Horatius was no Socail Justice Warrior.

Ken White (Popehat) is writing verse. This is a bad sign.


Then out spake prim Horatius,
The Censor of the Gate:
“To every persyn upon this earth
Butthurt cometh soon or late.
And how can we do better
When facing fearful speech,
Than shut down all discussion,
And stop the crimethink’s reach?


“As for the tender mother
Who knits a woolen toy,
Best send the cops to brace her
Although it gives her joy,
It matters not what we think,
We privileged with some sense,
Call the cops if anyone
May somehow take offense.

This is, naturally, a pastiche of Thomas Babington’s Poem… which I will quote but a portion of.

Then out spake brave Horatius,
The Captain of the gate:
“To every man upon this earth
Death cometh soon or late. 220
And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds
For the ashes of his fathers
And the temples of his gods,

“And for the tender mother 225
Who dandled him to rest,
And for the wife who nurses
His baby at her breast,
And for the holy maidens
Who feed the eternal flame,— 230
To save them from false Sextus
That wrought the deed of shame?

“Hew down the bridge, Sir Consul,
With all the speed ye may;
I, with two more to help me, 235
Will hold the foe in play.
In yon strait path a thousand
May well be stopped by three:
Now who will stand on either hand,
And keep the bridge with me?” 240

Then out spake Spurius Lartius,—
A Ramnian proud was he:
“Lo, I will stand at thy right hand,
And keep the bridge with thee.”
And out spake strong Herminius,— 245
Of Titian blood was he:
“I will abide on thy left side,
And keep the bridge with thee.”

“Horatius,” quoth the Consul,
“As thou sayest so let it be,” 250
And straight against that great array
Went forth the dauntless three.
For Romans in Rome’s quarrel
Spared neither land nor gold,
Nor son nor wife, nor limb nor life, 255
In the brave days of old.

Then none was for a party—
Then all were for the state;
Then the great man helped the poor,
And the poor man loved the great; 260
Then lands were fairly portioned!
Then spoils were fairly sold:
The Romans were like brothers
In the brave days of old.

How we have fallen, when the Pagans would shame us. For the SJW morons shatter the unity of our tribe, and cause division within the nation. For the lack of offense. They critique the very rough men who, by standing against our enemies, allow the very freedom to speech they trample on.

This used to be taught to every schoolboy, so in times of trial they would consider they were facing fearful odds for home, hearth, and family. WIthout such training, men have no spine, and requesting leadership is an impossibility. A return to a more stable society, which understands what is in the riches of our literature and art, would help.

But this is not what the elite currently advise.

The turning of the worm.

This world is wonderful, and every day there are more cool and creative things done. We should celebrate them, but instead we moan and complain because they do not fit entirely within our world view. This is most apparent in social media, such as Twitter, where the SJW are now censoring streams because their world view is fading, as the cycle turns, and the next generational shift is upon us.
Screenshot from 2014-11-18 22:38:41
Grerp does not say very much, but when she speaks it is generally a good idea to listen. She is talking in part about the SJW warfare, and how it has backfired on the clickbait merchants, particularly Gawker, that deliberately inflame the internet in the hope that you will go to their site and see all the advertisements while your ears are tickled with the latest scandal, the latest false outrage.

People who are active online should know that it’s not a safe place, and it’s not only unsafe in the sense that there are pedophiles waiting to talk to kids in chatrooms. It’s unsafe in the sense that everything is archived and can be called up to use as a weapon in any future conflict. And there are apparently thousands of mean or mentally unstable people waiting impatiently for the right opportunity to do just that.

What is Twitter? If you consider the hundreds of millions of people every day who tweet things via this medium – most of it is nothing but air. It’s the equivalent of bar conversations, only every conversation is public, not in the sense that it’s being “heard” in real time, but that it’s recorded, and can be played back, minus any context at any future date.

