Many social psychologists have an ideological aversion to evolutionary psychology, by Christian Jarrett.
Quizzing the social psychologists on their views of evolutionary theory, Buss and von Hippel found that they overwhelmingly accepted the principles of Darwinian evolution and also that it applied to humans, but when it came to whether evolutionary theory applies to human psychology and behaviour, the sample was split, with many social psychologists rejecting this notion.
Digging deeper into the survey results, there was no evidence that the social psychologists were averse to evolutionary psychology for religious reasons, but many did reject the idea that humans might be inherently violent (in certain situations) or that some people are widely considered more physically attractive than others due to universal evolved standards of attractiveness — perhaps, Buss and von Hippel suggested, this is because “they dislike the implications regarding the dark side of human nature.” …
Realities that puncture the PC fantasies are not allowed, by many of these leftist academics. They cannot even apply evolutionary theory to humans — because the obvious implications contradict their political beliefs. “Scientists”? Bah.
Buss and von Hippel think that, motivated by principles of social justice, many social psychologists are ideologically opposed to what they mistakenly think evolutionary psychology argues for — namely genetic determinism, environmental irrelevance, and the idea that attempts to change human behaviour are doomed to fail. In fact, these are erroneous caricatures and evolutionary psychology does not espouse any of these beliefs. It does though recognise that we are not blank slates and that our minds and behaviour have been shaped by evolution in important ways. …
On an optimistic note, Buss and von Hippel point out that their survey found that a substantial minority of social psychologists did endorse findings rooted in evolutionary biology.
The Culture War Neutron Bomb, by Rod Dreher.
We will see the coming of what James Poulos calls the “Pink Police State.” People will be happy to give up their political liberties in exchange for guarantees of sexual freedom. China’s “social credit system” will become an effective model for the Controllers, and the surveillance state (the mechanisms of which already exist in the West) will be deployed against dissenters. As the older liberals die off, the rising Jacobin generation will fight for this, calling it social justice.
President Trump and Congressional Republicans have already abandoned two previous attempts to secure funding for the president’s promised border wall after forcing two brief partial government shutdowns. But with Democrats preparing to take control of the House in January, the president is ready to give it one last shot.
At least that’s what he told Politico during an interview published Wednesday morning. The president said he would veto any funding bill that doesn’t include $5 billion in appropriations to start building his wall on the border. To avert a shutdown, Congress must pass — and the president must sign — seven appropriations bills that have already been negotiated before midnight on Friday Dec. 7.
President Trump apparently still believes that Republicans wouldn’t suffer any political fallout from a shutdown (particularly if it’s done in the name of border security); instead, Democrats would shoulder most of the blame. And given the increasingly violent confrontations between border patrol agents and members of a caravan of migrants from Central America, Trump believes the political winds right now are particularly favorable for approving the wall.
via Tip of the Spear
Five years almost to the day before President Donald Trump’s border officers blocked migrants with tear gas, authorities under President Barack Obama used identical tactics along the same stretch of border near the San Ysidro Port of Entry, according to 2013 press accounts.
President Donald Trump has strongly defended the use of tear gas at the Mexican border to repel a crowd of migrants that included barefoot, crying children as well as angry rock-throwers.
Critics denounced the border agents’ action as overkill but the US President kept to a hard line.
Mr Trump seemed to acknowledge children were affected but said it was “a very minor form of the tear gas itself” that he assured was “very safe”.
Did the ABC scold Obama five years ago? Is the Pope (apart from the current one) Catholic?
When it comes to Obama, when he uses tear gas, he is protecting the country. The narrative is that Trump is a cruel, heartless bastard …
Look What’s On The Menu — Crude Oil, by John Happs.
Here we see a group of activists protesting at an oil platform:
They are probably not aware that their fiberglass kayaks, surfboards, and life-jackets were made from petrochemicals. So were the tyres on their bicycles and the road asphalt their bikes travel on. They are also unlikely to know that only around 70% of oil is used for fuel with the remainder going into petrochemical feedstock from which thousands of other products are made including their bicycle helmets, vitamin capsules, sweaters, candles, sunglasses, telephones, aspirin and salad bowls. …
Oil spills, seepage, and WWII:
Around 50% of the oil that enters the ocean comes from natural oil seeps scattered around the world. More oil seeps naturally from the ocean floor into the Gulf of Mexico every year than the 200 million gallons spilled from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon accident.
