Not our government

Not our government, by Arthur Chrenkoff.

It’s pretty much a hard political law that when the right loses an election they tend to blame themselves (“it was the infighting – the bloody moderates/conservatives [delete as appropriate] destabilised the party” or “what a shitty campaign that was; what idiots do we have in charge at the headquarters?”). If, on the other hand, the left loses they blame the voters, who are either evil or dumb. Or they blame the electoral system. The same system that seems to work OK every time they win, all of a sudden becomes problematic, outdated and deeply flawed when they don’t. …

Then there is everyone’s favourite political priest, Fr Rod Bower …

If Labor had won the election, as pretty much everyone expected, it’s unlikely that the Gosford Anglican Church board would have proudly proclaimed “Yay! ABC/Fairfax/Guardian chose our government this time!”

Why High-Class People Get Away With Incompetence

Why High-Class People Get Away With Incompetence, by Heather Murphy.

The researchers suggest that part of the answer involves what they call “overconfidence.” In several experiments, they found that people who came from a higher social class were more likely to have an inflated sense of their skills — even when tests proved that they were average. This unmerited overconfidence, they found, was interpreted by strangers as competence. …

In an attempt to understand the implications of overconfidence, the researchers constructed a mock job interview. The students were asked the same question and videotaped. A group of strangers then watched the videos and rated the candidates. The selection committee generally opted for the same people who’d overestimated their trivia abilities. Overconfidence was misinterpreted as competence. …

Researchers said they hoped that the takeaway was not to strive to be overconfident. Wars, stock market crashes and many other crises can be blamed on overconfidence, they said. So how do managers, employers, voters and customers avoid overvaluing social class and being duped by incompetent wealthy people? Dr. Kennedy said she had been encouraged to find that if you show people actual facts about a person, the elevated status that comes with overconfidence often fades away.

“We may also need to punish overconfident behavior more than we do,” she said.

At Australian Ballot Boxes, the Left’s Empathy Deficit Came Home to Roost

At Australian Ballot Boxes, the Left’s Empathy Deficit Came Home to Roost, by Claire Lehmann.

Progressive politicians like to assume that, on election day at least, blue-collar workers and urban progressives will bridge their differences, and make common cause to support leftist economic policies.

This assumption might once have been warranted. But it certainly isn’t now — in large part because the intellectuals, activists and media pundits who present the most visible face of modern leftism are the same people openly attacking the values and cultural tastes of working and middle-class voters.

And thanks to social media (and the caustic news-media culture that social media has encouraged and normalized), these attacks are no longer confined to dinner-party titterings and university lecture halls.

Brigid Delaney, a senior writer for Guardian Australia, responded to Saturday’s election result with a column about how Australia has shown itself to be “rotten.” One well-known Australian feminist and op-ed writer, Clementine Ford, has been fond of Tweeting sentiments such as “All men are scum and must die.” Former Australian Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane, who also has served as a high-profile newspaper columnist, argues that even many mainstream political positions — such as expressing concern about the Chinese government’s rising regional influence — are a smokescreen for racism.

In an interview conducted on Sunday morning, Deputy Labor leader Tanya Plibersek opined that if only her party had more time to explain to the various groups how much they’d all benefit from Labor’s plans, Australians would have realized how fortunate they’d be with a Labor government, and Shorten would’ve become Prime Minister. Such attitudes are patronizing, for they implicitly serve to place blame at the feet of voters, who apparently are too ignorant to know what’s good for them.

What the election actually shows us is that the so-called quiet Australians, whether they are tradies (to use the Australian term) in Penrith, retirees in Bundaberg, or small business owners in Newcastle, are tired of incessant scolding from their purported superiors. Condescension isn’t a good look for a political movement.

GetUp put on notice over political links

GetUp put on notice over political links, by Brad Norington.

Government MPs are angered most about the conduct of GetUp — which they claim is a “front” for Labor or the Greens while pretending to be independent. …

The proposal to place limits on campaign activity outside polling booths follows deep anger inside the Coalition about GetUp’s role in targeting a “hit list” of MPs it did not like with a multimillion-dollar campaign to “remove the hard Right’s grip on power”.

Leading calls for changes, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton claims GetUp’s conduct during the campaign and on election day was “deceptive”, “undemocratic” and “unrepresentative”.

The Australian understands senior government figures are looking at how to tackle GetUp’s perceived campaign power, which is currently outside controls, while the group professes to be issues-based and not aligned to any party or particular candidate.

