More Pictures of Coffee Mugs and Food, Please

The main thing about social media that defines it and repulses me, is that it is so frankly stupid. Who thinks that you taking a picture of your breakfast is interesting? What kind of friends do you have that are spellbound by your choice of bagel spread? Are you surrounded by stalkers who can’t wait for you to post endless cliche`s of your humdrum existence followed by overused hashtags? If culture is drowning in this endless sea of stupidity, maybe it’s time to be different. But is that even possible for the mindless hordes of social media addicts that will click, favorite, like, love anything as long as its marginally different than what they saw recently? I wonder.

Part of the stupidity of social media is the implicit assumption that you have a right to infect everyone else with your thoughts and feelings, as if you had a right to broadcast everything all the time. Why would someone else sign up for that, unless they were equally as stupid? I say stupid because the perspective that nothing is private and everything is public is ill-considered and it will bite you in the butt. Just wait. Whatever is public (or shared among too many people) will find those people or many people using it to their advantage and not yours. The exhibitionists of this digital age will learn the value of restraint eventually. In the meantime, it’s time to tune out, drop out, and get some peace in this endlessly-chattering vapid digital world.

#TheStruggleIsReal 🙂

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Farewell, Adam Putnam

I’ve received flyers from former Florida Secretary of Agriculture, Adam Putnam. In them, he promises to be conservative. Yet, his friends and allies put this garbage together. Somehow, they think Florida residents are going to think Ron DeSantis wants illegals to get foodstamps. The article at Conservative Review goes into all the ridiculous and gory detail. The man leading the charge is a blogger here, too gutless to allow comments on his blog.

This bothers me on several levels. One is, that you have to lie about your opponent, you suck as a human being. Then, you decide to go for broke and create outlandish lies; who do you suppose Putnam is aping? Maybe someone who accused a competitor’s father of killing JFK, perhaps. That leaves a real bad taste in my mouth.

Second is, when you go into the political arena, to disallow comments on your own blog is the height of cowardice. I can’t say I love most of the comments that people post, but I won’t hide from them either — not in this arena. Yet this guy thinks he can peddle such charges, refuse to correct the record when shown he is wrong, and then shows up on the Alex Jones’ show, who is a master smear man? Gah. Why do such people keep defiling my state? Just go crawl back into the canal you slithered out of, man.

It is common sense to not associate with such slime, but I guess Putnam is trying to attract Trumpcult members.

Farewell, Adam Putnam. Hello Ron DeSantis.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Mercy Too Wide

I am reading Theodore dalrymple’s excellent book Life At the Bottom. In one essay, “Choosing to Fail”, he illustrates that the social safety net is its own industry and supply for its services grows to meet demand. What has happened in the UK, the US, and other welfare states is that the populace as a whole is made poorer by relentlessly supporting people in their homeless lifestyle. For example, hostels provide places for the homeless to stay so that they never lack for shelter. The shelters are not the Ritz Carlton, but apparently they are not so poor that it motivates the homeless to stop being homeless. The homeless are supported in their lifestyle by a veritable army of researchers, social workers, doctors, nurses, administrators of government programs, and on and on; yet very few are committed to the betterment of such individuals. No, this support apparatus needs a patient, and the homeless are more than willing to comply. From the certain political perspective that aids and abets this tragedy, the homeless are seen as people who cannot do any better than they are currently. They are objects of pity, and worse, they have become infantalized, as all responsibility for their actions are lifted from them. They are not responsible for their food, shelter, or medical care. Their public drunkenness is excused; they can sleep anywhere they wish and they are not shamed for refusing to shower. Society has been taught to tolerate all of this, so there is no social pull upwards. Instead, people just affirm them in their dissolution. No-one is asking, “Is this truly best for those who are homeless?” Is it not better individually, societally, spiritually, any which way you want to measure it, that these people do not burden the public with their care and that they contribute to society with the exercise of their talents? Yet without the homeless, and the poor largely speaking, liberals would have no-one to give their infantalizing mercy to, no-one to burden with a mercy too wide. They themselves would have to find a job that actually bettered society, instead of creating more and new classes of adult children. As you can see, there is an immense inertia in keeping the poor poor so that liberals may feel holy. Real holiness, though, requires seeing those who are worse off as equals, something that the always self-congratulatory and psuedo-magnanimous recoil at doing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Fundamental Difference

One fundamental difference between those in favor of liberty and those opposed is what each side thinks of the common man. One side thinks of the common man on the same level of themselves. The other thinks of the common man as someone to take care of, to do things for, because they think of this man as being fundamentally unable to do things for himself. Further, this side sees nothing wrong with such actions. They never imagine that being treated as a child is offensive. Why? Because they are better men, you see; they are a slice above; they are royalty. They are meant to rule and others are meant to follow.

Put another way, on one side is the virtue of humility. On the other side is the sin of vanity. On one side is tolerance, the idea of live and let live, a thirst to live free, not tyranny by an unending maze of laws. On the other side is the concept that not all laws need to be enforced all the time, that they will be enforced when useful, and ignored at other times. The idea here is that laws will be enforced for other people, but not for themselves, because they are the law-makers, not the law-followers.

Again, the first side sees laws as agreements among free men that bind all men equally. Thus, there should be few laws and they should restrict freedom as little as possible, because the restriction of liberty of one man restricts it for all men; only morality is a sure guide here. On this side, the preference is for simple, clear, and direct laws. On the other side, the idea is that laws reflect desires of what other people should do, but because that cannot be admitted openly, laws must be made complex so as to hide the interior reasons.