Also, what has happened to the huge volume of oil spilled into the world’s ocean during World War II when submarines sank so many German and Allied oil tankers? According to the Military History Site: “The collective tanker sinkings of ww2 put that (Exxon Valdez spill) to miniscule proportions and insignificance.”
So where is all this oil now? …
In 2010 a blowout of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig, which was about 60 km from the coast in the Gulf of Mexico, leaked 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf. …
But the lasting ecological damage predicted by environmental groups didn’t occur. Alarmists said the spill would still be evident in 40 years time. CBS News Network’s Melanie Warner warned:
This could mean a permanent end to the Gulf’s seafood industry and ten years from now … there will very likely still be seafood — shrimp, bluefin tuna and maybe snapper and grouper — that are contaminated with BP’s oil.
The alarmists were wrong. Most of the crude oil dispersed naturally. Hydrocarbon-consuming microbes rapidly increased in number to feast on the Deepwater oil spill.
Five months after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon, oil spill ocean bacteria had consumed at least 100 million gallons of oil. After five years there was little evidence to show there had been an oil spill in the area. …
What was once a large underwater plume of oil and gas was eaten by the bacteria with the mixing of seawater triggering a microbial bloom explosion.
Some microbes eat oil, and multiply rapidly when oil becomes available — so oil spills soon disappear. What about plastics? Maybe microbes didn’t evolve to eat plastic — imagine if all our plastic stuff got eaten by microbes within months of being made!
A Texas mother has threatened the father of their six-year-old son with a child abuse charge because he will not affirm their son is transgender.
According to a petition to modify the parent-child relationship brought by mother Anne Georgulas, her 6-year-old son, James, is a “gender expansive or transgender child and, by choice, now goes by the name Luna.”
Georgulas, a pediatrician, is seeking to terminate the parental rights of James’ father, Jeffrey Younger, because the child behaves as a boy – his biological sex – when he is with his father. James’ mother also wants Younger to pay for their son’s counseling with a therapist who will affirm his transgender identity, and for transgender hormonal treatments which may begin at age eight. …
James’ mother has diagnosed their son with “gender dysphoria,” a psychological disorder that is characterized by a child’s “persistent, consistent, and insistent” assertion of “their cross-gender statements and behaviors.” However, when James is with his father, he reportedly acts and behaves as a boy by his own choice.
How trendy! How 2010’s! All that progress — what will the next decade bring?
More seriously, might not the kid merely be trying hard to please both parents, living up to each of their expectations? A boy with dad, but transgender with mum?
So what happens if society as a whole expects all kids to behave as feminine? Good bye “toxic” masculinity, perhaps. But why did masculinity evolve? Why do the societies that thrived and survived have such strong masculine traits? Societies without masculine males seem to not be around — maybe there is a good reason for that? Guess we might find out soon, if masculinity continues to be swept away in the West.
hat-tip Barry Corke
Religious schools at risk of losing right to pursue their faith, by Paul Kelly.
Australia risks falling into an epic change that would gravely jeopardise the ability of religious schools to pursue their mission and uphold their faith, the Morrison government warned yesterday.
This follows Labor’s decision to act unilaterally to protect gay students, with Attorney-General Christian Porter issuing the warning: “Labor’s bill represents radical change because it provides no legislative ability for schools to act in accordance with their beliefs and the tenets of their faith.
“It completely removes the ability of religious educational institutions to maintain their ethos through what they teach and the rules of conduct they impose on students. This is because Labor’s bill would, for the first time, expose religious schools to litigation under the Sex Discrimination Act merely because they impose reasonable rules such as requiring students to attend chapel.” …
Every sign is that the religious schools are broken and prey to radical change. Their will to defend their centuries-old, faith-based teaching mission is compromised by their terror of being labelled homophobic, while their parental communities do not comprehend what is happening.
There is universal agreement that the law allowing schools to remove students because of sex or gender be repealed. That is not the issue, though it is constantly presented as the issue. The real debate is about the remaining protections for religious schools. …
Porter repudiates Labor’s claim that nothing in its bill threatens religious education. “Labor has failed to listen to the genuine concerns of religious educational institutions and their more than one million families in what amounts to a radical approach to such a fundamental overhaul of exemptions that Labor inserted in 2013,” he said.
Could this really be happening? To take a wider perspective, Marxists have always hated Christianity as the main impediment to creating a model society as they saw it. Now they are using gay activists and homosexual rights to gradually marginalize and outlaw Christian teaching.
Jesus Christ was the world’s most influential politician, whose teachings over the last two thousand years moved the world away from the “might is right” politics that existed before. The notions that we are all equal in the eyes of an omnipresent creator, and that this life is but a prelude to another so we’d better act honorably, eventually led to the end of economic and sexual slavery, for instance.
Do the left realize the nature of the Pandora’s box they are opening? Perhaps they take the benefits of the modern world for granted, and think it is OK to carelessly pick at the underpinnings?
hat-tip Stephen Neil
Gerard Batten and the Question of Sex Slaves, by Hugh Fitzgerald.
Nigel Farage said last Friday that he wants Gerard Batten out as UKIP leader for naming Tommy Robinson his adviser on rape gangs and prison reform. Farage complained about Batten’s “fixation with Tommy Robinson and discussing Islam.” And it’s true: Batten has been saying some disturbing things about Islam. What makes them most disturbing is that they all happen to be true.
Consider his claim that Islam permits the taking of “sex slaves” from among Infidel girls, and that this is the ideological justification for the Rotherham grooming gangs. When he said this in a television interview with SkyNews, his interviewer, one Gillian Joseph, expressed her distaste and disbelief. She first described his appearance at what she called an “anti-Islam rally.”
Batten promptly corrects her: “It was not an anti-Islam rally, but a rally for justice for women and girls.”
Joseph then insists that Batten had “attributed them [sex crimes] to a particular religion. That’s not the ideology of Islam.”
Batten replies “It’s in the hadith and Qur’an… If he [Muhammad] did something, it’s okay for other people..”
Joseph repeats: “That’s not the ideology of Islam.” She continues: “You’re attacking the entire religion of Islam which doesn’t espouse…to actually advocate sex before marriage.”
Batten answers: “It does allow people — their followers — to take sex slaves who are not of the same religion. Kuffars, infidels can be taken as sex slaves. It’s one of the conditions of warfare that they have.” …
The Qur’an is clear on the subject of sex slaves. It tells Muslims to take captives when they meet unbelievers in battle: “Now when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens” (47:4). It also refers to slave women belonging to the Islamic prophet Muhammad as spoils of war: “O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have paid their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses of those whom Allah has given you as spoils of war” (33:50). There are seven different words for “slave” in the Qur’an, but the most common expression, which appears fifteen times, is “those whom your right hand possesses,” which refers specifically to sex slaves.
The West is having real difficulty coming to grips with the seventh century nature of fundamentalist Islam. It’s not hidden, but it is not at first believed because it seems so … pre-medieval.
Robert Spencer notes that “a powerful statement of the right to sex slaves in Islam was delivered on May 25, 2011 by a female Kuwaiti politician, Salwa al-Mutairi, who spoke in favor of the Islamic practice of sexual slavery of non-Muslim women, emphasizing that the practice accorded with Islamic law and Islamic morality.
“Sex slaves are not forbidden by Islam. On the contrary, sex slaves are under a different law than the free woman. The free woman must be completely covered except for her face and hands. But the sex slave can be naked from the waist up. She differs a lot from the free woman. While the free woman requires a marriage contract, the sex slave does not—she only needs to be purchased by her husband, and that’s it. Therefore the sex slave is different than the free woman.” …
The legitimizing of sex slaves is found both in Qur’an passages –e.g.,Surah Al-Muminun (23:6) and Surah Al-Maarij (70:30)– and in the behavior of Muhammad, who took 12 wives and numerous concubines, including those who could be described as “those whom my right hand possesses” which meant “sex slaves.”