But I find the process of this fascinating. It is like watching a horror movie: it is horrible and fascinating all at the same time. The children of the elite, told that nothing matters but their feelings, are finding that this does not work. And when people argue back, they cannot handle it. The irony is that I was reading apologetics earlier this evening, and that is nothing but logic, reason, appealing to facts, and not digging into the morass that is postmodern thought.

My only sensible theory at this point
is that there’s a massive wave of cognitive dissonance running through the special entitled ones. After years of the rest of us being polite and not calling them out on either their stupidity or their assumption that the rest of the world should conform to their idea of how things should be, we’ve had enough and we’re telling them to stop. Worse, we’re telling them where they can put their entitled belief (Slice. Sideways, and without lube).

They, who have been taught that all that matters is the feels and that logic and facts are the tools of the patriarchy – and as a result lack the ability to realize that without those “tools of the patriarchy” most of their world simply goes away. The computers: they run on logic. All the technology we take for granted: built on observation, logic and experiment – have no way to handle being smacked in the face with anything that doesn’t support their worldview.

To some extent I pity them. This has to be hellishly traumatizing for them. But at the same time, their nonsensical beliefs are destroying everything I value, so I can’t be merciful. That’s my choice, and my penance. I just hope I won’t have to go to the blood in the streets level to defeat them.

Screenshot from 2014-11-18 22:41:49

But these people have to be confronted for their own sake. We all make our own hell, bu making one out of snobbery, priggishness and sheer hatred is horrid, and all should be spared that. (And I assume Zanax is some form of zombie benzodiazepine)

The SJWs say they stand for equality. Only they don’t. That’s a smoke screen. They are champions of diversity, provided that everyone is diverse in exactly the same approved manner. At their core they are petty, vengeful, tyrannical thought police, who simply can’t abide someone sinning. They’re an unholy cross between puritans and communists, with a heavy dose of Zanax, and severe self-esteem issues.

Social Justice Warriors are control freaks. Nothing more. Their bizarre antics have given true feminists a bad name. Their mad accusations of racism against anything and everything causes real racism to get lost in the background noise. By accusing well meaning, good intentioned individuals of horrible crimes, they legitimize and empower the real criminals.

Gamergate, and the loss of sponsorship of the most snarky sites, is the start of the turn. Expect more. The next turning will not be progressive. And being like the SJW will be increasingly bad for your health: if you follow them the mad will consider you a fool, for they recollect what it is to be sane, and you have thrown it away.

I like Morlocks (concerning a shirt).

I really have to thank my Papist friends for clueing me into this. Julian O’Dea, who has been watching the comment land, and Elisabeth Scalia, who takes the SJWs down with her usual verve.

Anyone who knows (and loves) techno/science geeks knows a couple of things:

  1. They are generally sweet-natured people who are preoccupied with techno/science geeky thoughts.
  2. Because they are preoccupied with such thoughts, they are neither fussy, nor vain. Food is merely fuel, and clothes are mere bodily covering. They generally are not thinking about what they are eating, or wearing.
  3. A comet scientist who has just helped to land a probe on to a comet is unlikely think think, “oh, I’m going to be interviewed, so I’d better take off this inappropriate-but-geeky shirt full of sexy-women-with-guns on it, which was designed by a female friend.”
  4. Because techno/science geeks are sweet-natured, if a tweeting malcontent urinates on a great moment for science because she doesn’t like the inappropriate-but-geeky shirt, they will quickly and — unfortunately — tearfully apologize for giving offense.
  5. Because techno/science geeks rarely-unto-never set out to demand attention, declare victimhood for themselves or deliberately offend their fellow humans, they don’t really understand that there are some people in the world who live to take umbrage, find things to be offended about, and make people cry.

Yes, and the SJW forget that almost everything they eat, use or do is supported, made, or maintained by geeky men. Farm Geeks, Industrial manufacturing geeks, systems administrators. The people the Eloi cannot bear. Morlocks.

But I like Morlocks. All of them, including the ones who wear Hawaiian shirts, shorts, socks and sandals. Provided I don’t have to share their dress sense.

I for one am ecstatic that society
doesn’t depend on the PC crowd for advancement or we’d still be living in caves using stone knives and naked (wearing bear skins, after all, would not be PC). And if anyone is stupid enough to pay attention to your and your ilk’s whining, we may find ourselves back in caves.

As a Woman With A STEM Career–if a guy’s shirt puts you off “science”, that just means you weren’t really interested in doing it in the first place.

Those who can, do; those who can’t, complain about the clothing those who can happen to be wearing when they manage to do what those who can’t don’t.

Do not be an Eloi, and do not be like them. Do something significant instead.

Avoid tertiary education if possible.

I went to the boys prizegiving this week. While the Rector was pontificating (and to avoid my ex, who had travelled from Auckland to be there) I was talking with Kevin[1]. He is, according to the sons, the best English teacher in the school. He is also a fan of C.S. Forrester and David Weber. So we were talking Science Fiction and how he managed to avoid Postmodern English Theory by the skin of his teeth. We then talked about student loans: he has just paid his off.

He has been renting and driving a crappy car. He has no mortgage. But Inland Revenue are off his back, for the loan has gone.

Screenshot from 2014-11-11 18:17:58

He is 37. So when Matt Forney says do not go to University unless you are trying to get training in a hard science or engineering, he’s correct. What he forgets to add is that if you get out of the USA you can avoid prerequisites, which mean you never need to deal with professors like this.

Imagine a black man who willingly puts himself in an environment where he’s called the n-word every day and told he’s an inferior, evil person because of the color of his skin. You’d think he was insane, right? Yet men are still choosing to attend universities where their Marxist, leftist, feminist professors preach hatred against men in general and straight white men in particular. To be a man in college is to be blamed for everything that’s wrong with the world, from poverty to colonialism to environmental degradation. If I wanted to be picked on, I’d go see an insult comic.

Not only that, but while your professors and administrators assert themselves as infallible moral authorities, they’re engaging in degeneracy on a level that would make Caligula blush. Beyond professors tearing up political signs they disagree with and helping fabricate “hate crimes,” both they and administrators are complicit in wide-scale academic fraud.

For example, most professors and administrators are well aware that many of their students are going to degree mills and passing in work that is not theirs. They do nothing because if they actually started expelling students for plagiarism (like the college syllabus says they’re supposed to), that would mean fewer tuition dollars for the school and no money to pay their bloated salaries. If you’re too much of a wuss for war, education is a pretty damn good racket.

The only reason to go to college if you have the talent and drive to major in a high-earning, math-centric degree such as computer engineering. Anything else is a waste of your time and money.

He is correct, and I say this as someone who works in a tertiary institution. The rhetoric about male violence, male predation is constant. The amount of practical things done — minimal. The main harm reduction that my university has done is buy up the local pubs and redevelop them. With continual internal assessment in First year, there is no time to drink anyway.

Screenshot from 2014-11-11 18:16:52

So what is college? Particularly American College? EW argues that it remains a selector for (moderate) intelligence and conscientiousness, particularly for women.

First, college does screen out the dumb, just less than it used to. Which one reason why employers insist on bachelor’s degrees for entry-level jobs…it is still a proxy, albeit a weak one, for intelligence and conscientiousness. Second, intelligence is heritable–about 50%, if memory serves–thus smart parents have smarter children on the whole. Yes, the IQ of smart peoples’ children will regress toward the mean, but the mean itself will rise over time. Third, intelligent people are more likely to make choices to get married and stay married, which itself confers many benefits to children born of the union, to include greater wealth, success, lower criminality (itself an indicator of higher intelligence) and a greater propensity to get and stay married.

Thus, I submit that the assortative mating theory does have validity, and that it does spawn a cognitive and social elite.