One side sees themselves in harmony and brotherhood with the common man; the other sees the common man as pawn, problem, or object of perpetual mercy, a mercy that leaves the common man always at some kind of disadvantage. One side longs for the blessing of all men; the other wants to keep some group always beneath their feet so that they can continue to enjoy their lives. One side wants all to share in the bounty of liberty; the other wants to keep the bounty only for themselves.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Not Your Friends

Stacy McCain shares this story, a sad and predictable story of how tolerant those who sport the badge of tolerance really are. In the end, your intentions (or your heart, or your motives) count for nothing — not to the author of all benevolence, and neither to the modern-day inquisition, always willing to punish you for any deviation from liberalism. People need to understand that the politically active left is not for you. They are narrow-minded bigots who stand at the ready to curse you, dox you, send you death threats, turn your friends against you, ruin your reputation, and even get you fired. They are not your friends.

Note: this is a one-sided hate. Conservatives do not behave like that, by definition. Those on the right who behave that way to people expressing their opinions do not have the principles shared in common by conservatives. So there is no “what about…” or “But the right” in play. No. The ends-justify-the-means SJW set has no opposite. So what does this mean? It means that the common man should understand that the greatest enemies to freedom are those who demand adherence to a narrow set of political and spiritual beliefs. Understand that you have a limited supply of political oxygen. Understand that you are not safe. Understand that there is a war already in play and the side you are on will devour you.

Such it always is for those who are not aware and have no interest in liberty. Just wait. Your ox will be gored and then you will understand what we all know. Then, you will join us and we will take you in with open arms. The left speaks a love made up of misery and license, while the right speaks at least liberty if not the greatest freedom the world has ever known, a liberty that flows from divine love.

Come on over. It’s beautiful over here.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

I Want the Antibiotic

I am grateful that modern medicine is not relativistic. Aren’t you? Isn’t it great that when we are infected, that the doctor doesn’t just pat our heads and say, “You have achieved a new state of consciousness! Celebrate it!” Instead, he or she recognizes that we are sick, and offers a prescription intended to make us well. This is a good thing, because I want to be healthy. Don’t celebrate my disease! I want the antibiotic!

As much as modern medicine is absolutist, culture is relativstic. Instead of counseling people and giving them medicine if needed, culture affirms their disease. If someone posits the insane belief that they are a man born in a woman’s body or the reverse, they are screaming out for help. If such a person then says that the only cure for his/her condition is bodily mutilation and taking hormones of the opposite sex until they die, surely an intervention is necessary. Culture’s response? Affirm the individual’s faulty thinking and make everyone else pay for his/her mutilation and hormones. What such individuals need is the antibiotic. They need a cure to their disease, not an affirmation that they have no disease at all.

Yet culture consistently has made the same faulty diagnosis and the same faulty prescription — that there is no disease and everyone else must pay to help you continue in it (culture here meaning “most people”). Yet how did this come to be? Fear and a lack of courage. As the madness spreads and accelerates, what America is headed for is ruin, not redemption. What is coming is increased segregation as media and lifestyle options proliferate. Once again we will see homes without TVs, people on one side of the street having nothing in common with those on the other side, communities becoming conclaves. This is all a natural reaction, because some splinter, some fragment, will endure the cultural crash that is hurtling at us, and even now, we are separating ourselves from the corpse. The bigots and the frightened tyrants will insist that we partake in the same rituals of self-destruction that they do, and they will persecute those who will not, but they know that their kingdom is coming to an end, and so they must live outrageously now; afterwards, they will not have the power to dominate the conversation as they do now.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment


People often think that direct democracy is the government that we should have, yet these people cannot make time for voting. What compels them? The spirit of the age — a kind of impatience fused with unthinking anger and the desire to “do something”. That this devolves into “do anything” is readily apparent once you collect a group of angry people.

History reminds us of what happened to free blacks in the pre-Civil War North, what happened to Jews in czarist Russia, what happens to Christians and protesters in Egypt, and on and on. The mob has no soul, and those who want to take power into their own hands almost always lack any sort of discipline necessary to do anything valuable. Instead, the mob breeds a kind of individual irresponsibility and anonymity. How exactly did you think the brown shirts and Mao’s Cultural Revolution worked, anyways?

From another angle, if people are forbidden to organize themselves on the basis of shared interests peaceably (IRS/Tea Party scandal), then what remains but either government-sanctioned groups or groups who do not assemble for peaceable interests? It is surprising that the penchant for mob violence has abated since the election, but it is never far, ready to be stoked and built into something awful. Obama did the same thing during his tenure, as he let urban violence spiral out of control, hoping to recreate a summer of ’68-style cultural transformation. The Parkland shooting is a direct result of Obama’s policies. Instead of punishing those who broke the law, he and his programs encouraged the local and state governments to look the other way. That this creates the very problem that the left uses to seize more and more power is predictable. After all, some mobs are more equal than others, and they know best, so they say.

What mobs thrive on and use for great effect is a principle called “terror via numbers”. A mob is the weapon of choice for the left and for the totalitarian fascist alt-right. In the end, whomever can be made to kneel will be made to kneel before the Baal of government power. Oh you may not care now; you may think the sufferings of other people baking or manufacturing armaments or refusing to agree with the professor or not wanting to date “transsexuals”, but you will be made to care. In the cultural war, there are no innocents and if you are not with the left or the alt-right, they will gather their mob and demand horrible things from you.

Yet in America, things are only beginning to bubble. South Africa is an example of the cauldron at full boil. If the black mobs succeed in making the country unsafe for whites by declaring open season on white farmers (it is a racial hatred thing there), then the lesson will be painted in blood on the world stage. Zimbabwe was not enough. No, the mob must take the successful, the Western, murder any who oppose them, and leave their country a charnal pit of waste and death. The numbers do not look good for those opposed to the murdering mobs in South Africa; approximately 9% of the country is white, and 70% are blacks who support murdering whites.

If South Africa falls, then the fight comes here in earnest.

All hail the mob.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment