Aboriginals didn’t need a water bomber to save them from Government nurtured firestorms

Aboriginals didn’t need a water bomber to save them from Government nurtured firestorms, by Viv Forbes.

Fires lit by Aboriginal men and women created the landscape of Australia. … Their fires created and maintained grasslands and open forests and extinguished all flora and fauna unable to cope with frequent burn-offs.

Early white explorers and settlers ­recorded the smoke and the blackened tree trunks. They admired the extensive grasslands, either treeless or with well-spaced trees, and no tangled undergrowth of dead grass, brambles, branches and weeds.

Early explorers who ventured inland were amazed to find extensive grasslands and open woodland. Their reports attracted settlers to these grassy open forests and treeless plains with mobs of cattle and sheep.

Despite modern folklore tales about ­Aboriginal fire management skills, anyone reading diaries from early explorers such as Abel Tasman (1642) and Captain Cook (1770) soon learned that Aboriginals lit fires at any time, for many reasons, and never tried to put them out.

If threatened by fires lit by enemies, the most frequent response was to light their own protective fires (now called backburning). Firelighting was deliberate, and sometimes governed by rules, but there was no central plan. There were no firefighters, no 4WD tankers, no water bombers, no ­dozers. But Aboriginal fire “management” worked brilliantly. Because of the high frequency of small fires, fire intensity was low and fires could be lit safely even in summer. Any fire lit would soon run into country burnt one or two years earlier and then would run out of fuel and self-extinguish.

Early squatters quickly learned to manage fire to protect their assets, grasslands and grazing animals.

Graziers need to protect herds and flocks, homesteads, haystacks, yards, fences and neighbours, as well as maintain grasslands by killing woody weeds and encouraging new grass. So their fire management was refined. They soon learned to pick the right season, day, time of day, place, wind and weather ­before lighting a fire. …

We from the government, and we’re here to help:

Today we have replaced decentralised fire management with government-nurtured firestorms.

First governments created fire hazards called national parks, where fire sticks, matches, graziers and foresters were locked out and access roads were abandoned or padlocked. And green-loving urbanites built houses beside them and planted trees in their yards. The open forests and grasslands were invaded by eucalypt ­regrowth, woody weeds, tangled undergrowth, dry grass, logs, dead leaves, twigs, bark and litter — all perfect fuel for a wildfire holocaust. …

Into this maelstrom they send the brave volunteers. With insufficient tracks, insufficient nearby water, ­uncleared tracks, insufficient fuel reduction burning and bush right up to towns and houses, disasters are guaranteed.

A bureaucracy led by progressive Greens:

Central management and control of burn-off policy has failed. Too often the people in charge did not understand bushfire history and science and were too influenced by green ideology.

It’s carbon dioxide causing the bushfires, they say:

Extinction Rebellion in Adelaide. Picture: Mike Burton.


Picture: George Manos


Boy are they going to regret this when they figure out they’re not Saving The Planet, just the banksters and socialists.

Someone someday is going to do a very interesting study on the power of suggestion on gregarious hominids. Could industrial Marxists convince university educated young men and women to strip naked in public and paint their bodies while forecasting the end of the world if people don’t buy their products? Isn’t education supposed to protect them from that? We got the kids out of the mines and factories and they grew up to be advertising banners for big government instead.

New Zealand gun confiscation program steps on a rake

New Zealand gun confiscation program steps on a rake, by Jazz Shaw.

When New Zealand experienced a mass shooting in April (previously virtually unknown in that nation), legislators there moved quickly to enact a mandatory gun “buyback” of certain semiautomatic firearms. …

So how did that work out for them? Friday was the deadline and as the Washington Examiner points out, it hasn’t exactly been a smashing success. …

“The New Zealand program successfully led to the compensated confiscation of 51,000 of the targeted firearms. But as the left-leaning Guardian newspaper reports, this is out of an estimated 170,000 such guns currently in circulation. And there are still a minimum of 1.2 million legally owned firearms in New Zealand on top of that.” …

Now what? The Government will look either impotent or authoritarian.