And if you want to be in that elite, to college you should go. What EW misses is that the US system is inefficient. It requires all people get a general education. The Commonwealth, which specialises at Batchelor’s level not Master’s is far more selective. This inefficiency, when combined with compulsory post modern Marxism, encourages women not to breed, or not yet, and may be causing a dysgenic trend for higher IQ women. This would fit with my observation of PhD colleagues: most of them are not that happy, and not that child orientated. Those who are happy and child orientated, interestingly, are married not to fellow PhDs, but tradesmen. (The same applies to female medics. Many of these are marrying men with trades, not fellow medics. My generation tried two medico marriages, and most of these failed, mine included).

Heartiste’s recognition of the relevance of credentialism is similarly perspicacious:

Conflating runaway credentialism with IQ misses the fact that today’s paper pushing woman with a communications degree was yesterday’s equally competent secretary with a high school degree, and perhaps even yesteryear’s farmhand mother with sharp instincts for survival.

Indeed, even many wise men fail to grasp this. Education is a far stronger predictor of female fertility than IQ is. Intelligence and educational attainment are correlated, of course, but once educational attainment is controlled for, there’s very little difference in fertility across the intelligence spectrum. This isn’t just the case at the national level; it’s descriptive power is global in scope.

So, young man, what to do?

Firstly, accept that boys are not good at being faux girls. The education system, until graduate level, rewards those who are neat, diligent, unquestioning and recite back what they are taught. At graduate level, being questioning and a geek helps (I know this for this is how I earn my money.) If you do not have the self discipline to learn despite the biases against you, then do not get tertiary education.

Secondly, college costs a lot of money, and graduate school more. So do not waste your time studying something that will not pay. Consider college as trade school for geeks. Unless you are independently wealthy, avoid hobby courses — art, music, literature — and any course that aims to make you a well-rounded individual. Shop around, including internationally: there are top 200 universities in Australia and NZ that are a lot cheaper than some state schools in the USA (and have less required courses). An alternative in the USA is to join the ROTC and get the military to pay: the military do generally treat young people with some respect (because you may have to die to fulfil your oath).

Thirdly, go to work first. There are exceptions to this: getting into medical school in NZ is best done just after leaving school. But if you don’t know what to do, go work on a farm, sling burgers, make cars. You will discover motivation. If you are young and single, go where the jobs are: the oilsands in Canada, the dairy farms in Southland…

Finally go for trades. The university degree is degraded. Plumbing however… remains. Women look for those who can provide as husband material. You will not have as much debt. Your job cannot be outsourced. Yes, it is dirty, physical, technical and hard. And the trades are the last area where the apprenticeship system — which works for men — continues.

Young man and young woman, do not go automatically into debt to be poorly educated. Do not take the default position. You do not need a mortgage before you marry, you do not need to spend your thirties paying your debt down, and you do not want to find yourself disqualified from meeting your dream because the federal bank demands payment.

A university generalist education is a luxury good. Like a supercar. Leave it to the rich, or fools.

On wrath swinging the pendulum.

This is a time of peak progressivism, when the SJW consider that they speak from a position of authority, and they can impose their views on anyone. One can see this in the response within the church: the SJW infiltrate and report on (in this case the Southern Baptist Convention).

And they are still called haters, even when the SJW trumpet that they have the power. Because they do not resile from the word of God, they are haters.

One pities the poor bloody Gay Southern Baptist; dealing with his proclivities in as chaste a life as he can have (just like the frivorced) but unlike the single and divorced straight brothers, being forced into the front line of the culture wars, if he wants this or not. Because the SJW has no underrstanding of any person apart from their label, apart from their place in their neo socialist plantation.

The Convention itself recognizes that its influence over society is waning. Mohler was the first of many to use the phrase “moral minority,” signalling that the days of the “Moral Majority” are over. “The disappearance of cultural Christianity, like a morning mist,” he said in his opening remarks, “is a reminder to us that it was cultural and not Christianity… We are accustomed to ministry from the top side of the culture, not from the underside. We are accustomed to speaking from a position of strength and respect and credibility, and now we’re going to be facing the reality that we are already, in much of America, speaking from a position of a loss of credibility, speaking from the underside, speaking from the wrong side of the moral equation.”

Nevertheless, the reach of the Southern Baptist Convention remains wide, not only among its member churches but among the many independent evangelical churches who might still look to it for guidance. Understanding how these church leaders are discussing LGBT issues is essential to the ongoing work of increasing LGBT acceptance in society, not only under the law, but culturally. In a series of posts, ThinkProgress will take a discerning look at how the ERLC conference revealed the struggle in evangelical Christianity to address LGBT issues and the gap between the love with which they are ministering and the hate they are perceived as reinforcing.

I must admit the self-righteous priggery of the left makes me nauseous. But this is combined with a certain anger at their continual monitoring of what one says and thinks, in case they are offended, hurt, misguided or in any way held to account. it’s not a nice combination, but it has a name, and that is wrath.

One of the things that tens to happen in the political system is that people get really angry when politicians over reach. One saw this with the Bush Administration, and one is now seeing this with the Obama administration. The wiser presidents understand this, and work with all people of goodwill to ensure the republic continues to be guided wisely. (And yes, the parliamentary system is a republic, but a sensible one. Because we do not elect a king, but instead drafted a family, we have generally a king who would have rather stayed in the navy or army, and a much cheaper system).

The less wise retreat into ideology and become perplexed as to why the people no longer trust them. It generally comes down to this: you have interfered overmuch. You have tried to make us better.

And that is not the role of the government. The Church itself is too wise to legislate this, but instead turns to prayer. It takes God to turn a man around.

We have forgotten our Descartes: nothing human is alien to us. W all hold within us desires which harnessed, lead to love, art, beauty and courage… but allowed to rot lead to lust, greed, envy, malice and destruction.

Last night I rewatched Serenity. One of the things that happened in the movie is that the elite doped a populace with “Pax” to make them less aggressive. It had two responses. About one percent of the population became murderous savages, killing and eating all around them. The other 99% lay down and died. Rest became sloth and that was fatal. The hero commented that his sin was wrath.

But the pagan who wrote this missed one point: wrath may be counted among the deadly sins by the clerics, but a sin it is not. There is a time for anger. There is a time for righteous justice.

And when SJWs try to regulate the church, that time is now. We cannot afford to move into the slumber that the elite want us to enter.

It is time to reform ourselves, cast out the impious, stop trying to be liked, and let our feral show. It is time for wrath aid let that anger push back at the SJW. IT is time to mock them, to confront them, to not be silent: to not let them rule, It is time to take the leadership of the west back, and let the kirk again guide the civil magistrate.

Or it is time to let this civilisation fall, and leave it tor rot.

Reformation day linkage and statistics.

During Kirk today Barry reminded us that today is All Saint’s Day or Reformation Sunday. Regardless of which side of the Tiber you are on, it is a day to recall the generations of faithful witness that have gone before us. This was emphasized when we had a dedication service for a family, with the grandparents, parents, older siblings and parents standing in front of the congregation.

We were reminded that there are no second generation Christians. We prayed that in time the child blessed would walk through the waters of baptism having chosen to accept faith [1].

Last month we have had #gamergate, a move in the lectionary into revelations, and locally one son through his examinations, and this blogger doing his duty to his guild and university

Some blog stats. Google has 9K views in the last 30 days, and last month this was the 25th most seen blog in the NZ rankings. I expect neither to remain as high.

Screenshot - 021114 - 12:10:13

OK. Around the traps, some good reading:

Dalrock: reminds us that being a single mother is again stigmatized, and why. Let’s say that the haters got all hatey over there, particularly after Cail C. produced advice straight out of the Pauline playbook.

Yes, there are some mothers without husbands through no fault of their own: women who were abandoned by bad men (though in that case they bear some responsibility for choosing that man), women who were raped, and of course widows. It’d be nice to treat them differently from the much more common frivorcee, but it’s hard enough to do that on a personal level, when you know the circumstances. It’s impossible to do it on a societal level, or on the level of government policies.

So in practice, you either shame single motherhood, or you….don’t. That’s why churches now praise all single mothers, and even ridiculously hold the Mother of God up as their representative. The exception soon becomes the rule.

On a personal level, if you know a single mother who was genuinely dealt a bad hand, by all means treat her kindly and help her out — while encouraging her to provide a father for her kids (their own father or a new one if he’s dead).

Now, the fact is that most of the women who are single in the church of my age are divorced. I’m divorced. TL;DR we either encourage women to reconcile with their husbands (the Catholic model) or we make a judgement as to if the divorce is licit (by criteria) and call the erring spouse dead to the church and encourage the innocent party to remarry (the protestant model). If you are going to have the Catholic model, you better have a lot of nunneries — for many women will choose not to reconcile: some of these should never had married in the first place. (You will need a few less monasteries, unless the feminists gut the church, at which point only the gnarly and obnoxious crunchy end of the reformed church will remain in the secular environment. The monastery will again, as it was at the end of the Roman empire, be far more attractive than Babylon, and many will flee the sisterhood to mountains, in the hope they can rebuild the church, as before, from scholarly mancaves).

Cail blogged further on this, and the entire thing is worth reading. An extract.

Those specific exceptions aside, I think there are some things he might be able to do to nudge the operation in a better direction. First, I’d be after the priest/pastor, asking him whether he’s talking to these women about finding new husbands or reconciling with the ones they really still have. Are they temporarily alone and only needing this help for a while until there’s a man in the house again, or is the situation open-ended until she feels lonely? What’s he doing to rectify their feral status? Does he have a policy on single mothers beyond making sure they’re comfortable? If a marriage gets rocky in that church in the future, will the focus be on keeping it together, or will it be on helping the woman escape and survive alone?

Also, are there any elderly or frivorced men in the church who could use some of this help? Not every man has the skills and ability to clean his own gutters and change his own oil, after all. Extending the charity to some men would help shake the idea that it’s all about “vagina = deserving.” For that matter, there might be some young families who could use the help too. Make it about helping people in need, not about helping “single moms.”

There are a lot of single moms out there. Most of them brought it on themselves and their children. They shouldn’t be rewarded for it, and married women shouldn’t be given the impression that they can blow up their marriages and be protected from the consequences. But we do want to encourage repentance and reform, and we don’t want to punish her children for her sins.

What can we do?

Well, we should help those who need it. Some of us don’t: we can pay for help (and I do). Some are victims, and need to be helped up. But we should encourage all to return to normal life as fast as possible. For children, that means two parents: in previous generations the church encouraged widowers to marry widows so that both families would have the economic and emotional stability they needed.

And those who want to be “strong and independent” can move to the bush. Outside society, where the Hobbsean rules of brevity and brutality apply. The rest of us have to live for one another.


1. I have to be careful here. When my children were small, we had them dedicated, not baptized: we were worshipping with the Bretheren then and the Baptist influence was huge. I now consider this an error: the covenant of baptism is for all ages, including infants. And we do practice infant baptism, for those parents who will take that covenantal relationship.

The party of SJWs gets pwnd

This is from NZ’s Hansard, and is a public document of question time yesterday. The Greens are the party of SJW in NZ, and they hate the government.

For the non locals, Russel is the co head of the Green Party, and is advocating, as he did in the election, that the Right is practising Dirty Politics. John is the Prime Minister: Mr Eade was a member of his staff Mr Hager alleges gave information to Cameron Slater (Whaleoil) for him to use in his blog.


Dr Russel Norman : When did he or his chief of staff become aware that Jason Ede, while employed on the Prime Minister’s staff, in his office, had accessed the Labour Party’s private database without permission from the Labour Party?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY : My chief of staff became aware of the fact that Mr Ede had gone into the part of the Labour website that it had failed to properly secure, that its members apologised to their supporters for this, and that the database was publicly available some time after that event occurred.

