Pages

Thursday, July 31, 2008

The Anti-Human Philosophy of Darwinism

An article by Dinesh d'Souza on Townhall in clarification of a recent al Jazeera broadcast in which he was juxtapositioned to Richard Dawkins, shoots once again to the forefront the fruitless discourse on Darwin's Theory of Evolution on the one hand, versus Creationism and Intelligent Design (ID) on the other (the latter a legal collation).

D'Souza, author of "What's so Great About Christianity," before joining the Hoover Institution, was the John M. Olin Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Dawkins authored "The God Delusion" and is a well known Skepticist whose wiki biography fails to disclose any political activities other than anti Vietnam and anti Iraq War reflexes.

Dawkins is a proud Skepticist. Skepticism itself is a Naturalistic theory which holds that man is incapable of acquiring knowledge about reality. It even rejects consciousness and reduces man to the animal level. The term Skepticism by its Greek root σκεπτω, to think, suggests reason, but on the contrary, the theory excludes it. Skepticism is endemic in current academia.

Dawkins' credentials as a Postmodern anti-humanist are indicated by his involvement in the Great Apes Project, which seeks to reduce humans to the moral level of gorillas, and his close association with bio-ethicist Peter Singer, a well-known advocate of infanticide in the service of animal liberation, both suggesting that the distinction between man and animal is meaningless to Dawkins.

Returning to the discourse on evolution versus creation, it is clear from the outset that this false, unscientific dichotomy is leading nowhere. Any explanation for the origin of life other than the two polarized options are a priori excluded from the debate for reasons of Postmodern sophistry. The reason lies in a rather dishonest debating technique, a parlor trick in which Postmodernists excel: recasting the subject in a caricature of itself after which - exposed to ridicule - it can safely be condemned as 'obviously invalid.'

As d'Souza explains the reason why relativist thinkers cling dogmatically to Darwin's unproved theory is that it provides them with the 'scientific' basis for the atheist ideology. This in turn explains the fanaticism and the close-mindedness displayed since the 1880's and why Charles Darwin - like Sigmund Freud - has been included in the Marxist pantheon.

Out-of-the-box, often exact scientists (the real ones) working in the field known collectively as Intelligent Design, are lumped in with Creationists proper after a US lawsuit (see Part I) declared the two metaphysical explanations legally 'identical.' But compare the Biblical story with this explanation of ID and it becomes plain that equivalencing the two only exists in terms of a political agenda: the Darwinists'.

Since then any suggestions, other than evolutionist, are confined to a particularly nasty corner of the atheist hell specially reserved for 'Christians and other primitive Flat Earthers.' The picture is meant to conjure up the vista of Galileo's enlightened heliocentricity, said to have been suppressed by the obscurantist Renaissance Church.

The cases are is not dissimilar, but the Catholic Church authorities displayed a far more open, scientific mind-set than Galileo and Postmodern Darwinian absolutists combined: the Galileo denunciation by the Church lay in the fact that he insisted on his theory being taken as empirically proved, while in fact this was not the case.

The same is true for Darwin's theory. Luckily for Galileo, he later turned out to be right; this remains however to be seen in the case of Darwin and his pomo followers, who prefer shutting up dissent: the result is that their theory increasingly takes the shape of dogma, and that scientists think twice before publicly venturing a fresh hypotheses. As far as research in the field of the origins of life are concerned, we are in a scientific dark age.

The application of Darwinism to other fields is rejected by both debaters, but in the case of Dawkins, this position is questionable: like Muslims, pomos are allowed to lie to their opponents.

D'Souza - himself a Darwin follower - explains that the theory as posited by Darwin had no bearing on the origin of life itself, or indeed on human consciousness.

Dawkins for his part - although he declared Darwinism to be applicable to cultural traits (memes) - in Part II of the program rejects social Darwinism: not its existence, but advocating it. Of course Dawkins would reject social Darwinism: in the eyes of its adherents socialism does little else but counter it and compensate its perceived victims from the negative effects; the core tenet of the dialectic is progress through strife and conflict between 'the Oppressors and the historically Oppressed'. Of racial Darwinism as invoked by Nazi ideology, Dawkins pretends not to be aware; he prefers to patronize his interlocutor and ridicules him as 'illogical,' a flat earther.

Typically Dawkins prefers to start indoctrination of the dogma as early as possible: children ideally should be exposed to the correct ideology from the age of eight, rather than their middle teens when the faulty epistemological basis has already been formed; after Fichte it is well known that free enquiry and dissent must be crushed as early as possible.

We see that relativist thinkers use the Christian approach as an excuse for the relativist anti-humanism. The Biblical principle that God created man in His image leads not only to the fundamental objectivity that all men are created equal (also rejected by relativism); but the same teaching laid the cornerstone as well for the anthropocentrism that relativists so fiercely denounce. Man is not Nature's lord and custodian, but its usurper. Down with civilization, long live Rousseau's noble savage!

What seems at first glance to be a legitimate debate on a existential issue which may be approached from a religious, philosophical or sccientific angle, can on analysis be reduced to the usual boring banalities of the Postmodern political agenda: a ploy for the deconstruction of Western civilization through the anti-modern dialectic (sigh ...).

Links to the Al Jazeera broadcast:

- Part I
- Part II
- ID explained: for followers of 'thought creates matter' ID is only one step away

- Filed on Articles in "The Dialectics" and "Life Ethics" -

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Global Warming: A Problem Not Supposed to be Solved

These guys are spot on. Environmentalism is just another control mechanism in the fight against reality: the Postmodern dialectic. It goes from Rousseauian anti science and technology, to - increasingly - anti humanism. It's a particularly destructive set of crypto Fascist values. Wake up!



more about "Glenn Beck debunking Rousseauism", posted with vodpod


- Hat Tip: All American Blogger, Duane Lester -

- Filed on Articles in "The Science of Global Warming" and "The Dialectics" -

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Cultural Jihad, a.k.a. "The Project" - Updates

There's important, new material available. On the Articles file:

Front Page: "The Origins of the Muslim Brotherhood “Project”," by Patrick Poole

In May 2006, when I first introduced American readers to the Muslim Brotherhood strategic plan known as “The Project” (including the first complete English translation of such, published here at FrontPage), very little was known about the document beyond what had been reported in the European press and Swiss journalist Sylvain Besson’s book, La conquête de l'Occident: Le projet secret des Islamistes (Paris: Le Seuil, 2005). (...)A new book, however, sheds fresh light on the background of “The Project” and offers new details on the fundamental realignment of Muslim Brotherhood strategy and doctrine that it represents. >>>

