Skip to content

Category: Culture

The best that has been thought and written and why these ideals are difficult to meet.

February 9, 2018 | 5 Comments

Equality of Opportunity Always Masks Desire For (More Than) Equality Of Outcome

Last November, Spiked magazine held a discussion panel on “Is the left eating itself?” at which appeared ex-Evergreen State College professor and self-described progressive Bret Weinstein. You may recall that Weinstein was chased off campus by a mob of social justice warrior students.

Weinstein answered yes to the question, the only possible response. Except for the amplification that they’re eating everything else, too.

Why the voracious appetite?

“I recognized that there was a hidden dichotomy between two populations within the left.” He continued, “One of those populations earnestly wishes equality, and there can be some debate over what it is that is being equalized, but virtually everybody on the left would say that they are for equality of opportunity.

“Then there is another population that does not wish equality of opportunity, what it wishes to do is to turn the tables of oppression…you would discover that some of the people who had been pursuing some nominal version of equality were really about some radical version of inequity with new people at the head. And I do think that is what we are facing.”

Genuine equality of opportunity is rare, found only in carefully controlled situations. Take runners toeing the line in a race. Everybody starts in the exact same position, measured down to the millimeter. Any runner found edging off the mark before the gun, even by a fingertip, is disqualified, or causes a re-do.

But this careful scrutiny only occurs because the runners have proven themselves eligible to participate in the race in the first place. Years of inequality (training, biology, etc.) went into creating a moment of controlled equality of opportunity.

It’s also plain that this controlled equality is expensive. The groomed track, trained judges, even the audience: it all adds up. What’s maybe not as obvious is the glaring inequality necessarily created in this mini-equalitarian scenario. Not just that only the best runners will be there, but they will either be all men or all women.

True, some of the women might be men pretending to be women, as in this race, but the natural and ineradicable inequality between the sexes will be manifest. Who would host a race pitting the best men against the best women? Who could doubt the outcome? Only somebody who is convinced in genuine equality and who desires equality of outcome.

There is no evidence of genuine equality. All outcomes, except in specialized or trivial circumstances, are unequal. Men and women do not race equally in the sense the top runners will be on average male, nor do they take math tests equally in the sense the top and bottom scores will on average be male. Men and women have never produced equal outcomes (in these senses). There is no observation that confirms equality. Yet some still believe in it. This can only be the result of ideology, which is the only possible way thousands of years of observation can be dismissed in favor of theory.

Those who preach for equality of opportunity generally believe in equality in general, though they will claim this equality is occult. Genuine or true equality really does exist, but it is hidden or suppressed, and there would be genuine real equality of outcome if not for forces holding back equality. That these forces exist is, of course, proof in inequality, at least in ability to wield these forces. Believing in forces thus disproves equality.

At any rate, nothing but equality of outcome will do for some. And by equality of outcome, what supporters mean is the superior result of some favored group or groups.

Here’s the headline: Oxford University gives women more time to pass exams.

Students taking maths and computer science examinations in the summer of 2017 were given an extra 15 minutes to complete their papers, after dons ruled that “female candidates might be more likely to be adversely affected by time pressure”. There was no change to the length or difficulty of the questions.

Equality demands men and women are no different, therefore equality of outcome should result. When it does not, forces are at work. At the least, it must be that men are better suppressing women who take math and science tests, or that women can’t face the pressures of testing as men can. True inequality must exist. So equality is false. Thus there is no reason to expect equality of outcome.

In this case, changing the test time changed nothing: “Men continued to be awarded more first class degrees than women in the two subjects.”

The next step is to change the tests, and make them so that equality of outcome occurs. Equality, since it doesn’t exist, must always be enforced by artificial means. And, of course, this force proves the inequality. Satisfaction will only be announced when more women than men produce top scores.

February 3, 2018 | 19 Comments

#MemoDay — Open Discussion

If you haven’t read it yet, which is unlikely, here is a link. If all you heard was media spin, read it. It’s only a couple of pages, none of it technical. If you have not read it, do not comment on it.

Update A clear, convincing, and damning timeline.

Update. Nunes speaks here. Mandatory listening.

Early spin, incidentally, because I write this right after the memo was released, says the memo is “misleading”. How? Hey. Don’t bother me with details. All some people need to hear is that it is “misleading” to dismiss its contents.

The poor John McCain says the memo does Putin’s work for Trump. Dude. The memo shows the whole Russia thing was a fabrication. But McCain pretends not to remember this, or maybe with his brain surgery he really doesn’t. Or maybe he hopes his listeners forget.

Another. Some guy at CBS said that (the fired) Steele was desperate Trump not become president because Steele might have believed in his dossier. Good one! That almost sounds true—upon a first quick hearing.

Jennifer Rubin, the Washington Post’s self-described conservative blogger, tweeted, “HUH? Nunes doesnt say the dossier was false, or that Steele knew who was paying for it or really anything else. Is Nunes nuts? R’s look like clowns. Again.”

Jenny, the dossier is false. Happy now?

The rest have fixated on the term “nothing burger”, or are out to hang Nunes.

You know the details. What next?

What we need is to remove power from the central state. At a start, disband the unaccountable FISA courts. The FBI has too much power. Remove it. We don’t need extra government surveillance, we need less.

We need to continue to point out to the “normies” the cancerous role the mainstream media plays. Remember how they scoffed (to say the least) when Trump claimed he was being wired tapped? Remember how the assured us that releasing the memo would be a massive “security risk”?

February 2, 2018 | 9 Comments

Who Is Q & Why Might He Matter? — Guest Post by The Blonde Bombshell

The internet is a cauldron of competing ideas. The ones that get the most play are promoted by the legacy media. Under the surface, there are a swarm of websites that hawk so-called “alternative” ideas–alternative in the sense that they do not toe the line that has been plainly and loudly laid out my the MSM mandarins. Questions bubbling beneath the surface are either largely ignored or tamped down by the gatekeepers and remain hidden largely from public view.

The activity of one “Q” could be thrown in the pile of “nothing to see here,” but intriguingly there may definitely something, and something potentially earthshaking and paradigm-shifting, to see here. Mysterious messages started showing up on 4-chan on October 28, 2017 that suggested the detention (not arrest) of HRC and asked questions about recent donations made by a prominent globalist billionaire. Q did not sign his communications until November 2, and a trip code for verification was not put in place until November 9. It is purely speculative whether Q was the author of the earlier posts.

October started with the puzzling shooting in Las Vegas and continued with the baffling deaths of some witnesses of that shooting. Catalonia voted for independence but was blocked by Spain. There was a plague in Madagascar. Raqqa was liberated from ISIS. There was the run-up to the run-off election in Alabama for a senate seat. The president, posing for pictures after a meeting with military leaders, suggested that this period was the “calm before the storm.” There was more going on, of course, but this is just a refresher. In terms of the news cycle, October was a thousand years ago and almost as forgotten.

At the end of this confusing month, in comes Q. The choice of “Q” is thought to be a reference to a high-level security clearance. Given the content of Q’s posts, it seems likely that if Q is not in the inner circle of the president, he is very, very close. If Q has such a high-level clearance, what is he doing blabbing on the chans? He hasn’t overtly divulged classified information. Q poses questions, and his followers dissect and try to interpret the various multiple meanings that Q could be alluding to. There is a predictive quality to some of Q’s posts.

Sometimes Q tries to point people in a particular direction to do further research, but the people are deaf to his suggestions. Other times, Q’s meaning is more evident. Q posts can be as short as a few words or a few lines, or longer, heavy with text or code. Q also posts images. A recent image reminded followers of the deep, warm relationship one former candidate for president had with an acknowledged and avowed KKK member. The answers to the questions (“crumbs” or “bread crumbs” in Q-speak) are publicly available and can be found with a little ingenuity and digging. Q will sometimes communicate with anons on the boards, and answer questions or calls for clarification.

Reddit hosts a board dedicated to discussion about Q called CBTS (Calm Before The Storm), referring to the president’s once-cryptic remark. Some made the leap that this had something to do with North Korea. In light of recent events (such as the lost-and-found FBI texts, the still-secret four-page FISA memo, for starters), it seems likely that the storm has to do with dismantling the corrupt power structure of DC. Q’s posts seem to underscore that this a reality, and much of the dismantling is going on behind the scenes and that the public is being purposefully kept in the dark to preserve the republic (much to the chagrin of avid followers).