GetUp claims it “tripled” efforts in the federal election compared with past efforts. The group is estimated to have spent more than $10 million in deploying 9,000 volunteers who made phone calls, did home doorknocks and distributed how-to-vote cards as part of efforts to target Coalition MPs.

After Saturday’s election, GetUp national director Paul Oosting took credit for defeating Tony Abbott in Warringah. Although no other Coalition MP on GetUp’s “hit list” lost their seat, Mr Oosting claimed his group was influential in shaving back swings to Mr Dutton and other Coalition MPs. …

A key difference between GetUp and unions … is that unions are openly aligned with Labor as “associated entities” under the Electoral Act.

Bullets dodged, stars aligned as Australia’s outlook is transformed

Bullets dodged, stars aligned as Australia’s outlook is transformed, by Robert Gottliebsen.

I learned yesterday that one of Australia’s largest home builders was planning a substantial reduction in its work force next week had Bill Shorten won the election.

Others would have quickly followed and, indeed, some home builders had already started their ALP-driven retrenchment program. Those mass sackings would have triggered a steep decline.

The simple fact was that for the last six months very few home sites were sold and the home building industry was facing a deep slump in early 2020, and adjustments had been made in advance.

At such a time the negative gearing clamps would have been catastrophic. There will still need to be some staff cuts among builders because the pipeline is empty but they will not be nearly as savage. …

It is too early to see a sudden swing to people building homes and buying land but the building development industry has no doubt that there will be a substantial increase in demand.

The real estate market will not return to boom because there is still a credit squeeze but further big falls are off the table. …

I have had the chance in the last 48 hours to talk to a lot of small and middle sized businesses and the phone has been running hot because of my role in the mobilisation of retirees.

Everywhere there is a feeling of incredible relief and in due course that relief will be reflected in confidence.

Fear, loathing, intolerance – and worse

Fear, loathing, intolerance – and worse, by Paul Driessen.

Throughout history despots had effective ways of reducing dissension in the ranks. Inquisitors burned heretics. Nazi’s burned books – before taking far more extreme measures. Soviets employed famines, gulags, salt mines and executions. ChiComs and other tyrants starved, jailed and murdered millions.

Today’s Green New Dealers and their allies have mapped out their own totalitarian strategies.

They proclaim themselves socialists, but their economic policies and tolerance for other viewpoints reflect a different form of government – fascism: A political system in which authoritarian government does not own businesses and industries, but strictly regulates and controls their actions, output and rights -– while constraining and suppressing citizens and their thought, speech and access to information.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has “no problem” with the fact that implementing her Green New Deal would require “massive government intervention,” wealth redistribution on an unprecedented scale, and many trillions of dollars in new debt. GNDealers want to totally eliminate fossil fuel production and use, and control how much we can drive and fly, heat and cool our homes, eat meat, and live our lives. …

GNDealers don’t want to talk about any of those ethical, social justice or environmental issues –- or about the GIGO computer models and bald assertions of Climate Armageddon that have no basis in real-world evidence. They don’t want anyone else talking about it, either. They want to control what we say and think, even what ideas and information we can find online and in print, television, radio and social media. …

Their version of “free speech” thus includes – and demands – that their critics have no free speech. On college campuses, in “mainstream” and social media, on search engines, in online information libraries, even in the arts, bakeries and K-12 education, thought control and electronic book burning are essential. Despite having a 12 to 1 ratio of liberal to conservative professors, leftist college faculty, administrators and students still ban, disinvite, disrupt and physically attack conservative speakers and their hosts. …

Electronic book burning:

The Big Tech monopoly routinely implements electronic book-burning tactics. Google and other internet search engines systematically employ liberal biases and secret algorithms to send climate realism articles to intellectual Siberia and censor conservative thinking and discussion. Google YouTube blocks access to Prager University (PragerU.com) videos that its censors decree offer “objectionable content” on current events, history, constitutional principles, environmental policies and other topics.

Google is evil:

Google helps the Chinese government deny its citizens access to “dangerous ideas” – and says nothing when China sends a million Uighur Muslims to “reeducation camps.” Its hard-left employees ostracize any conservatives they still find in their ranks … and claim helping the US Defense Department with Cloud computing or artificial intelligence surveillance would “violate their principles.” …

Wikipedia is pretty poor:

Wikipedia posts distorted or false bios for climate realist experts and organizations – labeling me an anti-environment lobbyist – and then pops up ads soliciting money for its biased “educational” material. Securing corrections is a long, often fruitless process. Even more totalitarian, the Southern Poverty Law Center uses phony “hate speech” claims to defund and “deplatform” conservative groups like David Horowitz’s Freedom Center, by pressuring credit card companies to close off donations to them.