Update:

Memri: "Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide: Bin Laden is a Jihad Fighter"

On May 22, 2008, the reformist Arab website http://www.elaph.com/ posted a comprehensive interview with Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Muhammad Mahdi 'Akef. In the interview, 'Akef (...) expressed support for the resistance in Iraq and Palestine, and for the activities of Al-Qaeda. 'Akef's statements evoked harsh criticism among clerics and politicians both inside and outside Egypt (...) The following are excerpts from the interview (...) >>>

Update: New! Music for Liberty: WMD (Weapon of Musical Defense)

Atlas Shrugs: "Weapon of Musical Defense" (WMD)

Last night I made good on my promise on my new radio show Voices of Freedom on KFNX to play new and original music with a message, a counter jihad message. Great rockin' tunes. Several concerned and talent rock stars got together and put to music everything they had learned about Islam after 9/11. What took years to learn has been put to fabulous music. They are currently producing a CD of roughly 22 songs which will be available on itunes.

Last night I played the world premiere of Appeasement (minute 5 on the show Download 2nd_Show_July_24.mp3 ) and promised Atlas listeners the opportunity to download two songs for free. GO HERE FOR THE FREE DOWNLOADS.

Appeasement
What happens when a desire for peace at at any price meets an insatiable desire for world conquest?

Best Nation
is about the tacit acceptance of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam by the UN. We think it's a pretty shocking document and more people would be shocked by it, if only they knew about it.

From the new website:

We're getting ready for a forthcoming web launch. We know it's a mysterious name but you'll just have to wait. (...)

Update:

WMD’s knowledge repository is open: If you’ve heard our songs (which you can do via our home page), you’ll know that the lyrics are packed with more information (...) When everything is ready we will have a full reference site (...) For now we’re opening up a tiny portion of what we call “The Library“. We have one article up at the moment which is a side by side comparision of the full text of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is the very heart of our song Best Nation. (...) >>>

Update: Pat Condell weighs in:



- Filed on Articles in "The Project" -

Planning: Obama Cancels Visit To Wounded U.S. Troops

If he'd had the sense not to include the visit to wounded US troops in the 'campaign funded' foreign policy tour in the first place, he wouldn't have had to cancel it.

At some point it must have seemed a good idea ... What a classic!

Ace of Spades answer the rhetorical question: "Did Obama Snub Troops Because He Couldn't Bring Reporters Along?"




more about "Planning: Obama Cancels Visit To Woun...", posted with vodpod

Thursday, July 24, 2008

On Memory Lane: the Cold War Continues

News is breaking of a US-Russian spat, reminiscent of a rather romantic episode in the good, old bipolar days of the Cold War - the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Russia's Izvestia newspaper this week quoted a "highly placed source" as saying Russia could land Tu-160 supersonic bombers nicknamed "White Swans" in Cuba in response to a planned U.S. missile defense shield in Europe that Moscow opposes.

Reuters in "Cuba silent on Russian bomber report: Fidel Castro" reports that former Cuban leader Fidel Castro on Wednesday said Cuba does not have to explain or "ask forgiveness" that Russia might use its Cold War ally Cuba as a refueling base for nuclear-capable bombers. He did not address whether the report was true or false, and Cuban officials have made no comment.

- Caption: August 29, 1962: U-2 photograph showing no construction at San Cristobal -

In marked contrast U.S. Air Force Gen. Norton Schwartz told the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, that if the Russians did refuel the bombers in Cuba "we should stand strong and indicate that that is something that crosses a threshold, crosses a red line for the United States of America."

According to Reuters, Russian officials have denied the Izvestia report. The Russophobe begs to disagree:

"The possible deployment of Russian strategic bombers in Cuba may be an effective response to the placement of NATO bases near Russia's borders," a former Air Force commander said on Monday.

Russian daily Izvestia earlier on Monday cited a senior Russian military source as saying that Russian strategic bombers could be stationed again in Cuba, only 90 miles from the U.S. coast, in response to the U.S. missile shield in Europe.

"If these plans are being considered, it would be a good response to the attempts to place NATO bases near the Russian borders," Gen. of the Army Pyotr Deinekin told RIA Novosti. "I do not see anything wrong with it because nobody listens to our objections when they place airbases and electronic monitoring and surveillance stations near our borders," the general said.

However, Deinekin said the possibility of Russian bombers being stationed in Cuba is largely hypothetical, because Russia's Tu-160 Blackjack and Tu-95MS Bear strategic bombers are both capable of reaching the U.S. coast, patrolling the area for about 1.5 hours, and returning to airbases in Russia with mid-air refueling.

Russia resumed strategic bomber patrol flights over the Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic oceans last August, following an order signed by former president Vladimir Putin. Russian bombers have since carried out over 80 strategic patrol flights and have often been escorted by NATO planes.

Robert Kagan it would appear, has a point regarding history retaking its normal course after Europe's strong Kantian/Hegelian push for a global Utopia.

- Filed on Articles in "Freedom isn't Free" -

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Of Cameronism, Pragmatism and the Nudge

Ever since Rousseau posited that the State's Common Will is in perpetual tension with individual Free Will, a state of affairs justifying compulsion, the Left has sought ways and methods to make citizens comply to its collectivist ideas.

It should be well noted that this Common Will is of an entirely different nature than the Common Good; the Common Will is a precursor to Hegel's "true freedom through the State," foreshadowing the state as an organic, ethical whole of the totalitarian Collective.

Starting with lies and fallacies followed by agitation, murder and terror; after internal mass deportation to social engineering; from mental hospitals to gulags; after subversion, indoctrination and the counter-culture's sensitivity training; which was succeeded by the nasty Postmodern social pressure of petty political correctness; while spin-doctoring and re-framing were perfected by Third Way-ers Clinton and Blair - we are today subjected to the latest attempt at neotot interference with the exercise of our ethics - Free Will - this time from the field of behaviorism, the Materialist approach to psychology.

In full accordance with the collectivist tradition it is introduced to us by its Orwellian name, aimed at perceiving it in all its cuddly harmlessness: the 'Nudge,' the Real Third Way, we are promised. The true definition is of course the very opposite of a nudge, it is another blatant attempt at making people comply to collectivist principles.

The latest tool has been thought up by Messrs Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, academics of the University of Chicago, which also happens to be Obama's old stomping ground and the common factor in their involvement. The revelation does provide some answers to questions concerning Obama's voodoo approach to campaigning.

Traditionally the assault is opened by attacking the human instrument for the exploration of reality: reason. Indeed, the target of the first salvo is the rationalistic thought that man makes choices that are always and exclusively in his own self interest: that notion was part of an outdated 'narrative' in the field of economics, all the fault of the exact approach during the 40s and 50s (homo economicus). Always the same pomo logic: take a notion to extremes and when it fails to comply, denounce it as invalid.

Whereas the author of the Spectator article "Nudge, nudge: meet the Cameroons’ new guru," James Forsyth, falls hook, line and sinker for the new tool, Daniel Klein (PDF) connected to the Santa Clara University in California, who is obviously schooled in Libertarian political philosophy, sees straight through the fallacies. We'll return to the Cameron connection shortly.

The Nudgers qualify their nanny invention as "the taking of actions in which no coercion is involved with the goal of influencing the choices of affected parties in a way that will make those parties better off." At this point the narrative is infected with an ugly equivocation in the form of a rather nasty oxymoron, Libertarian paternalism, also the title of a conference paper included in the May 2003 issue of the American Economic Review.

Klein, in a commentary to the paper makes mincemeat of the preposterous notion: "If Thaler and Sunstein were to proceed with this kind of gimmick, we could anticipate the following papers: "Libertarian Socialism (...) Libertarian Communism (...) Dirigisme (...) Interventionism (...) Repression (...) Paternalism."

In the neotot book, any method that doesn't involve dungeons and gulags is considered non-coercive. Subtle distinctions are lost on them: their mind-set is entirely directed at the Rousseau dichotomy of individual will versus Common Will, which justifies the use of any kind of coercion.

Libertarians from the authoritarian period were moved by other principles: their 'nudges' were rational requirements which could be freely accepted or abandoned. The neotot Nudge on the other hand is a sly means to make people act in conformity with the collectivist ideological wishes: spin-doctoring 2.0., if you will. They don't call Nudging the Real Third Way for nothing!

Reason out of the way, the Spectator article gives further enlightenment on the nature of the Nudge. Almost in passing we are urged to think of it as something trivial ... religion for example, which is "at its best is all about nudging." How daft do these pocket potentates think people are? Atheist Collectivism over its entire history have begrudged organized religion its central role and powerful influence! Now, it is the substance of ... 'quips.'

The Nudge book is described as a "guide to how the power of nudging can best be harnessed," at which point the Pragmatist environment in present 'post-ideological' politics enters the stage.

In part III of the post "When Reason Fails: Morbid Obama Intoxication" we had a closer look at what the Pragmatist world view actually entails. It is often thought of in terms of a choice for the mere practical - but like the Nudge - under the harmless sounding epithet lurks a far more sinister creature.

(...) William James (1842-1910), who gave the concept its name (...) wrote: 'The true,' to put it very briefly, is only the expedient in the way of our thinking, just as 'the right' is only the expedient in the way of our behaving."

Pragmatism is a Romanticist version of relativism. Extrovert action and passion are valued over introvert reflexion and reason. Pragmatism is essentially amoral (... and is) governed by the principle: our goal is so ethical that even the unethical is justified in reaching it - the aim justifies the means, truth is flexible and depends on the need of the moment, an utility expedient towards realization of the goal.

(...) Pragmatism is rather dishonestly presented as the opposite of what it aims to achieve. It seemingly is the practical over theory, portends to position the individual in a central role, ostensibly respects reason and facts, while its very principle constitutes an assault on logic (everything is in flux), gives a central role to feelings and passions (subjectivism), denies reality (nothing is absolute), and reduces the individual to an atom of the collective (...)"

That the approach is not as innocent as it sounds comes to the fore when it is coupled to dogma, and subjective passions are allowed to spiral out of control. This was the winning ticket that made National Socialism such a lethal ideology: they strengthen one another.

One can see how that works: our aim justifies the means (Pragmatism) because we say so(subjective dogma). Dogmatism couples blind belief to an already brutal concept while it is fired by passion, case need through Sorelian myths. It beckons: stop thinking, follow me and I'll give you what you want so passionately! This constellation of ideas makes the Obama campaign so dangerous for unbalanced followers, of which there are regrettably many.

Returning to the involvement of Tory leader, David Cameron with Nudging and Pragmatism, some serious clashes of ideas stand out which are lost when 'logic' tolerates contradictions.

From an article on Cameronism by Richard Reeves in the New Statesman it transpires that - where the basics are concerned - Cameron, far from being a Materialist Pragmatist or a Humean Skeptic, actually thinks in terms of society as a collection of responsible individuals:

"It is this essential optimism, that individuals and communities can usually organise their lives more successfully than any government, which underpins Cameron's rhetorical commitment to move power from central to local government and give users more power over the manner in which public services are provided. (...) One of Cameron's mantras, a deliberate wedge between himself and Thatcher, is that "there is such a thing as society. It's just not the same thing as the state." (...) All the work on family breakdown, poverty, education and antisocial behaviour fits into the basic Cameron analysis: society is broken, and the state cannot put it back together again. "The big question (...) is not what will government do - but what will society do?

Central to Cameronism are Libertarian ideas, as a limited state and a belief in progress through voluntary, mutually beneficial interaction. Moreover, Cameron's choice for what is practical should not be confused with the philosophy of Pragmatism! What we have here is the curse of Postmodernism: sloppy logic - deliberate of accidental - leading to a confusion of definitions.

Another cause for concern - the "Oliver Letwin definition of Cameronism as taking 'Conservative approaches to achieving progressive goals, '" a brief perusal of this Tory document (PDF) learns that on the contrary, the shoe is on the other foot: Cameron uses progressive themes to achieve Libertarian outcomes in an effort to expunge Nasty Party rhetoric.

Prioritizing the winning of a general election is a choice for the practical, rather than the Pragmatic.

- Filed on Articles in "Big Bro's Smoke and Mirrors" -

'Editing' Reality in the Interest of Perception

After the scandal of the Al Dura case - of which no one in the general public seems to be aware because it was suppressed by the mainstream media - we now have the as yet nameless incident of a Palestinian demonstrator being shot purposely in the foot by an Israeli soldier.