Islamic State, Rotherham etc.:
Non-Muslim girls who were raped by Muslims report that their rapist would pray just before and just after raping them. Clearly they believed it had religious sanction, that they were only being good Muslims.
UKIP leader Gerard Batten
Gerard Batten, this commonsensical, mild-mannered, altogether admirable man, no matter how often he is described as “far right” and “racist” by the likes of Gillian Joseph, should be able, by dint of repetition — even the truth, in this hectic age, needs to be repeated to make it stick — to imprint on the brains of his listeners what is a very simple notion.
To wit, that the phrase “those whom your right hand possesses,” repeated fifteen times in the Qur’an, refers to female slaves taken from among the conquered Unbelievers, who can be used by Muslim males for sex, that according to the Qur’an this is a legitimate activity, that Muhammad himself, the Perfect Man and Model of Conduct, took such sex slaves.
Yazidi and Christian girls have been mass-raped by members of the Islamic State, Christian girls have been kidnapped and raped by members of Boko Haram, and more than 1,400 English girls, as young as 11, were repeatedly raped in Rotherham alone by Muslim men who believed that such Unbelievers could naturally be treated as sex slaves, for they were, according to the Qur’an “the most vile of creatures.”
hat-tip Stephen Neil
Tucker’s Treatise, by Steve Sailer.
At age 49, Carlson is in his prime and is likely to stay there for quite a while. Like Pat Buchanan, he’s genial off camera and a tiger when the red light turns on. He’s starting to run into the Ali G problem that top PR advisers have now heard he’s trouble for their clients, so he’s getting sent mostly second stringers to thrash.
Moreover, he’s brought to the often ossified world of cable news a relatively fresh perspective that had previously largely been kept out of the mainstream media, if I say so myself.
Carlson, a rich kid from La Jolla, isn’t a populist outsider by upbringing or personality. His father was a Republican ambassador and his stepmother was an heiress and a niece of Sen. William J. Fulbright (D-AR), a leading insider opponent of the Vietnam War. A witty man, Carlson seldom pretends to be anything other than a member of the elite he insightfully criticizes. …
The central theme of Ship of Fools is that the convergence toward the reigning elite consensus of economic conservatism and social progressivism is better for the people at the top of society than for maintaining a stable middle-class democracy:
The marriage of market capitalism to progressive social values may be the most destructive combination in American economic history. Someone needs to protect workers from the terrifying power of market forces, which tend to accelerate change to intolerable levels and crush the weak.
Companies can openly mistreat their employees (or “contractors”), but for the price of installing transgender bathrooms they buy a pass. Shareholders win, workers lose. Bowing to the diversity agenda is a lot cheaper than raising wages. …
Carlson is struck by how many 20th-century progressive shibboleths have been forgotten as the long march through the institutions has triumphed:
The majority of journalists and intellectuals in 1975 would never have accepted the lame excuse that silencing, firing, and ruining people for holding an opinion was fine, as long as it wasn’t specifically the government doing it. They would have declared that a free society depends above all on free minds. …
Interestingly, despite his clarity of expression, almost nobody has noticed Carlson’s growing ideological centrism. But that’s because what matters most to contemporary intellectuals is not policy but keeping the alliance of the margins together by blaming straight white males. And Carlson is the exemplification of straight white maleness.
The White Christian West Flips Pathologies, by David Cole.
For centuries, whites were obsessed with the notion that, being superior as they felt they were, it was their divine right to conquer and enslave the “inferior” races. In yet another example of replacing one extreme with another, many whites now act as though it’s their sacred duty to atone for past sins by allowing nonwhites to reconquista the shit out of the West.