 

Sir Roger Scruton: ‘Get Rid of Universities Altogether’

Sir Roger Scruton: ‘Get Rid of Universities Altogether’, by Human Events.

“It sounds as though we have [lost complete control of universities],” conservative philosopher Sir Roger Scruton told the Europe at a Crossroads conference today in London. …

“There are two solutions to this, though,” explained Scruton – arguably one of the greatest living conservative philosophers.

“One is to start new universities, outside the nexus of state control, which is what happened with Buckingham [University]. Founded by Margaret Thatcher, and where I do teach a course, and which is going in the right direction. Which does have well known reactionaries like David Starkey talking openly from the platform. That’s a possibility, though of course it is a small gesture.

“But there’s the other way forward, which is to get rid of universities altogether.” …

“That is to say, make sure their sources of funding dry up,” Sir Roger continued.

“They are essentially state-sponsored institutions. Withdrawing the grants that they enjoy would bring them right down to the level to which they are actually approaching, and I think that might be something that we should think about.

“On the other hand we don’t want to lose all the scientific advances that universities produce and which are necessary to a modern economy. It could be that we ought to ring fence the humanities, which after all can enjoy all this bigoted leftism largely because they make no difference whatsoever to the general economy, and just give support to the sciences.”

2020 Democrats on hot seat after climate change backfires on Australian left

2020 Democrats on hot seat after climate change backfires on Australian left, by Valerie Richardson in the Washington Times. What lessons are being drawn from the Australian election result overseas?

The Australian Labor Party’s stunning defeat may offer a cold, hard warning for Democrats counting on climate change to sweep them to victory in 2020.

Running on a climate-change platform, the left-wing party lost a supposedly “unlosable” election on Saturday to the conservative Liberal/National Party Coalition, led by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who once praised fossil fuels while holding up a chunk of coal on the floor of Parliament.

“Every time Labor and [activists] reminded Australia that Morrison brought a lump of coal to Parliament, they were helping Morrison,” said Australian climate skeptic Joanne Nova in a post on her JoNova blog headlined, “How to lose the unloseable election: be anti-coal.”

Said Matt McDonald, associate professor at the University of Queensland, on ABC.net: “Voters feared climate policy more than climate change.

The election results were unexpected, but they also represented the latest in a string of defeats around the world for parties pushing the 2015 Paris climate accord, green energy, fuel taxes and carbon pricing.

That Shapiro Meltdown: What It Says About Him—and Conservatism, Inc.

That Shapiro Meltdown: What It Says About Him—and Conservatism, Inc.. By James Fitzpatrick.

Ben Shapiro got DESTROYED, as one of his own fanboy videos might put it—and as he has admitted. Shapiro surprisingly lost his cool and cut short a BBC interview with UK media Big Foot Andrew Neil. …

Shapiro was expecting to promote his new book The Right Side Of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made The West Great, the latest in the long series of Beltway Right slop defining the West and/or conservatism as post-Enlightenment prattle about “individualism” or “liberty” or “Judeo-Christianity” or anything other than a people (white, by the way) with a real culture and civilization.

In his book, Shapiro bemoans “division” and the supposed inability of people today to debate rationally (!!). He also proclaims his criticism of Trump — Shapiro was a Never-Trumper and ostentatiously split with Breitbart on the issue. …

In other words, Shapiro expected to appear in his traditional American role as gatekeeper, eager to condemn populist nationalism and to portray himself as an “intellectual conservative.”

But Shapiro’s popularity, such as it is, depends on titillating a conservative audience. Like every would-be celeb in Conservatism Inc., he must simultaneously push and enforce boundaries. This inevitably leads to problems. …

In fairness to Shapiro, Neil was engaging in “Point and Sputter” journalism (essentially all journalism these days) in which a statement, often quite old, is taken out of context and sprung on a guest during an interview ostensibly about something else, followed by a display of faux outrage.

Yet Neil had a substantive reason for using this tactic and noting other statements Shapiro made in the past. The whole point of Shapiro’s book is to defend civil debate, but Shapiro’s schtick itself consists of baiting people. …

Saying “race is real,” “homosexuality is a mental illness,” or “transgenderism is a mental disorder” can all be provocative or offensive statements at different times and places. But baiting transgenders is edgy on campus while safe (for now) within the general conservative movement.

In contrast, saying “race is real” is a career-ender for conservatives — very largely thanks to people like Shapiro. In an interview with the Los Angeles Loyolan, Shapiro makes sure to virtue signal against “white supremacy,” the “alt-right” and the “evil” (Shapiro literally uses the term) Richard Spencer. …

Shapiro has a platform precisely because he is allowed to have a platform. He complains about campus protests and online abuse he suffered during the 2016 campaign, but I can confidently predict that Ben Shapiro will never lose his Stripe account, his PayPal account, his checking account. He will never lose his Twitter — while his critics (some undoubtedly abusive but definitely not all) mostly have.

He is “New Media” only insofar as he is promoted by Legacy Media, and because any competition to his right, including the grassroots activists who drove the 2015-2016 Trump insurgency, is being persecuted and purged by Big Tech. That’s the only reason why people need to be in “the tent” at all—to be allowed to earn a living. …

Neil was right when he identified the lack of intellectual energy coming from the Beltway Right. Again, partially this is because most of the incisive critics have been deplatformed, cut off from financial resources, or simply intimidated via direct threats. Yet it’s also because the Beltway Conservative Movement is fundamentally a product of corporate donors. Not surprisingly, they aren’t coming up with anything except the usual calls for tax cuts and deregulation. …

Ben Shapiro has no stake in political success, no skin in the game. His job is to remain in the political sweet spot of triggering the hysterical campus left, while gatekeeping for the Beltway Right. This allows him Main Stream Media access, fundraising, and bookselling opportunities, while repeating the same tired slogans like it’s still the Reagan years.

Yes I know there are Ben Shapio fans out there, and he says some good things, but he is controlled opposition and was anti-Trump.

Ethno-Fanaticism

Ethno-Fanaticism, by the Z-Blog.

The response by elites is to attack group identity by writing the people out of their own history.

That’s what you see here with this claim that Shakespeare was not a white man from England, but a Jewish woman. The usual suspects have jumped onto it, because they think it makes them look clever, but there is something else. These claims are popular with left-wing Jews for the same reason white identity politics is increasing popular with white people. Without a strongly typed host society, tribalism becomes the default sense of identity. These secular Jewish women are becoming ethno-fanatics.

Now, to be fair and offer a counter to this argument, Jews rewriting history to put themselves in the center of it is not a new thing. What Christians call the Old Testament is pretty much the first work of revisionist history. A small literate tribe in the Middle East wrote the story and made themselves the stars, despite the fact they were minor players in the region for thousands of years. If the Persians had been better at passing down a written history, the story would have different stars and narratives.

In modern America, Jews have come to dominate much of the ruling class, so they are rewriting themselves into the national story. That is the whole point of Ben Shapiro’s new book. His argument for Judeo-Christianity is all about the Judeo and nothing about the Christian. The point of the project is to make himself the star of this think he greatly admires, even if it is imaginary.

Hundreds Of “Black Vest” Migrants Seize Paris Airport Terminal: “France Does Not Belong To The French!”

Hundreds Of “Black Vest” Migrants Seize Paris Airport Terminal: “France Does Not Belong To The French!”. By Daisy Luther.

Yesterday, hundreds of undocumented migrants took control of Terminal 2 of the Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris France. Approximately 500 migrants seized the terminal.

“France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!” one person can be heard yelling into a loudspeaker. …

The migrants are reported to have refused to allow passengers to board their planes until their demands were met. They were held back by riot police but actually got a meeting with a representative of Air France.

Will this new tactic become commonplace, a glimpse of the future?

Population 1950-2010 Africa, ME, Europe

Rapper Sings “I Fuck France, I Burn France” as He Symbolically Strangles a White Woman

Rapper Sings “I Fuck France, I Burn France” as He Symbolically Strangles a White Woman. By Paul Joseph Watson.

A controversial French rapper is facing more heat after he released a track in which he sings, “I fuck France, I burn France,” as he is portrayed strangling a white woman meant to symbolically represent France.

Nick Conrad was previously found guilty of incitement to violence and fined 5,000 euros for releasing a song in which he advocated killing white babies. Conrad appealed the verdict, claiming the track “was a comment on racism”. …

In a new song called Doux pays (sweet country), Conrad portrays France as a white woman whom he eventually strangles to death. …

Tech giants ok with this:

While Facebook claims that it bans “dangerous people” who spread “hate,” the social network giant has taken no action against Conrad, nor has Facebook-owned Instagram or any other platform.