While the news item is all over the media (the contrast with the cautions of 'disturbing material ahead' are staggeringly hypocritical!), no reference whatsoever is made of the Al Dura precedent, in which the 'editing' of video material has been established without doubt.

It never ceases to amaze how the professional press manages to be hoodwinked in such an obvious fashion. The answer to that rhetorical question is clear however: today's subjective reporting is entirely politically motivated.

- Caption: it is generally forgotten that 'the wall' was erected after numerous terrorist attacks on Israel; it's purpose is to prevent others -

Apparently postmodern fascists believe that the proliferation of deliberate lies is in the public's interest. It says a lot of the depth of the cynicism of the neotot mindset and the 'scourged earth' tactics of their politics: propaganda and the manipulation of perception is everything to those who think that thought creates reality.

The IDF will conduct a thorough investigation into the matter. Considering the history of Paliwood, they'd better ... don't hold your breath for a retraction if it turns out that the footage once again has been subjected to an 'editing' process.

The article in American Thinker "The New York Times and the al-Dura Hoax" explains how this fact editing for the purpose of propaganda costs lives. Here's how it works in practice:



- Filed on Articles in "The Demise of the Press from Hell" -

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Belgium: Ground Zero of Transnational Politics

Just as there are no Macedonian or European people, the Belgians are the doubtful owners of a non-existent pseudo ethnic label. The tribal Belgae have just as much relation to the present Flemish and Walloons as the ancient tribe of the Teutons have with modern Germany. Here's the historical Wiki of the region through the ages and here's the Wiki for the intricacies of modern Belgium.

The BBC earlier this week made short shrift of the long, complicated story of postmodern Belgian politics. The Brussels Journal has details and suspects the imploded Government was just an EU ploy to get the infamous Lisbon Treaty signed. Now that the document has been ratified, the cabinet served its purpose and has become redundant. We may never know if this conspiracy theory holds a kernel of truth.

However, this might be a good time to acknowledge that the Kingdom of the Belgians is a historical mistake. Belgium, the seat of NATO and the European Union stands model for the EU itself and is just as synthetic an entity: no nation, but a multicultural state. The sole concept binding them was the originally German royal house of Saxe Coburg, but even they are seen by the Flemish as a bulwark of Francophone dominance.

Going from crisis to crisis is symptomatic of the postmodern propping up of multinational non-nations at the expense of the no longer politically correct sovereign nation-state: multicultural kitch and faux imperial goulash is all the rage. No democratic nation-state has waged war over the last half a century, but the forces of postmodernism have long made up their mind: nation equals nationalism, equals a machine of war.

Belgium may with right be seen as a major battle ground of the onslaught of transnational progressivism on the old Westphalian guard.

When Flanders was an agricultural backwater Wallonia was an industrial revolution power house. It has run to seed by its inability to adjust to the times, as well as the corruption of its monolithically Socialist politicians. Today the economic shoe is on the other foot: while Wallonia continues to import foreign labour on Socialist principles, poorly educated and under-adjusted Muslims make a bee-line for the ranks of the unemployed, for which Flanders foots the bill. But the squabbles over power and which language group is financially propping up who, are ultimately of secondary importance.

The Brussels Journal ventures another interesting observation: "Belgium can continue to flourish without a national government for the simple reason that the cabinet doesn’t have to decide much anyway. Most authority has devolved to the regions […] The central government is left to deal with foreign policy, defense and finance policy – all issues that are increasingly taken care of at the EU level."

This accurately describes the transnationalist plan of operation: the national apparatus of state is very gradually stripped of authority and powers, to the point of becoming an empty shell. Once redundant, the 'regions' take over while foreign affairs, defence, and monetary policy is taken care of on the supranational level: curtains for the offensive nation state, hello to the nascent transnational entity consisting of multicultural regions.

The hypothesis is taking shape, that this project was started decades ago on a micro level, when villages, municipalities and town councils were stripped of their historical identity and began a process of re-structuring into administrative clusters under fantasy names that had no root in local history.

An example would be three villages - Oakborough, Bridgewick and Weathertown, administered by the new council of Goodchange (motto: "Change for Progress"). It is preferably well infiltrated by transies, professional key posts being manned by fifth columnists trained by the Common Purpose school of progressive thought. IngSoc exists ...

We'd like to hear your story, if such processes have taken place in your area. Belgium needs careful watching, it being the model for the transnational future.

In honour of the ongoing Belgian crisis The Lighthouse shows a very early vid noir of the unique artist Jacques Brel, who died much too young and whose biography truly fits that illusive multicultural epithet, Belgian.

Related: "For Flanders"

- Filed on Articles in "Transnational Progressivism" and "Dossier Common Purpose" -

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Obamaphobia!

The constructed legal neologism 'Islamophobia' is a misnomer on many levels, but most importantly it is an equivocation that represents the shift from religion to race, turning offences against it into racism.

In the humorless, pathological personality cult that is the Obama campaign, all supporters had to to do was reverse the mechanism to morph satire and caricature - in fact all criticism of the Obama couple - into something morally equivalent to blasphemy.

In postmodernism the process from presidential candidate to a pseudo religious being-of-light against whom all offence is a sacrilege, is an easily constructed fallacy. Matt Purple looks at the new taboo in "Liberal Blogosphere: Satire of Obama is Unacceptable." "First they went after Saturday Night Live. Then Jon Stewart got blasted. Now left-wing blogs are attacking the New Yorker for satirizing Barack Obama and his critics on the cover of their most recent issue."

Postmodern relativists have made the corruption of definitions and the conflation of unequal concepts the centerpiece of the war on reality. The result is an ideological hotchpotch, which is the essence of the mess we find ourselves in today.

Here's an excerpt from the chapter The World of Paradoxymora and Other Mythical Creatures from the as yet unpublished tome "The Dystopia of Paradise."

In positing there is no such thing as truth, relativism reveals two inherent contradictions which renders its tenets invalid:


- in terms, in stating the truth that there is no truth;
- which in turn implies the validity, that Relativism itself is false.
Relativism is an ideological hell-hole infested with such contradictions, made acceptable and fashionable in speculative-philosophical circles by the anti-modernists Kant and Hegel (see also the Introduction to "The Dialectics"). Further investigations produce a host of other infestations: discrepancies, inconsistencies, as well as paradoxymora lurking under every stone; realivori, and objectiraptors pouncing at every turn.

Relativism is an oxymoron that causes serious cognitive as well as psychological damage. Those affected confuse fact with opinion, people with ideas, public opinion with truth, religion with parliamentary democracy, it undermines self-esteem, crushes morality, causes tolerance of the intolerant and turns tolerance into intolerance, confuses criticism with offences against etiquette (and now blasphemy and racism), reality with myth, truth with delusion, and equal with identical; it polarizes, and leads to making moral choices on the basis of other people's opinions; it leads to malignant Narcissism and severe egocentrism, but other than that, it's perfectly rational ...

Related video material:

- Satire explained to the unwashed
- Colbert takes on The New Yorker

- Filed on Articles in "The Pomo White House"-

Sunday, July 13, 2008

Global Warming = Earth Lib

"The battle for the world is not a battle between two political ideals. It is a battle between two views of the nature of thought."
-- Leonard Peikoff
_______________________________________________________________

Psychology deals with mental processes and behavior. Philosophy explains man's understanding of reality in terms of broad abstracts, based on three axioms: existence, consciousness and identity.

Axioms are self-evidences rooted in the perceptual awareness of the world around us. They have a built-in protection against attacks by reality dodgers who disagree: being the basis of all human knowledge, to disagree means relying on the very same axioms.

A child realizes that objects exist and learns to integrate sensations into percepts. This leads to the axiom of identity, which is necessary for human cognition. Entity and identity - differentiating one object from another - leads to the next discovery: the Law of Causality. In time a child absorbs and integrates all axioms.

Entities perform actions; it is what entities do. Walking is not possible apart from an entity with legs. An entity has certain attributes, while lacking others. A child shakes its rattle and hears a sound, whereas a pillow is mute. Every entity has a nature: specific, non-contradictory and limited. An entity must act in accordance with its nature.

On the basis of two points the adult validation of Causality consists in stating the relationship explicitly: the Law of Identity, and that action is an action of an entity: A = A. The alternative would be that an entity acts apart from its nature, or against it. Both are impossible: existence is identity. Apart from its nature a thing is nothing: a ball is not a ball if its nature is not that it is round.

Causality is a corollary of identity. A corollary is a self-evident implication of already established knowledge. The Law of Causality is the Law of Identity applied to action.

Vast numbers of men never get beyond axioms. A primitive tribesman - often even lacking an integrated consciousness - does not have the benefit of Aristotelian principles; he has no way of adhering to axiomatic consistencies. He ends up contradicting the self-evident, as is also the case in various mystical world views.

Of an entirely different order are men who have the benefits of advanced education, yet consciously reject axioms on political grounds, as is the case with Postmodernists - Leftist as well as Rightist subjectivists. A declared war on reality - deliberate and systematic self-contradiction - is the essence of their 'narrative.'

The philosophers of the past two centuries known as the anti-modernists, the Counter-Enlightenment movement or present Postmodernists reject the very idea of the self-evident as the base of knowledge and repudiate all three axioms, attacking them as 'arbitrary postulates,' 'linguistic conventions' or 'Western prejudice or (meta)narrative' (e.g. science).

Is it any wonder that the sequence of events get confused? The military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq are placed prior to the tragic events on 9/11 is but one example of time-line problems with cause and effect, the Law of Causality?

A CNSNews article has identified other difficulties related to direct causes: "A top Democrat told high school students gathered at the U.S. Capitol Thursday that climate change caused Hurricane Katrina and the conflict in Darfur, which led to the “black hawk down” battle between U.S. troops and Somali rebels."

Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the House (Select) Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee, betrayed his credentials by using another popular rhetorical trick from the Postmodernist cupboard, the false equation: (he) "equated the drive for global warming legislation with the drive for women’s suffrage in the late 19th and early 20th centuries."

Either that, or a dialectical process from the Rousseau school of thought is taking place in the mind of the Representative, the liberation of planet Earth from the oppressions of the perceived 'white, male power structure' (another term for rational civilization).

More such stories have been compiled by M. Barbay in "Global Warming' Caused Regional Problem? (Since 1975)."

Here we see how a seemingly minute, deliberate, philosophical manipulation of the speculative, ideological variety - which separates the world of ideas (subjectivism) from the world of reality (objectivism) - can lead to major problems. But then, it was invented two centuries ago for that self-same purpose: the peddling of literally, 'non-sense.' The cause of crime is the law ... thought creates reality.

Another interpretation would be the manipulation of facts, or the 'Orwellian' rhetorical trick of changing definitions into their opposites resulting in oxymorons, for instance Hegel's "true freedom through the state."

Who remembers that modernity - the Enlightenment and its political offshoot liberalism, once stood for what is presently its opposite? Individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and rationality became collectivism, statism, socialism and anti-reason, the latter presently morphing into the ultimate expression and most frightening form of subjectivism: anti-humanism.

- Filed on Articles in "The Dystopia of Paradise" -

Bloggers Against Legal Jihad

Geert Wilders, Dutch MP and producer of the short film "Fitna," a video document which explains the perils of Sharia law for democratic values (can be seen here), has received a summons from a lawyer to pay radical imam Fawaz Jneid before next Sunday an advance payment of EUR 20,000 in compensation for damages the imam suffered through accusations Wilders made against him in "Fitna." In total the damages claimed amount to EUR 55,000.

Prime Minister Balkenende, currently attending the Sarkozy 'Club Med' circus in Paris, will come to speak with Jordan's PM about the Jordanian decision to seek Wilders' prosecution through the kingdom's Courts.

Hate imam Fawaz Jneid who is associated with the infamous As-Souna Mosque in The Hague has cursed defenders of Western values like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Theo van Gogh and Afshin Ellian in truly shocking terms. Wilders in a reaction speaks of moral inversion. He isn't impressed and vowed to pay not even 55 cents.

- Caption: cartoon of Wilders by Kurt Westergaard -

The issue doesn't stand on its own. Articles dossier "Legal Jihad" lists many such matters from all over the globe. But personal damage claims do seem to be a new trend in the war on the West. Pamela Geller, over on Atlas Shrugs relays a similar case.

"Litigation jihad is one of the most venal and effective weapons in the jihad assault on Western civilization. Hamas is suing UK blogger over a tiny detail (...) The little guy up against those bloody petrol dollars. One has to wonder if Hamas is using US State department funds to pursue this?" Yeah, or Dutch and EU development funds, for that matter?


"A British blog called Harry’s Place is being sued by Mohammed Sawalha for posting a variant of a translated phrase from one of the plaintiff’s speeches. Lest you think of Mr. Sawalha as an innocent lamb, consider that even the BBC (yes, even the Beeb!) says that he “master minded much of Hamas' political and military strategy” and in the UK “is alleged to have directed funds, both for Hamas' armed wing, and for spreading its missionary dawah”.

Dangerous stuff, we're trying to get as many bloggers as possible to react to it. Join the list of supporting blogs. The British blogs have already amassed together. A blogburst has been started at NeoConstant in support of Harry’s Place (and here's the original blogburst post) (...).

It looks like Harry’s Place is going up against some pretty top-notch lawyers on this one, and they’ve got guts, but as the post goes on to say: If Mr Sawalha persists in attempting to silence us with this desperate legal suit, we will need your help. We won’t be able to stand up to them alone. This is why we’ve started this blogburst, to get the word out that we won’t let members of Hamas or any radical terrorist group censor us or any of our fellow bloggers.

If you’d like to add your site to the blogroll, simply email us at admin@neoconstant.com, and include your site’s URL. Then copy and paste this entry into one of your posts. Future posts will be emailed to you. Thanks, and don’t forget to head over to Harry’s Place to show your support of their freedom of speech!


- Filed on Articles in "Legal Jihad" -

The Silent Expansions of Europe: Eurabia

The silent, post-democratic expansion of Europe into swathes of northern Africa (Maghreb) and whole chunks of the Middle East (Mashreq) continues unabated.

Nobody's been asked and no one tells, except buried news items like this morning's Yahoo!News article "Syria's Assad to seal detente with Europe". The story is so remarkable, that contrary to policy it should have been published here in its entirety. We decided against it, but reading it comes highly recommended.


While Syria's secret service agents continue to operate in the Levant as if on their own turf, the Syrian President thought nothing of having a former head of state assassinated; who recently heard about the UN investigation into the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri, is kindly requested to inform.

So what, if the current head of the ruling dynasty sees his country as his own private stretch of real estate, in which the sole Fascist political party is the means to rule it; who cares if the proxy totalitarian state's apparatus is in lock-step with Iranian theofascism, the actual potentates of the Assad private estate; what gives that Israel recently had to trash a secretly built North Korean nuclear reactor; or that American diplomatic efforts in the Middle East are undermined?

The Eurocrats' magic word for expanding the sphere of influence is 'interdependence,' the vehicles towards it are the talking-shops and environmental projects pending overcoming the reluctance to unleash overt cultural cooperation on the peoples of Europe. The excuse: Hegelian 'world historical events' leading to Kantian world government at any price.

Just curious how long the dealings with evil will last until blow back time ... "Syria's Assad to seal detente with Europe" - read it all >>>

Update:

If present view is too opinionated, try My Greek Odyssey for a more balanced view on the matter of the newest world order: "Surviving in the Brave New World"

- Filed on Articles in "Eurabia" -

Thursday, July 10, 2008

A New Dossier: Socialist Causes Explained

A new dossier has been opened on Articles, which endeavours solving the sometimes enigmatic ideological causes the Left chooses to champion.

If the question keeps you awake at night how come the interests of women and gays have been jilted practically overnight in favour of theofascism, keep an eye of this file.

Occasionally the answer is right on the surface, whereas at other times a more profound analysis by professional shrinks is indicated.

But once the machinations are understood, the veil will be lifted of what appears to be a conundrum within an enigma within a Rubik's cube.

- Caption: The People's Cube - "An Alternative Secret History of the World" -

Take an RSS and know how to solve ideological puzzles such as these faster than you say Che. You too can become a trend-setter and be politically correct even before the rest of the masses know the current truth!

Update: caution - doctrinal material ahead

For reactionaries stubbornly resistant to the principles of the red pecking order, you can now pay a visit to the BBC Northern Ireland doctrinal site for a crash indoctrination course on correct citizenship. Specifically recommended come the Racism module for a thorough examination of possible yuk toddler remnants, or you can act now! on ethnic minorities if you are deeply shocked by "the problems faced by different people and groups in your community. "

- Filed on Articles in "Petty Political Correctness" -

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

The Left's Fest of Unbridled Hypocrisy

As the regular readership may be well aware of one of the major subjects of these pages is the hunt on and the exposure of mainstream media bias, known under the epithet "Orwell's Press from Hell." Familiar files on Articles for the collection of these stories are:

- "Blurring the Border Between Perception and Reality" - a series of posts with analysis and commentary;

- "Big Bro's Smoke and Mirrors" - a collection point of cases of media corruption, for instance the co-opting of sympathetic political parties and governments;

- "The Demise from the Press from Hell" - deals with general stories exposing media bias such as the present.

As the series "Blurring the Border Between Perception and Reality" explains, media bias is a well known phenomenon that only stands to reason: the media are a strategic area where public opinion may be influenced in the direction of choice. But propagandist issues apart, journalism is also one of the main occupational fields with an added attraction for postmodernists, simply because it is here that the shift from objective journalism to subjective reporting is made. The result is a complete 'alternative' version of history, the so-called narrative.

Since - roughly - the start of the new millennium, many of the mainstream media have given up even the pretence of objectivity. The pressures of the competition of English language Al Jazeera may have something to do with style and content. The BBC have succumbed to the point of almost having become a party in the daily guerrillas of Gaza, Israel and the West Bank, not to mention France2 in the ongoing case of Al Dura (a.k.a. Enderlin vs. Karsenty).

Political Lunch explain the matter without hidden memes. But in an op-ed titled "Your Brain Lies to You" New York Times contributors Sam Wang and Sandra Aamodt spill the Materialist beans, showing how the public may be manipulated by vile tacticians through the abuse of their own cerebral functions; but 'brain' here must be understood as an extension of the senses. Postmodernists seldom miss an opportunity to subliminally tuck away somewhere one of their pet methods for the deconstruction of reality.

In that riot of disturbing black-ops emanating from Republicans, "Karl Rove and all those who use Rovian tactics, Fox News commentators and conservative bloggers and emailers who fuel and pander to prejudice and bigotry by sending out scurrilous libels of Obama and, by association, the Muslim community, such as emails and comments" the public may rest assured that Democrats themselves would never, ever, stoop to such unethical manipulations.

Whereas Messrs Blair and Clinton's mastery of spin, public perception and re-framing of issues has become the stuff of legends, the newly evolved generation of reality dodgers would never resort to demagogy, voodoo campaign politics, subliminal messages, false psychological props or Neuro-Linguistic Programming, a.k.a. NLP or Hypnosis 2.0.!

In this fest of unbridled hypocrisy the opposition are well advised to gather behind the Democrat Being of Light; no pressure intended but the Savior's loss can only be attributed to the uniquely evil racism inherent in all Right-wing Americans. Such case be prepared for four more years of fake hysterical rage, rage, rage and scurrilous invective, coupled with biased, wrathful, hateful, divisive, vitriolic, bigoted, intolerant and warmongering, racist and sexist slurs from the Orwellian Press from Hell, The True Race and all the other projection-ridden protagonists of the pathological Left.

- Filed on Articles in "The Demise of the Press from Hell" -

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Exploding the Postmodern Myth of Moral Neutrality

UK's Tory leader David Cameron told the fat and the poor yesterday they must bear some of the responsibility for their own conditions.

The shift from personal responsibility to victimhood - man shunned of Free Will and reduced to a mere plaything of God, Nature and circumstance - has always been primary to the traditional Left. In fact, it is an existential precondition.

Postmodernism has added another dimension to the concept of victimhood on the philosophical level. The entire field of ethics got cancelled out: truth, as well as the qualifiers good and bad, true and false, conveniently collapse before the rejection of objective reality.

The result is the relativist attitude that renders fact mere personal opinion: everybody is right from his or her point of view. As a consequence any critical response, or 'passing moral judgment' has become a social no-no in the etiquette of polite society.

The postmodern version of petty bourgeois morality - political correctness - does the rest for the paradox that passes moral judgment on moral judgment, rejecting it as unevolved and a tool for oppression wielded by white patriarchists.

This inconsistency, and many others like it, has not resulted in the rejection of relativism as a fallacy. On the contrary it is taken as a phenomenon typical of all 'interesting' concepts. Indeed, the absence of contradiction would have made it intellectually suspect in postmodern eyes!


Postmodern relativism survives thanks to sophisms, rhetorical tricks and the tolerance of fallacies. The myth of moral neutrality has applications all over the Western world: from religiously neutral public spaces - the French approach to the separation of Church and State - to appeasement and moral cowardice in the face of evil.

Here's a preview from the draft of "The Dystopia of Paradise" in which the matter is explained from the Aristotelian position:

Just as atheism is not a position of religious neutrality, but on the contrary, is the belief that God does not exist, so a relativist stance is not morally neutral either, but is in fact the conviction that all morality is relative.

The supposed ethically neutral stance that Western politicians are trying to maintain towards Muslims, the radicals lumped with the moderates, are a mistake as well as a deal with the devil.

Postmodern relativists have an inherent belief in a place of complete impartiality. No judgments nor any offer of personal views are allowed. A neutral posture towards the moral convictions of others is supposed to be the essence of tolerance. Greg Koukl, founder and President of Stand to Reason, an American institute for Christian apologetics, has falsified the notion.

Koukl points out that relativists by not 'passing moral judgment' actually imply that - because some circumstances are ethically ambiguous - there are no moral certainties at all! The assumption however that there is no particular universally valid set of values other than your own, does not constitute neutrality. It is a particular view of morality, called relativism. In relativism, relativism itself is the value!

Relativists heartily promote their 'value-free' stance. We should respect an other's view, and they assert how morally despicable - yes, immoral - it is to foist your own convictions on others.

- Caption: courtesy "Friendly Atheist" -

Did you spot the paradoxymoron [2] lurking in that statement? The 'syllogism' just committed suicide, by imposing the view on you that if you disagree with it, your view is not valid, while it just stated that all views are valid.

We see that, far from being tolerant, fair and neutral, relativism is dictatorial, intolerant, fallacious and morally bankrupt. If in your dealings with a multiculturalist you are overcome by a sudden awareness of being in the presence of a bigoted hypocrite, you may have mentally picked up this implied fact.

Give an opinion and your neutral stance has been forfeited. If it wasn't for the eloquence of body language, the only place for neutrality would be silence.

Even more vigorously enforced is the idea that lumping innocent Muslims with terrorists and radicals is unfair towards moderates. It is a line that will not be crossed. The problem is that at this point an ethical inversion takes place, as terrorists share in the untouchable 'moral neutrality' towards the innocent.

This occurs because in the face of two morally exclusive options, no choice is being made. The good can stand out only in the face of evil; in a world without wrong, in the end nothing appears to be right.

- Filed on Articles in "The Dystopia of Paradise" -

Sunday, July 6, 2008

Progress Report: Balkan Irredentism Unabated

Our regular OSINT contributor on Balkan affairs, Ioannis Michaletos has published a fresh report on the progress of irredentism and the ongoing push for a Balkans caliphate. We'll get back to it shortly.

By now much has been revealed about 'Bill's whim', the Clinton administrations' personal amities and predispositions for political engineering in the region. Details on the subject are compiled on the relevant Articles dossier.

In other posts we have commented on the almost traditional mistake made by Americans when - as a matter of course - they side with any independence movement whatever its revolutionary or separatist hue. It frequently lands American foreign policy in trouble, as was the case in the earlier stages of the Russian Revolution.

- Caption: BBC: "Deal done" (NATO with KLA/UCK) - Gen Clark (right), Gen Ceku (second right) and Mr Thaci (left) [UN administrator for Kosovo, Bernard Kouchner second left]-

Julia Gorin in "Shame on America: How the U.S. Bombed G.I. Joe" reminds us that events in living memory might have corrected postmodern moral inversions. Had they been remembered such stories might have told us where the West's natural allegiance actually lies: "God bless the America that was, as embodied in veteran Arthur Jibilian, the last surviving member of Operation Halyard, the biggest airlift rescue of World War II. It is also the most suppressed rescue mission, given that it was made possible by Serbs."

The root of the mistake lies in the altogether different natures of Locke and Rousseau type revolutions. The matter is addressed in some detail in "Radical Rousseau's Ravages." In the case of the carving up of the former Yugoslavia (see video material included in "Bill's Vista for a Better Balkan") Americans once again fell into the trap and they continue to do so, by supporting the irredentist drive for a Greater Albania. In some quarters its realization is already an inevitable fact.

Gorin is also on the Kosovo case: "Kosovo/Albania/America: No Merging into Greater Albania. (i.e. Greater Albania Confirmed)." The posting mentions an indictment against the Albanian National Army (AKSH) and the Front for Albanian National Unification (FBKSH), the AKSH’s political wing. The organizations seem to be related to the Information Agency United Albania, which made these pages earlier this year in "A Door in Kosovo" (see update) when we pasted a revealing image from the site, currently ditched as possibly too overtly spilling the Balkan beans.

Reverting to Michaletos' update we'll quote only the general developments. The entire 19th June article "Alert level rises for Jihadi attacks in the Balkans" can be accessed on the site of the International Analyst Network:

The Balkans were deemed as a safe territory for the Islamists for the past 15 years, and Albania was often named as “The safe hotel,” a place with lax control for the movements of these groups. The current developments bring to surface a wider campaign against the Islamic networks, although they have actually upgraded their capabilities since their former allies have reached positions of power, such as the case of Kosovo relates to.

More importantly it has to be noted that terrorism and organized crime are closely
interrelated in the Balkans; therefore any sudden change in the balance of powers signals a round of conflict between the oppositional crime rings.

Moreover sources related to the Homeland Security in the USA, have already reported that the 2007 catastrophic
wildfires in Greece were probably a form
of
“pyro-terrorism” by Jihadists, whilst Greek press often reports that up to 2,000 Muslims are being monitored 24/7 for extremist behavior and connections, mostly in the Athens region. Bulgaria last year unraveled its own Jihadi network, which was composed by proselytes and Serbia has managed to break up a radical group in the Sanjak Eparchy.

In addition to the above, the coming USA elections provide by definition an opportunity to Jihadists to strike against Western interests in order to create the psychological framework on which they seek to manipulate political events. The Russian-American antagonism in the Balkans is another factor that hinders international cooperation on security affairs and the increasing involvement of the Turkish intelligence; especially in FYROM is another x-factor in the wider picture.

In overall, it is important to stress the emergence of a deteriorating scene concerning Balkan security affairs and a fair estimation is that the 2008 summer period will have a high alert status and in particular in Kosovo, Albania and FYROM.

- Filed on Articles in "The Balkan Caliphate" -

Thursday, July 3, 2008

The Dialectics: the Strategy Against the West

On the Articles pages information and links are compiled per subject in files or dossiers. One such file way overdue is on the various dialectics and the phenomenon of petty political correctness.

Much has been said and written on the subjects, but the true purpose and origins are seldom reduced their roots. This file seeks to remedy that hiatus. The following text will be transcribed to the Articles section as an introduction to the subject.

In reaction to ultra rational positions taken by the later thinkers of the Enlightenment, a brand of 18th century German intellectuals sought to save the old order by undertaking a cultural movement countering the rationalist influences. These reactionaries are known as the German Idealists, the Romanticists, the Counter-Enlightenment movement, or the anti-modernists.

In the effort, anti-modernist philosophers Kant (1724-1804) and Hegel (1770-1831) sought to square Judeo-Christian cosmology with reason.

Kant saw philosophy as a grey area between science and religion and made it the battleground in the war on reason. His rescue effort resulted in the corruption of all three fields. Philosophy - in Aristotelian and Thomist hands a precision instrument for the exploration of reality - has never recovered from Kant's speculative theories about the nature of thought.

Kant devised a dialectical mechanism which was later further developed by Hegel to reflect contradictions: the dialectic of contradictory elements, also known as 'new reason,' making them part of reality. Thereby he inflicted on the world the self-perpetuating mechanism for progress through strife and conflict. A practical application we see around us every day is the adversarial approach to communication, common to the journalists, lawyers and politicians.

Hegel skewed Kant's proposition by replacing God with the State. Later followers posited further variations on such themes, creating in effect secular pseudo religions. This is the origin of mystical nationalism and of malignant racial and cultural theories, including Postmodern multiculturalism.

Hegel's followers divided into Right, and Left (or Young) Hegelians. Young Hegelian Karl Marx (1818-1883) further developed the dialectic, devising yet another skewed version (dialectical materialism) of Hegel's skewed version.

Marx' paranoid vision of society has divided the world into two species of humans: the oppressors and the oppressed, resulting in a perpetual struggle of minority groups against the 'power structure.' The latter should not be understood as simply 'those in power', but rather 'those in power, other than us'.

Contemporary postmodernism in whom Right and Left Hegelians have re-united (yes! their are quite a few closeted Nazis there), harnessed political correctness to today's version of Marx' class struggle. Rousseau's vista of a noble, primordial world destroyed by the logic of man's egoism and drive for civilization, might well have sired the epidemic of Western self-loathing. But it is now part and parcel of the postmodern dialectic: political correctness, a mechanism for self-control along the lines of direct action or positive discrimination with the aim of establishing redistribution of power and rights.

This dossier aims to compile examples of the practical applications of the postmodern dialectic. These often takes the shape of contemporary multicultural and social ideas concerning minority groups.

The overt, narrow objective is the liberation of the minority in question (women's lib, black power, gay rights, etc.) with the view of shifting power and rights from the 'white males power structure' to minority victim groups (everyone else). In the Pragmatist expediency this moral aim justifies any means, but methods of self-control through moral, social pressure are very popular today.

The ultimate aim however goes far beyond the narrow collective group interest: the deconstruction from within, of Western culture as it developed over the course of three millennia.

The next step on that path was set when the Left recently abandoned the patronage of the traditional historically oppressed groups in favour of their enemy, Islamism: its potentially deconstructive powers are simply too promising to pass up. The fact they have made the shift without any visible signs of cognitive dissonance says much about the ruthlessness of the underlying ideology. Next stop: 'borders are immoral.'

Dossier:

Pajamas: "Saving the Males From the NY Times," by Bernard Chapin

Members of the mainstream media not only cherish alternative lifestyles; they also wish to purge everything from our culture that prevents their realization. This was evident on Father’s Day when the New York Times Magazine commemorated the holiday by placing the misandric query, “Will Dad Ever Do His Share?,” on its cover. Inside is a lengthy expose by Lisa Belkin on this subject entitled “When Mom and Dad Share It All.” Those familiar with the contents of the Gray Lady will be unmoved by yet another attempt to denigrate fathers. After all, fulfilling the needs of politically correct oppression merchants practically has become the paper’s central purpose. (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "The Dialectics" -

 
RatePoint Business Reviews