The right or wrong of it doesn’t interest me. What does is the ability of the white Christian West to emerge from one pathology and dissolve into another, to go from “We will conquer you” to “Please conquer us.” Of course, white nationalists will claim that the white West was coerced, “tricked” into such a reversal by outside forces. …
The Jewish experience in Europe:
When one considers the Jewish experience in Europe over the past thousand years, what stands out to me is the fact that even in the face of countless expulsions — expulsions from England, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Russia, and, well, you name the European country and it’s likely to have expelled the Jews at some point in its history — by the time Hitler came to power in the 1930s, there were still damn near 10 million Jews on the continent. That’s truly astounding. No matter the forced expulsions or the forced conversions (i.e., the influence of “outside forces”), the Jews held on to their identity, and to their desire to remain in Europe. Sure, it can be argued that for centuries they had nowhere else to go, but a weaker group would have just converted en masse.
There is a darker aspect to this corporate virtue, and it concerns online leftist activists who pressure companies and politicians into severing ties with journalists and media organisations whose opinions they despise. Last weekend my colleague Janet Albrechtsen wrote extensively about one of these groups, the Sleeping Giants, whose followers obsessively target companies that advertise with conservative outlets, particularly Sky News.
These offence-taking aficionados monitor every utterance of presenters for so-called hate speech. Once identified the relevant excerpt is tweeted to companies that advertise on the program or publication. The followers of Sleeping Giants are likewise encouraged to inform these companies of damage to their “brand” by association.
You could say the activists convey a polite but menacing message that they would like to feel these companies are acceptable, respectable, and presentable. In other words, terminate your contract with the ”offending” media outlet or face a consumer backlash. Like most of those intent on repressing dissenting views, these activists will lie, deceive and manipulate to further that objective. …
Last weekend former Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane, a supposed champion of diversity, defended Sleeping Giants. Taking issue with Albrechtsen, he said she had “demonise[d] those who dare exercise their free speech against racism, bigotry and sexism”.
Leave aside for now Soutphommasane’s risible assertion that this, rather than control of narrative, is the aim of Sleeping Giants. What is not in issue is that he regards boycott movements, whether implied or otherwise, as an exercise in free speech. Yet in 2014 he condemned a social media campaign against halal certification businesses. It was, he said, a case of “anti-Islamic bullying”.
“Its currency is distortion and misrepresentation,” he said. “Bullying that aims to stimulate fear and divide Australians.” Yet now he defends a movement that revels in such tactics. That is hypocrisy. To hear the divisive and censorious Soutphommasane suddenly champion free speech is nauseating. …
Writing last weekend about 2GB broadcaster Alan Jones, Fairfax columnist Peter FitzSimons described Sleeping Giants as “social justice warriors” who were “pursuing Jones’s sponsors online over being associated with his brand of bigotry, racism, misogyny and bullying”.
“Does that, then mean the definite end of Jones on the Sydney airwaves, or at least those of 2GB” asked FitzSimons, yet again falling victim to his infatuation with superfluous commas. “Hopefully,” he added. Perhaps Bandana Man needs reminding that only last year he hectored and bullied the elderly tennis legend Margaret Court over her public opposition to same-sex marriage. “Does Melbourne Park really want to have an arena named after someone who stands so firmly against such inclusiveness, who is becoming a byword for bigot,” wrote FitzSimons, calling for it to be renamed.
Sci-Fi and fantasy writer Andy Duncan claimed in a podcast that J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings books are racist, citing the negative perceptions associated with the evil Orcs.
“It’s hard to miss the repeated notion in Tolkien that some races are just worse than others, or that some peoples are just worse than others,” declared Duncan recently on the Geek’s Guide to the Galaxy podcast. “And this seems to me—in the long term, if you embrace this too much—it has dire consequences for yourself and for society.”
So invite the Orcs to come and live in your country, in your home, fool.
Of course it’s racist. The whole book is about different races — hobbits, men, elves, dwarves, orcs, and so on. Tolkien obviously meant the Shire to be England, and the darker, more powerful forces lie to the east.
The Shire is not intended to be geographically or politically associated with England in a literal sense. Rather, it is presented to the reader in terms that would have been familiar to someone who was native to England.
