt just as well. Adam is describing Australia, but I can confirm that the same applies in NZ. Far better to live away from the bubbles, where your house is a home and not your sole “asset”. Remember that if you are not paying tax on your income from it, it is not an asset.

Once you understand and fully internalise the truth that all media is simply advertising, it becomes a process of gradual illumination as you step from reading between the lines to reading the inherent truth of the lines, within their own context. The last part is the key to it all; you are always reading truth in the media; it just behooves you to grasp whose truth it actually is.

It’s spring in the southern hemisphere which means that it’s time for the spring auction sales in the Australian real estate market. Because the Australian financial and economic systems are now deformed Ponzi clowns entirely dependent on the continuing appreciation of shoddy buildings known as ‘assets’, what once were simply homes are now the collective cooked goose propping up the entire shoddy edifice. Australia as a whole, not just the political class, are so entirely dependent on wealthy Chinese continuing to buy their country in order to prop up their own wealth that they will put up with just about anything in order to kick the can a little bit further down the road so they can at least sell and retire to the mythical Southern Highlands.

The Mainstream curdles

Stacey McCain is not a radical. He’s a garden variety conservative Republican. God, Jesus, the Constitution, Guns and Bacon. Light on the Lawyers and Money. And when he sees that the collusion is in and what was for thousands of years considered normal is now badthink he calls it correctly. It is not ignorance. It is a choice. Not to collude with Chulthu.

Biden clearly does — his family have become quite well off, thank you, from consulting with Ukraine oil companies (and now the Ukranians are wondering where the money went, they are trying to say it’s all Trump’s fault and impeah him).

IT is so useful to be able to virtue signal about a group you are not part of — remove all moral agency from them, and use them to call your enemies evil. Milo Yianopoulos would, correctly, scorn his help, seeing it a slavery.

Again, the adjectives “weird” and “bizarre” are appropriate. Biden is speaking of a time “eight, ten years ago” — i.e., 2009-2011 — when no one at a “business lunch” would have objected if someone made a joke at the expense of a gay waiter. Well, I don’t know, if he was an obvious mincing fairy, maybe someone would have said something, but . . .

What? No, I’m just pointing out the absurdity of Biden’s rhetoric, which involves a few different unstated premises:

  • The idea that a valid metric of “homophobia” is whether someone makes jokes about gay people; I make jokes about all kinds of people, and it doesn’t mean I hate any of them;
  • The attribution of universal victimhood to gay people, who we are supposed to believe are so emotionally vulnerable that they are irreparably harmed by jokes;
  • The idea that “the vast majority of people in America” are “just afraid” because they “don’t understand” — they are ignorant, and must “learn” whatever it is that cures homophobia.

These are the beliefs Biden was attempting to express in his incoherent gibberish, and the premises of his argument (which are widely held by liberals) simply cannot withstand objective scrutiny. As with every other issue, Democrats are promoting in regard to gay people what Thomas Sowell described as The Vision of the Anointed, the idea that every public-policy dispute involves a contest between the Enlightened Few and the Benighted Many. Liberals consider themselves to be morally and intellectually superior to such an extent that the rest of us are in need of their tutelage. Whatever the issue — high-speed rail in California or “Drag Queen Story Hour” at your local library — liberals think of their opponents as intellectually inferior to themselves, so that your opinion is wrong, and you are a bad person, if you disagree with a liberal.

It is this attitude that inspires Democrats to abrogate the First Amendment freedom of their opponents, by labeling the expression of disagreement as “hate speech.” You will scarcely be surprised that Biden endorsed surveillance of “terrorist groups” that disagree with him

Microsoft make a couple of good laptops and not much else. What the current management excel at is importing their fellow countrymen. This is ruining Seattle, and Seattle stands as a warning: an example of how to drive the working class and poor not out of town but onto the streets and into dysfunction.

Historically, zoning regulations, whereby municipal governments decide “what parts of the city will be industrial, residential or commercial,” are linked to high-cost housing. However, city planners have been determining where people live, work and do business for close on a century. Pure market forces and the price system have been absent in city planning for a very long time.

It is, therefore, more edifying to survey the special interests currently involved in the anti-zoning debate. These are the grubby interests of the developers, the realtors and the municipalities (hunkering after more property taxes). All are protesting the idea of the “Single-family home that offers people a chance at traditional, white-picket fence homeownership.”

Development fiends and fanatics all hunger for the revenues that come from “dense housing,” namely “any housing that’s attached to another unit, often in taller buildings: apartments, condos, town homes, row houses.”

Against this background, it seems clear that the egalitarians have appropriated the anti-zoning argument. They now malign single-family neighborhoods in favor of promoting density, which is—wouldn’t you know it?—more expensive and thus lucrative.

To the working poor, the new cellblock units that replace single-family homes are worse than useless, as they cost so much more than the homes torn down.

No wonder the Economist clucks in outrage against “local control over zoning.” As ruthless and reckless as it is, local government is more likely than state or federal governments to be responsive to the petitions of single-family homeowners against building “dense housing,” to accommodate Jeff Bezos’ H-1B visa arrivals.

Ilana Mercer, Unz Review

I default on matters of politics to mistrust, and I live in a country where most politicians are motivated altruistically. This has never stopped them breaking their word, for the best of reasons.