New Zealand is pretty much in a lose-lose situation at this point. If they ignore the people defying the order they look impotent. But if they try to enforce it via strongarm tactics, there could be a lot of people involved in gun battles. …

The people who followed the government’s orders and turned in their firearms are, by definition, most likely law-abiding citizens. But do you really think the criminals with unregistered weapons were turning them in? Unlikely to say the least. So now you have 51,000 lawful people with no way to defend themselves while the potentially violent criminals are still armed.

As everyone knows, when every second counts the police are only minutes away.

Meanwhile, from the USA, a clue about whether guns per se “cause” gun murders:

Don’t Mess With Texas

Don’t Mess With Texas, By John Hinderaker.

This short video is suddenly everywhere. It comes from a livestream of the service at the church near Fort Worth where someone opened fire on parishioners with what looks like a shotgun. He was immediately shot by two legally armed persons, one of whom reportedly was a security guard.

It appears that altogether, there were six people who immediately pulled guns in response to the shooter.

The church has taken down the livestream video. It seems impossible to view it now without signing in.

Crime Prevention Research Center:

This attacker definitely picked the wrong church to attack. The yellow arrows are pointing to what some have identified as guns that parishioners were carrying.

Why were there so many armed people at church? Might have had something to do with this, also near Fort Worth:

It is not the first deadly shooting to take place at a church in Texas. In November 2017, Devin Patrick Kelley opened fire on the congregation at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, killing more than two dozen worshippers, before taking his own life.

What happened, by Ryan Ledendecker.

On Sunday, during what would otherwise likely be a quiet worship service at the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas, an armed gunman entered the church and after talking to a man for several minutes in the corner, pulled out a shotgun and opened fire.

The gunman, as was witnessed in recorded video of the entire incident, barely managed to get off more than a few rounds before an armed security guard standing 50 feet away from the shooter drew his pistol and fired a single shot, instantly killing the gunman with what appeared to be a perfectly placed head shot. …

Going by numerous reports on social media, the hero Texan has a great reputation in the community and possibly runs a firearms training school. There are also reports from reported locals that he’s a retired FBI employee, though that hasn’t yet been confirmed either.

Stephen Green:

The Left’s response to these heroic actions — best summed up as, “If we can’t protect you, nobody should” — is either as revealing as it is revolting, or maybe the other way around.

Germany: A “Latent Sense of Insecurity”

Germany: A “Latent Sense of Insecurity”. By Judith Bergman.

Every year since 1992, R+V, Germany’s largest insurance firm, has been asking Germans what they fear most. “This year, for the first time,” according to a report in Deutsche Welle, “a majority said they were most afraid that the country would be unable to deal with the aftermath of the migrant influx of 2015“.  …

Just this March, 11 men were arrested on suspicion of planning a terrorist attack in Germany. Police told the media that the goal of the attack had been “to kill as many infidels as possible” by using firearms and vehicles. According to police, the Islamist group had already organized the rental of a large vehicle: money had been raised and weapons dealers had been approached. …

German media also reported in April that German authorities have prevented 13 terrorist attacks in Germany since 2010 and that, according to the Federal Criminal Police Office, all of them were “linked to Islamic extremism”. As recently as October, a Syrian man plowed a stolen truck into the back of a line of traffic, ramming eight cars together and injuring seven people. …

A May 2019 survey, conducted … for the newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, showed that discussing certain issues in Germany has become taboo. … It concluded that “The refugee issue is one of the most sensitive topics for the vast majority of respondents, followed by statements of opinion on Muslims and Islam“. As an example, 71% of Germans say, according to the survey, that one can only comment on the refugee issue “with caution”. …

As the survey on German self-censorship has shown, 57 % of Germans say that “increasingly being told what to say and how to behave” is getting on their nerves. Germans from the formerly communist East complain more about this than the average German, as they have “fresh historical memories of regulation and constriction”.