The core conflict of the setting — the wars between Gondor & Mordor — are a retelling of the Perso-Roman wars of history. Minas Tirith, the magnificent successor of a yet greater city (ruined Osgiliath — real-life Rome), is Constantinople — the frontier between Europe and Asia is roughly in the middle of the setting. Tolkien’s world is as interesting as it is precisely because of his use of oriental as well as occidental archetypes. …
Mordor is, hilariously enough, Iran – the only place on Earth or Aman to be ringed by mountains in such a distinctive fashion. …
Having identified Gondor as the Eastern Roman Empire, Arnor or Eriador is obviously the West — although here spliced with the “North”, the German-Roman empire that historically inherited the mantle of Rome in the West. … There may well also be an analogy of Angmar with the Vikings, as the sole Northern, Germanic threat medieval Europe ever faced. …
This isn’t a real-life retelling of history, but a very cultured professor’s conscious attempt at mythology. …
The Rohirrim, the blond horsemen of Rohan, are the mid-20th century European’s imagined Aryan/Scythian ancestors, fresh from the Steppe and still purely Germanic. In the imagination, they co-exist with the rest….
Mirkwood, the “largest forest in the world” is Russia, which shares the key trait of impressive size. That inclines me to say the Necromancer, Sauron disguised, is Communism, ie the Orient disguised. …
I don’t think most of the smaller/non-human realms can be pinpointed in any such fashion, though the Valinor=USA (Mighty Land Over the Sea) and Numenor=Atlantis (the imagined home of the “noble” races, in both cases) parallels are obvious.
Which is why the story curiously resonates so with Europeans, especially those from the West.
hat-tip Stephen Neil
Angela Merkel’s ‘EU army’ is for putting down internal rebellions, by David Archibald.
The notion proposed by France’s President Macron that Europe should have its own army, and by that he meant the E.U., was promptly supported by the German chancellor. The proposal has met with incredulity and derision. The more appropriate reaction would be alarm. …
Who do they expect to fight? Russia is the only power in the region, and the Russians don’t have the horsepower to mount a large-scale attack. The Russian economy is only slightly larger than Australia’s.
One clue is that Macron and Merkel are talking about only an army — no navy or air force. If you don’t have an air force, then you don’t get far on the ground. That is the first clue about whom they think the new E.U. army will be fighting. It won’t be any country with an air force.
Another clue is the E.U. crackdown on private ownership of guns. The E.U. even coerced Switzerland into changing its gun laws. The E.U. restricts Swiss access to the European market to get what it wants.
The E.U. is afraid of an armed citizenry, which might rebel against the self-perpetuating regime in Brussels. E.U. bureaucrats know that their diktats with respect to immigration and other matters are deeply unpopular and that an insurrection might break up their empire.
Their model in coping with that is the Austro-Hungarian empire, which was made up of a multitude of ethnicities that didn’t have a common language or heritage. That empire kept order by raising military units in one ethnicity and stationing them in a province that didn’t speak the language of the soldiers. This meant that orders to shoot civilians were more likely to be carried out.
A Swiss reader adds:
The EU need an army to shoot at their own people.
The Waffen SS was the first real European army — with 20 different nationalities.
It makes sense. Naturally you won’t hear this pointed out in the pro-globalist media.
Liberal MP Craig Kelly plans to run as an independent at the next election and is being urged to quit the party immediately, in the latest blow to unity inside the Morrison government.
Mr Kelly did not rule out leaving the Liberals before the election, but told Fairfax Media on Wednesday night he would not defect before Parliament rises for the year on December 6. …
Mr Kelly — a conservative MP from southern Sydney — has privately conceded he has no chance of retaining preselection in the face of a push by moderate Liberal members who have the numbers to remove him. …
A senior Liberal source confirmed the party was delaying the preselection in Hughes as long as possible in case Mr Kelly went rogue, but they would be forced to bring it forward if he quits and joins the crossbench.
Craig Kelly is among the very best on the issue of climate change, and seems to have a fair grasp of the reality and enormity of what is happening.