Bullion always as a melt value, and, as this blogger notes, paper certificates do not.

The safe-deposit box had about 50 one-dollar silver certificates. They’re worth about $1.50, unless you have some star-added serial number bills, which I don’t.

The front of the bill is different than your standard one-dollar bill. It says:

“This certifies that there is on deposit in the treasury of the United States of America One Dollar in silver payable to the bearer on demand.”

Except that there isn’t. Congress, in 1968, retracted that promise.

The coins with actual silver have value – greater value, because they are made of something that cannot be invalidated by a legislative body. The paper money’s promise was a social contract that could be revised or revoked by the government as it pleased, at the exact moment it became possible and expedient, and benefited the government.

Might be a lesson in there somewhere, IDK.

The Ladysphere

Ladies, marriage is not about your feelings. It is a place where God will make you holy, despite your feelings. Ignore lists such as this. It is not men who qualify for your affection: it is you who needs to qualify for their commitment.

Because most men will leave if you have a list that long. (Warning: there is a picture of the author of the list there. It ain’t pretty.)

Kea found this before me. Read the whole thing.

Folks often look to the things we post on our blog and FB page and make very lovely heartfelt comments about how inspired they are by this thing we have. We’ve been together for about 13 years and yes, the stuff we post is real and true. We are absolutely crazy for each other. Here are some thoughts that apply to both men and women. We don’t want to pretend to be experts though. Scott is divorced. Mychael had a child out of wedlock before we met. Both of us could be considered failures in this area, and we both have tried to come to realistic grips about those shortcomings. Maybe, in fact, that is point number one. –Knowing that you are not perfect.

Next. We see a lot of posts from people, right after a break up that declare something like “this next time I am going to hold out for [fill in the blank list of qualities]” Stop doing this. Why in the world do you think you are entitled to a person like that? This is the boneheaded “soulmate” canard. The idea that God (or the universe or whatever) has someone out there built just for you and you just have to trust that He will deliver that person to you. How self-absorbed do you have to be to think that way? Instead work on MAKING YOURSELF INTO SOMEONE THAT A HIGH-QUALITY MATE WOULD WANT TO MARRY. If you are a woman, ask yourself “what kinds of things to men really like” and the opposite if you are a man. The world does not owe you a good spouse.

Scott and Mychael, Ljubomir Farms

Theological Ramblings

Bruce Charlton has read too much Mormon Speculation. He likes the idea of primordial creation — before creation, I knew you — thinking that there are homunculi awaiting conception. I would argue instead that the divine is outside of creation and can move around time. However, his speculation has some truth within it.

Our worship of consent has the whiff of libertarianism and the Whig: the Whig has always been of the devil. The correct response to having reason is to praise God for it.

To choose hell means that we resent God’s choice, we regard it as having been made un-lovingly, for God’s own purposes with which we disagree. Hell is the denial that God acted with love, or the denial that love is a sufficient reason for God to act.

This hell is what happens when a person is angry at God, at God’s primal act of ‘making’ us his child. It is to accept the consciousness that was bestowed by God, but to reject God’s purpose for which consciousness was bestowed.

To choose hell therefore means that we choose to retain our consciousness and agency – despite its having being forced-upon us; but (motivated by hatred and resentment against God) to use this consciousness in opposition to God’s purposes.

Hell is to use our powers of agency against the agenda of God – and instead for our own agenda.

And hell will mobilise our better emotions and corrupt them. Rhetoric is always suspect — asking for whom it benefits is simple prudence.

Augustine got this correct: Sin is anything taken to extremes. At the extremes we find ourselves questioning God, and the justice inherent in nature. This is the error of this age, and that is why this seems harsh. The older generations would have called in plain sense.

Unlike Nietzsche, I accept pity (compassion) as a virtue, but unlike many modern Christians, I see pity as a secondary virtue that degenerates into pathological altruism when it is not regulated by the primary virtues of justice, prudence and courage. A man without compassion is certainly a bad man, but a man who is guided by nothing but compassion is a King Midas of misery. Everything he touches turns to mold.

Morbid pity does its mischief in many ways. The most obvious is that it rushes in to palliate unpleasant but just deserts. A drunkard groaning in bed should at least get his own aspirin! A sluggard lamenting his empty belly should be ignored. The road to wisdom runs through the swamp of suffering, and when morbid pity tries to bridge that swamp with a causeway, it turns the road right back into folly. All suffering does not deserve pity, and it requires justice, prudence and courage to harden one’s heart when it does not.

More insidiously, whenever we feel pity, there is a great danger we will begin to feel sorry. Notice the telling equivocation in this word sorry, which can mean simple compassion or guilty remorse. Morbid pity is compassion that has degenerated into guilty remorse, into a false belief that I have somehow caused the suffering that I see. Compassion makes me feel a duty to alleviate unjust suffering. Morbid pity makes me feel that I am at least partly to blame for all the sorrows of the world.

Prudent pity for the poor is a virtue, and it leads to charity. Charity is given in love and received with gratitude. Morbid pity for the poor is a vice, and it leads to restitution. Restitution is given in shame, received without thanks, and impartially showered on deserving and undeserving alike. When wealth waxes guilty, poverty waxes predatory, and “Christian charity” becomes the cover for a heist.

The Orthosphere

Enough. This is going up — there is very interesting technically right now.