Q speaks in riddles: “Future proves past.” “Do you believe in coincidences?” “Follow the wives.” “Expand your thinking.” “Alice & Wonderland.” “Who took an undisclosed trip to SA?” “Why would the Chairman of GOOG travel to NK?”

Very early in the Q story there were questions regarding Q’s authenticity. Some said that Q was the result of sophisticated AI (as in the movie War Games; Q said, “Shall we play a game?”). Others posited that it was a LARP (Live Action Role Play)—that Q wasn’t some big patriot, but that he was just another frustrated video game player having some fun. Others cast aspersions on the Q followers as being gullible rubes seeking a savior.

Because of the nature of the information being dealt with, there are mistakes, there is some barking up the wrong trees. There was a kerfluffle when Q posted “DEFCON [1]” on January 8. Those with a military background jumped to the only conclusion they could have, but in Q-speak that was later decoded seems to be: DEFinitive CONfirmation in 1 minute.

Q—which could be one person or a group—offers some solace for frustrated, law-abiding citizens who are tired of seeing their future being swatted away by the globalist agenda. Q offers hope that Something Will Be Done, and Is, in fact, Being Done. Q isn’t only for Americans. The Reddit board attracts comments from people around the world who are watching the storm very carefully, and who have a fervent hope that some of the winds will blow their way and clean up their governments.

There also is a spiritual aspect to Q. Q is prone to quoting scripture and urges people to pray. Oddly, he posted the text of the Lord’s Prayer before the Pope started musing publicly that he thought the crusty piece of text needed an upgrade. On the Reddit CBTS board, a new person often stumbles on and posts something like, “Is it me, or are there a lot of Christians here?” They are informed that yes, indeed, this is a battle between good versus evil, light versus the dark, God versus Lucifer. Followers are praying and fasting for the president and the republic. Whatever Q has done, he has reawakened a spirit in the American people that has been slumbering for far too long.

Link: Reddit CBTS board. If you are unfamiliar with Q, take a look at the “Book of Q” which is posted on the right-hand side of the page. Check out the FAQs and other resources.

February 1, 2018 | 14 Comments

Pedophile Says He’s A 9-Year-Old Trapped In Man’s Body. So He Is

Stream: Pedophile Says He’s A 9-Year-Old Trapped In Man’s Body. So He Is

The Daily Wire reports on the story of 38-year-old Joseph Roman, who was “accused of sexually assaulting two six-year-olds and an eight-year-old on repeated occasions.”

Roman was “charged with repeated predatory criminal sexual assault.” The kicker is that he told police that he’s really “a 9-year-old trapped in an adult’s body.”

If Roman was a 9-year-old, he obviously would not be guilty of sexual assault on the same scale a 38-year-old would be. The best the police could do is to call 9-year-old Roman’s parents and ensure that he gets a good talking to. He couldn’t even be spanked, because that’s abuse.

Well, Roman says he’s 9. His birth certificate says 38. Who’s right?

The Right to be 9

Roman is. That’s what the transgender movement is all about. The right to self-define who we are. Transgender activists insist we should not be hemmed in by externalities forced on us against our will. Reality cannot be allowed to trump our desires.

Besides, the birth year used to calculate Roman’s 38 years was assigned to him at birth (probably by some patriarchal doctors). He had no choice in the matter.

He now has the right to make a choice. If he says he’s 9, we have to honor that right. It is our duty to agree with him about this age. To do otherwise risks ageophobia, in the same way that calling a man who thinks he’s a woman a man is transphobic.

The Supreme Anthony

Recall the words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy who wrote into the law of the land that “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

Roman has defined the concept of his existence of being a 9-year-old. That’s his truth. It must therefore be our truth, too.

You may object to all this, but just think. If what we have been told by transgender advocates is true, then we cannot rely on science or measurement to decide what “gender” somebody is. We can only go by what people tell us they are. The same reasoning must apply to any biological characteristic.

Missed Genders

A man believes he is a woman, and says he is a woman. Science and all external, objective measurement says he is a man. We must discard this evidence. It must form no part of our judgement. All that is left is the man’s claim that he is a woman. That claim makes him a woman. Not only that, it creates the burden on us to recognize his womanhood.

If we call this man a man, we would be guilty of “misgendering” him. According to Health Line,


Identify as a Stream reader and click here to read the rest.