The Liberal Party is going to replace Craig Kelly as its nominated member with Kent Johns:
Kent Johns is the Party’s Vice President but in 1995 he was elected as a Labor Councillor for Rockdale. In 2002 he resigned from Labor and joined the Liberal Party. He was elected as a Liberal Councillor in 2004 in Sutherland Council and today he is rallying up support for pre-selection for the seat of Hughes.
The left within the party are not even trying to hide their hatred towards Conservatism, the fact they have put a former labor stooge against a conservative firebrand such as Craig Kelly demonstrates that they will do anything to destroy any right wing element of the Party.
“I prefer to welcome migrants than to have children,” French woman tells newspaper, by Voice of Europe.
After asking its readers, one French woman says she prefers migrants over children:
“Personally, I do not envision children in my life. I do not like them, but I do not hate them. The environment is a factor that confirms my choice.
“There are so many people who migrate because of climate change and, at the same time, we are told to continue to procreate, particularly for pensions. I prefer to welcome migrants than to make children with an uncertain future and who will consume again and again.
“Children are a financial and energetic sink. When I meet people, I try to clear the situation quickly by saying that I do not want them. I do not see myself changing for someone, nor to put my career on hold.”
How widespread is that sentiment? If there is genetic component to her attitude, it will be erased from the gene pool before long.
hat-tip Stephen Neil
“Progressive” ideas didn’t win Victoria, conservative ideas went missing, by Lyle Shelton.
Does anyone seriously think the majority of people want their children taught that gender is a social construct? That their little girls could be boys trapped in the wrong body requiring puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and ultimately their breasts surgically removed?
Monty Python’s Life of Brian was right. It’s not even the Romans’ fault that a man can’t be a woman with a womb and have babies.
But that is precisely what Daniel Andrews’ farcical “progressive” Victoria teaches children at “Safe Schools”.
I think it is too early to claim that “progressive” politics has triumphed and that conservatism should be consigned to the scrap heap. People don’t yet know the meaning of or the consequences of “progressive” politics. …
The media package and conservative lack of cultural confidence:
As Andrews implemented his “progressive” vision, the Liberals were barely on the playing field.
What was their vision for Victoria? What do they stand for? No one knew.
Sure, they opposed “Safe Schools” and the rest but like Liberals everywhere, they failed to sustain a debate in the public square.
Most people simply didn’t hear the counter-arguments put.
The Left get up every day and go out and fight. Liberals are lazy, particularly when it comes to the awkward culture issues.
They also face the pressure of their “moderate” wing, which largely supports Left “progressive” social policy, telling conservatives to “tone it down”.
It’s also hard because the media are not neutral and no one wants to have to put their stack hat on.
By contrast, Daniel Andrews has steel in his spine and sticks to his guns, even over unpopular programs like “Safe Schools”.
When Liberal Leader Matthew Guy was given multiple free hits at “Safe Schools” during the Sky News peoples’ forum, he squibbed it.
He talked a big game on “Safe Schools” at the Australian Christian Lobby’s election forum but went missing in action on Sky.
He didn’t have the conviction.
Unlike Donald Trump, who appears to have plenty of cultural confidence.
Conservatives: display confidence in your message, and the voters will come. Cultural confidence is sorely lacking on the right side of politics at the moment, perhaps in part because of the furious media headwind against the right. Appear as if you aren’t sure or maybe would prefer to cosy up to the PC left — and many voters will go left.’
hat-tip Stephen Neil
The Victorian Liberals caused their own catastrophe, by Terry Barnes.
Andrews succeeded so massively because he and Labor marketed a positive vision for Victoria and Victorians, with policies to match. They framed this vision around macro capital works, but also around targeted micro giveaways, like solar fitout subsidies, aimed squarely at households and strains on household budgets in a low wage growth environment. They gambled voters would look at these achievements and plans rather than their vulnerable and sleazy underbelly, and their gamble paid off handsomely. …
[The conservatives] must confront the fact that so many mainstream, conservative-leaning Victorians have lost faith in the party of Menzies, and many grassroots Liberal members have lost faith in their own leadership.