Reality is winning through, despite the best efforts of the media and government in shutting people up:

While Germans are afraid to speak publicly about migrants, refugees and Islam, a recent study conducted by Bertelsmann Stiftung showed that roughly every second German considers Islam to be a threat.

According to Yasemin El-Menouar, Bertelsmann Stiftung’s expert on religion, according to the organization’s website, “Evidently, many people nowadays view Islam more as a political ideology and less as a religion and therefore not deserving of religious tolerance.”

People recognize the problem, even if the globalists won’t let them talk about the problem. It’s hard to see a good ending to this.

The Pure Evil of Vegetarianism

The Pure Evil of Vegetarianism, by David Archibald, who goes onto the attack against vegetarianism.

In the long run, the global warmers will be doing ‘bait and switch.’ Carbon as the hate object will be substituted with vegetarianism as the way to save the planet. They started talking about the need to remove meat from our diet years ago. But recently the messaging has become more insistent, unhinged, and disturbing.

He quotes a nutritional expert, Dr Natasha Campbell-McBride, the author of Gut and Psychology Syndrome:

I have a few families where parents were dedicated vegetarians and wanted their children to be vegetarians as well. … What these parents need to know is some statistics:

  1. Vegetarian children are more prone to health problems than children who eat meat, particularly to psychomotor impairment and diseases of the blood.
  2. Vegetarians are more prone to muscle loss and bone damage. They, on average, have lower muscle strength.
  3. According to census data vegetarians die younger than people who eat meat.

From my clinical observations I have yet to meet a healthy vegetarian. In the process of evolution we humans evolved to be omnivores, eating everything we can find in the environment: plants, eggs and meats. Our physiology is designed to work on these foods. To be healthy and full of energy we require a substantial amount of protein every day. …

David again:

Animals that eat plants have very long digestive systems with several stomachs full of special plant-breaking bacteria. The human digestive system is like that of lions and tigers in being fairly short with only one stomach, with virtually no bacteria in it. In fact our human stomach is designed to produce acid and pepsin which breaks down proteins into smaller peptides. These can only break down meat, fish and eggs.

In the spectrum of mental illnesses, vegetarianism is not as bad as gender dysphoria (with its 50% suicide rate), but that’s not much comfort.

Read it all.

Identity Politics Enables Anti-Semitic Violence. Enough.

Identity Politics Enables Anti-Semitic Violence. Enough. By Erielle Davidson.

Yesterday evening marked the seventh night of Chanukah. It also marked the ninth anti-semitic attack since the Jewish holiday began last week.

According to authorities, at least five people were stabbed Saturday evening during a Chanukah candle-lighting ceremony at a rabbi’s home in the New York City suburb of Monsey. A man allegedly used a machete to stab five people, with two reportedly in critical condition. According to reports, the attacker attempted to break into the synagogue next door to the rabbi’s home, but the doors were swiftly barricaded.

It will be telling to see how this particular attack is covered within the mainstream press …

Beard … ideological death cult member?

When it came to discussing the recent shooting at the Jersey City kosher supermarket by two Black Hebrew Israelites, reporting was startlingly sparse on the particulars surrounding the murders. As Bethany Mandel of Ricochet noted, many key details appeared purposely omitted, including but not limited to, the fact that video footage suggested the perpetrators’ initial target was a school full of Jewish children; that the perpetrators had a significant amount of ammunition; and that videos taken after the attack revealed many in the neighborhood blamed the Jews for the attack. …

The “social justice” arena in the United States, where most issues related to racial discrimination get siloed, is occupied primarily by those on the left. Thus, the growing problem is now groups traditionally in the business of confronting hate are less interested in doing so if they are unable to attribute the Jew-hatred to Trump or Republicans. If that anti-semitism is emanating from corners traditionally occupied by the left, the advocacy figures and media talking heads show an alarming and frankly disturbing indifference.

Nothing evinces this indifference more than a recent interview with Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City. When questioned about the attack on the Jersey City kosher supermarket earlier this month, Mayor de Blasio ignored the motivations of the perpetrators, who belonged to a radical left-wing fringe group known as the Black Hebrew Israelites. Instead, he deflected in a bizarre maneuver, opting to discuss the scourge of white supremacy and private militias. …

The vast majority of hate crimes committed against Jews in New York City have been carried out by people of color, and early reports alleging the identity of the recent murderer reveal the current attack may be no exception.

This pattern presents a true problem for the left. As my colleague David Marcus has written, “The notion that hatred is harbored by some in the black community towards Jews does not comport with their hierarchies of oppression.” And indeed, the left, in all its racial obsession, has picked favorites. And they didn’t choose the Jews.

But the Jews have long picked the left, by and large. That’s an increasingly unrequited love.

UPDATE: Latest, by The Yeshiva World.

A highly credible law-enforcement source tells YWN that the Monsey stabbing attack suspect ,Thomas E. Grafton, is a recent Muslim convert.


The suspect accused of going on a stabbing rampage in Monsey is “not a terrorist” – he’s just “mentally ill”.

Sure. When a non-left, non-Muslim white person commits an atrocity, they are guilty as hell and the whole world is told about it in detail for weeks. And it’s brought up in the future, as often as decency allows.

But if a POC, Muslim or leftist commits the atrocity, then they are just “mentally ill.” No bigger picture to see here. Move on. Down the memory hole asap.

Dr Liz Conor’s message for our PM, President Trump, and Boris Johnson

Dr Liz Conor’s message for our PM, President Trump, and Boris Johnson. By Michael Smith.

This is a bio for Liz Conor posted by the University of Melbourne.

Liz is quite the taxpayer funded academic and author.

So edgy!

A protected, pampered bunch who have played the system beautifully and contribute oh so much to the well being of other Australians.

No doubt they’re great believers in all the fashionable PC fantasies, and that’s enabled them to navigate to privilege in the Australian bureaucracy, media, and academia. Take a good look: these are creatures of Big Left Government and that’s where your tax dollars are going.

Commenter Muad’dib:

The immaturity of the left and the childish tantrums are surely without compare. I don’t recall any conservatives doing this shit when unpopular far left figures were in power.

The Media is Broken

The Media is Broken, by Rod Dreher.

When I graduated from journalism school in 1989, … I approached journalism — we were all taught to do this, if only implicitly — with the sense that The Truth Is Out There, and our task as journalists was to do our very best to discern it and reproduce it as accurately as possible. You might say that this is a “metaphysical realist” approach to journalism — that is, one dedicated to the belief that Truth has an existence independent from observers, and that it can be known, however imperfectly, through the methods of fact-gathering and sifting professional journalists learn and practice. …

I don’t believe that American journalism is dedicated to that foundational proposition, not anymore. … As I see it, most journalists today believe — and most are unconscious of it — that truth claims are really masks concealing the exercise of power. As such, they believe that the journalists’ task is to create and shape narrative to achieve certain political and social goals.

Same sex marriage:

An example I bring up often in this space is an enlightening (for me) argument I have around 2006 or so with a fellow journalist about the way our profession was covering the debate about same-sex marriage. I complained that the media were doing a poor job of exploring the complexities of the issue, especially the socially and religiously conservative take on the matter.

My indignant colleague said that there weren’t two sides to this issue: that there was Good, and there was Evil. He said, in all sincerity, “If this were the Civil Rights era, would you believe that we had a responsibility as journalists to give equal time to the KKK?”

Dwell for a moment on the fact that a professional journalist at a major news organization seriously believed that Christian churches and individuals who believe what almost everybody in the world believed about the sexually complementary nature of marriage until basically the day before yesterday — that those people are the moral equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan. This journalist was serious. And that statement he made was only the first time I’d heard it put like that.

Today’s journalists embrace bias:

If you believe that journalism’s mission is to side with certain classes of people against other classes of people, then you will have little to no interest in telling the stories of those you have identified as privileged or otherwise deplorable in the value system you hold, and that most of your colleagues hold (and study after study has documented that journalism is overwhelmingly populated by liberals and progressives).

Further, you may convince yourself that the stories you assign, you report, you publish or broadcast — that they all be focused on advocating a particular narrative, or narratives, and de-emphasizing, or even ignoring, competing narratives.

I used to think that it was sufficient to point out to journalists their biases in particular stories, and that out of a sense of professional obligation, they would seek to correct those biases. Now I think that’s naive. The belief that epistemic bias is something to be overcome in the practice of journalism is a concept from a previous era. Now it is embraced as a virtue — but only if it’s a bias towards the Left. …

Our news media are broken because it mistakes its ideological dream for reality, and by hypermoralizing its craft, has placed obstacles to observing the facts in front of its eyes.

It is difficult for someone like me, a professional journalist, to give up the idea that my profession is dedicated, deep down, to the proposition of telling the truth without fear or favor. But I think it’s probably necessary at this point, for the sake of protecting the people and the institutions I care about from the culture war these journalistic combatants wage on us. I cannot express to you how much this depresses me.

The question that the modern journalist asks about each fact or claim: How does that help the Left?

Experts Warn Global Outrage Levels May Reach Point Of No Return In 2020

Experts Warn Global Outrage Levels May Reach Point Of No Return In 2020, by the Babylon Bee.

The UN Panel on Outrage Change has confirmed the worst: global levels of outrage may reach the point of no return in 2020.

Outrage levels previously reached dangerous highs during the Bush administration, but Obama was able to reverse the trend. He didn’t change much about the way Bush was handling things, but he was a Democrat, so outrage levels went back down as the press stopped reporting on scandals and corruption.

However, in 2016, global outrage reached record highs, especially among Democrats. Republicans had been mildly outraged during the Obama years but mostly had to go to work so didn’t have much time to spew toxic, harmful outrage into the environment. …

Experts believe the reelection of Trump in 2020 would be “catastrophic,” catapulting outrage levels well into the stratosphere.

“If we do not cut our anger emissions immediately, the world will be consumed by fiery outrage by the end of next year,” said outrage expert Dr. Hal Gourd, pointing to a hockey-stick graph. The audience responded by getting really mad, shaking their fists at the sky and making loud grunting noises.

The Babylon Bee has become the newspaper of record. They have captured the essential truth, using satire.

Stock Market Mania Has Set in Among the Public. Is this the Top?

Stock Market Mania Has Set in Among the Public. Is this the Top? By an anonymous financial trader, and 104 of his buddies.

Remember the huge rise and then crash of the Dot Com stocks in 2000, and how stocks like Amazon and Apple nearly went belly up in the next three years?

Those companies and others were part of the American Tech Stocks index called the NASDAQ. Perhaps none of you reading this would remember a similar index in Germany falling 99% before it was abandoned completely and delisted.

Tech stocks were off the radar for years while the world’s focus turned to Australia and it’s resources stocks — mining in particular — from 2003 to 2008. Things went nuts again in the long forgotten, despised and unprofitable uranium sector. At one point, despite the Federal Government’s limit of no more than three uranium mines in Australia and the sensitivities around Chernobyl etc explosions (and the world’s near extreme tightening of transport regulations relating to the carriage of radioactive material), there were over 600 stocks on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) which claimed to be involved in the uranium industry. This represented one-third of all stocks on the Australian exchange.

Dot Com companies were brought back from the dead (literally in many cases — delisted ones) and turned into uranium stocks. At the peak, Paladin set a record for the biggest and fastest overall rise of any stock in ASX history. It rose from seven tenths of a cent to over $10 in about 3.5 years, mainly on the back of acquiring a then worthless uranium deposit in a little known, West African country called Namibia. The deposit had been abandoned by Rio Tinto, the uranium price was far below where it needed to be for profitability, the deposit was in a National Park, directors were working for free, Paladin had only a little cash and no backers, there were water and logistics issues and fierce opposition from locals to the deposit being developed. In short, no investor in their right mind would invest in the stock. The later boom was staggering and overblown and in recent years, Paladin was seen moving in and out of bankruptcy again and not trading with a share price a very tiny fraction of its heyday record.

With the next recovery beginning in 2009, after countries like Greece had to be repeatedly bailed out and had youth unemployment around 60%, tech stocks in America once again started to find some favor.

In the next decade, America would triple its money supply, Europe would do something similar, interest rates would drop to 5,000 year lows and go below zero in 17 countries. Economic textbooks had to be rewritten, because such conditions had never been seen before. There was no inflation, other than in assets like leading stocks and property.

Warren Buffett, arguably the world’s most successful investor in modern times, was helping to bail out big American banks on very favorable terms and apologizing in the New York Times for calling the recovery three months too early, while markets were still crashing.

President Obama later looked like a guru, suggesting the day before the recovery began that anyone who invested then would probably do OK. But it was the Federal Reserve (FED) — supposedly a completely separate and independent entity — pumping the markets back up by creating money out of thin air and lending it to leading financial institutions.

A general rule of thumb is that tech stock companies don’t get second chances once they turn sour. But Apple was leading the charge from near oblivion, ultimately reinventing itself four times from the late 90’s. New tech stocks like Netflix came from almost nowhere to be one of the market leaders. Amazon wasn’t alone in attaining valuations which could only be justified in normal times if they had sewn up most of not just planet Earth’s markets, but Mars as well. Not bad for a company which started selling a few books in a crowded and failing market sector.

When President Trump was elected, the media and investors outside the U.S. panicked and the market plunged. It proved in the end to be something that looks like a glitch.

Today, the NASDAQ has nearly doubled since he was elected three years ago. Market sentiment is about as high as it can possibly be — despite the China trade deal not being finalized, impeachment, lack of investment by ordinary Mums and Dads which got the Dot Com boom going and the media being against most of what President Trump is about, even when it’s unequivocally beneficial.

Most trading on the NASDAQ is performed with no human involvement. About a dozen companies do most of the trading. Most are illegally front running orders, and about 90% of all their orders are fake, and illegal, They are tricks by market players regarding market interest, and such orders are pulled microseconds before they can be executed.

Those trading companies have also been able much of the time to buy market moving announcement information up to half an hour before official and supposedly very tightly controlled, official release. They use supercomputers and ultra-fast connections which outrun the ones in use by nearly everyone else, including Government surveillance outfits. One company, Virtu, declared before it’s highly controversial and unpopular listing on the American Exchange, that it only had one losing day in its recent four year history.

See the chart above of the all conquering NASDAQ. President Trump is basking in its glory, optimism is near record highs and the future looks very bright … and that is what late 1999 to early 2000 was like. (President Clinton had also been impeached at the time.)

Mark Twain roughly said that history doesn’t repeat, but it sure does rhyme. Based on statements in recent times, The FED and European Central Bank (ECB), may no longer be willing to allow a crash like 2000 and 2008 and things do look really good coming into a traditionally money pumping election year and season. But somewhere in the darkness, a lonely few voices are softly calling “Remember Japan”.

Don’t say you weren’t warned.

There are increasing signs of insiders bailing out and the less informed buying in. But money supply figures are rising nicely, so there won’t be a crash in the very near future.

Five Australian PMs, fractured political parties: tribal politics loses its flavour

Five Australian PMs, fractured political parties: tribal politics loses its flavour. By Troy Bramston.

Only 55 per cent of Australians under the age of 30 support democracy over authoritarian forms of government.

There are five key trends that help define and explain the 2010s: leadership instability; party dealignment; the impact of social media; the change in traditional activism; and the degeneration of the political class. …

Labor’s vote is in decline:

The 2010s saw four general elections: 2010, 2013, 2016 and 2019. Labor did not win a majority of seats at any of them. Labor has won a major­ity of seats at only one election (2007) in the past 26 years. This is an appalling record. If Labor were a business, it would be in receivership.

The party’s primary vote registered 37.9 per cent (2010), 33.3 per cent (2013), 34.7 per cent (2016) and 33.3 per cent (2019) — a decline of 4.6 percentage points across the decade. Labor’s vote needs to be in the 39-40 per cent range to form ­majority government. Labor won with 43.3 per cent in 2007, 49.4 per cent in 1983 and 49.5 per cent in 1972. It is a long time since Labor got anywhere near this level of support. …

Labor has suffered a dealignment of voter support as non-tertiary-educated working-class voters have shifted to the Coalition and far-right parties such as One Nation, while inner-city progressive voters motivated by post-materialist concerns have shifted to the Greens. …

It will be difficult for Anthony Albanese, the most left-wing Labor leader in more than a half-century, to bridge this divide. …

Labor is struggling to reconcile its different constituencies: socially conservative working and middle-class suburban and regional voters with a wealthy progressive cohort of voters in the inner cities. The political divide in the next decade will be as much about culture and values as it is about specific policies. Labor, already breaking away from its historic moorings, will find the next decade more difficult.

Social media:

Radio transformed politics in the 1930s and 40s, TV transformed politics in the 60s and 70s, and the internet trans­formed politics in the 90s and 2000s. The defining technological change in the 2010s was social media. No politician can succeed without engaging voters via Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media platforms. ..

Much political campaigning takes place on handheld devices away from the scrutiny of the media and most voters. Messages, often fake, are highly targeted. (Remember Labor’s “death tax” or the Coalition’s plan to privatise Medicare?) Divisions are exploited. Political debate is dumbed down. …

The political class:

The political class has continued to degenerate. Those MPs who have not worked as a political staff member, party or union official, or as a lawyer are few and far between. Labor has degenerated the most and is now a wholly owned subsidiary of sub-faction leaders and union secretaries with diminishing real-world authority.

The membership of political parties continues to decline and constitutes less than 1 per cent of the electorate. …

Labor has shifted leftward and the Liberal Party has shifted to the right. Populism, while not as prevalent as overseas, is evident on the fringes of the major parties and is the stock-in-trade for minor parties. …

The influence and authority of the public service has tumbled. It is now challenged by competing sources of advice, including the inexorable rise in political staffers. Public servants rarely offer, or are asked for, frank and fearless advice. The bureaucracy’s ­effectiveness has been sapped by cost-cutting, efficiency dividends and many bright young people preferring a more lucrative and rewarding career in the private sector.

Increasingly the country is run by ideological politicians, the Twitter mob, and a dumbing-down deep state. Too many of those in positions of influence believe a set of PC fantasies and persecute anyone who disagrees, but the money flows to the fantasists. Perfect.

‘They lie to you’: Trump previously held private meetings with Navy SEALs to candidly discuss Afghanistan war

‘They lie to you’: Trump previously held private meetings with Navy SEALs to candidly discuss Afghanistan war, by David Choi.

Months after taking office in 2017 and hoping to get a better understanding of America’s longest war, President Donald Trump began taking meetings with enlisted US service members who deployed to Afghanistan.

“I want to sit down with some enlisted guys that have been there,” Trump told advisers, according to the national security journalist Peter Bergen’s latest book, “Trump and His Generals: The Cost of Chaos.”

“I don’t want any generals in here. I don’t want any officers,” Trump added, according to Bergen’s book, which was sourced from dozens of interviews with current and former White House officials and military officers. “I just want enlisted guys.” …

Among the first Afghanistan veterans said to have talked to Trump were US Navy SEALs who spoke critically of the war.

It’s unwinnable. NATO’s a joke. Nobody knows what they’re doing,” the SEALs said to Trump, according to Bergen’s book. “We don’t fight to win. The morale is terrible. It’s totally corrupt.” …

The new details surrounding Trump’s conversation with the SEALs also come days after an extensive Washington Post investigation found that senior US officials had long publicly mischaracterized the war. …

The officials in the government are awful people. They lie to you,” the SEALs reportedly told Trump. …

Trump also compared the senior military leaders to a consultant for a Manhattan restaurant from the late 1980s. Instead of heeding the advice of the consultant, who merely suggested expanding a kitchen for renovations, Trump reportedly argued it would have been more prudent, and cheaper, to solicit the advice of waiters from a restaurant.

A different kind of President.

Trump Fan Opens ‘MAGA Store’ in Michigan

Trump Fan Opens ‘MAGA Store’ in Michigan, by Amy Fur.

A man in Plainfield Township, Michigan, recently opened a store to sell Trump-themed merchandise to his community.

Gary Middleton opened the MAGA Store two weeks before Christmas and said that since then, business has been nonstop, according to MLive.com.

“Business is awesome,” he commented. “I didn’t expect this sort of response so quickly.” …

“The response has been overwhelmingly positive. It really has been,” he told Fox 17.

“A lot of great people come in and talk, tell their stories, we’ve had people come as far as Indiana. They love it, they are glad that somebody has the courage I guess we should say to open up a store like that.”

There were never any Democrat stores for Obama, Clinton, etc. They have the media on side, so there is no niche to fill.

San Francisco Dogs Begin Bagging People Poop

San Francisco Dogs Begin Bagging People Poop, by the Babylon Bee.

The dogs of San Francisco have announced a citywide cleanup initiative, in which the canines will carry little plastic bags with them wherever they go in order to clean up the massive dumps humans keep leaving on the sidewalk.

The initiative is expected to freshen up the city significantly, ridding the sidewalk of millions of pounds of human waste. …

The dogs have begun putting signs up around the city reading things like, “Please Pick Up After Your Owner” and “If Your Human Poops, You Scoop.”

Where California leads, the US then the world follows.

Conservatives Need Not Apply for Prestigious Scholarships

Conservatives Need Not Apply for Prestigious Scholarships, by Christian Schneider.

Last week, the Rhodes Foundation announced its 32 American scholarship recipients. The third paragraph of the statement accompanying the selections reveals the foundation’s true goals:

“For the third consecutive year, the class overall is majority-minority, and approximately half are first-generation Americans. One is the first transgender woman elected to a Rhodes Scholarship; two other Scholars-elect are non-binary.” …

Once the ultimate academic award for American students, the Rhodes Scholarship has morphed into an identity contest, where racial and sexual classifications appear to have trumped academic rigor. …

Hitting the jackpot of intersectionality

Drop dead, non-left:

The Foundation claims to reward “character, commitment to others and to the common good,” but those characteristics apparently apply only to progressives publicly dedicated to social-justice causes.

Of the 32 scholars chosen for 2020, only 13 fail to list involvement with progressive causes on their résumés. Of those 13, none lists interest in or experience with a conservative cause — they have chosen to present themselves as politically neutral. (Most of these “neutral” students are involved in the physical sciences, where there is no liberal or conservative way of curing leukemia.)

In other words, students on the left feel free to assert their progressivism, while students on the right know that if they want a scholarship, they better keep their politics a secret. …

This bias is well established in the case of other prestigious academic awards for American students. In 2018, not one of the 59 winners of the $30,000 Truman Scholarship reported being involved with Republican or conservative politics in any way, while 64 percent of winners espoused traditionally liberal causes.

Nudge politics. Reward one side, but not the other, and pretty soon you get what you paid for. Two previous examples with far reaching consequences spring to mind.

  • Starting in the 1950s, governments and banks only funded PhDs in economics at universities that supported Keynesian economics. Lucrative and prestigious government consulting jobs only went to PhDs in Keynesian economics. By the 1970s, President Nixon famously exclaimed that “We are all Keynesian now!”, and all universities had gone Keynesian. However, before 1930 Keynesian economics was considered crackpot. It was a doctrine that greatly favors banks and builds government power at the expense of the private economy. It just doesn’t work other than in the very short term.
  • Climate scientists who boost the high-sensitivity theory of carbon dioxide get rewarded with money, junkets, promotions, and sometimes even rock star status. The ones who stubbornly stuck to the evidence were sidelined or sacked, starved of funds, and shunned. Even so, the 97% is still an exaggeration! But give it time.

This is how the modern bureaucratic state buys the consensus it wants (with your tax dollars). Students now know to be PC.