Dr Russel Norman : Is the Prime Minister now saying that it is acceptable behaviour for ministerial staff to go into private databases—which they have no right to go into; they have not gained permission to go into them—take the data from those databases, and share it with attack bloggers like Slater? Is that now acceptable, ethical behaviour for ministerial staff?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY : What I am saying is that that part of the website was publicly available for people to go into. What I am also saying to the House is that, no, I do not agree with Nicky Hager being part of an action to steal emails. I do not agree with people coming to the National Party cocktail party and secretly taping our people. No, I do not agree with people secretly taping other activities undertaken by us. I think the member, actually, should pick up a mirror and have a bit of a look.

Take note.

John Key proceeded to say that:

  1. The Emails that Dr Norman was using were stolen,
  2. That the left had infiltrated private meetings to secretly tape conversations (which is not legal, to my knowledge, in NZ: I do know that when one tapes any interviews you need permission to do so).
  3. That the left are using illegal means to access information: his staffer looked at an open document.

In short, he confronted Russell and told him to take the beam out of his eye. An example for us all: when confronted by the offended, who go all threatening, call their tactics, call them out, and do not step back. The hurt of the SJW is huge.

Diddums. Harden up. And clean your own act up… because the Left as as much if not more dirt than the right. Dr Michael Bassett was in the Labour Government of Helen Clarke, a current saint to the left, and he notes poltics is always in the gutter.

Reading the New Zealand Herald and watching Parliament this week, one could be forgiven for thinking that the 2014 election hadn’t yet taken place. Left-leaning editorial writers and opposition parliamentarians have been busy re-hashing stories that grabbed them during the election campaign as though the voters hadn’t yet passed judgment. It’s worth reminding these people; an election occurred on 20 September, and they lost. The people have spoken. Voters told them that they had weighed up Nicky Hager’s “Dirty Politics” amongst other things and decided his book was either irrelevant to the current state of things, or was a pile of crap. “Dirty Politics” is a corpse, and there’s little sense now trying to resurrect it.

Why would these journalists and lefties, too many of whom are one and the same, want to revive Hager? A few, I guess, want something to keep bashing National with. They are angry at the election outcome. I keep being surprised at how many people believed until the numbers went up that a left coalition was still on the cards. Others possibly believe in St Nicky, and admire his chutzpah in using stolen emails for pecuniary gain. That, they seem to think, is “investigative journalism” at its finest.

There will be others again, many of them young or naïve in the extreme, who actually believe Hager’s story. They have so little understanding of political processes in New Zealand or anywhere else that they think there was something new and especially sordid about Jason Ede acting as a conduit to bloggers, passing information, and discussing tactics designed to put National in a good light. Some won’t know about the methods used by the Labour government while Helen Clark was in office 1999-2008, when press releases and exaggerated criticism of opponents were filtered to “The Standard”, Labour’s electronic broadsheet. Nor will they know about the priming done by cabinet minister Ruth Dyson each morning of her email tree with sleaze that the government wanted to be widely disseminated. The Prime Minister knew all about it. I found out about it: some of Dyson’s stuff was inadvertently sent to me! Some journalists won’t know that throughout her career Helen Clark had a list of journalists she’d ring to exchange gossip. Sometimes she would only hint, other times she’d tell the person on the other end of the phone about what she planned to do to some on her own side who had incurred her wrath. Occasionally she’d plant an idea that the journalist would be encouraged to follow up, hopefully with devastating consequences. A few people in today’s press gallery were involved and are currently keeping their heads down. If John Key rang Cameron Slater in any capacity, what’s the difference? The Herald’s editor might like to tell us?

All of this is called politics. Politics throughout time has been conducted in this manner. The telephone rather than emails used to be the chosen conduit. Earlier still, politicians and editors dined together, or went to country house parties at places like Cliveden to exchange gossip. I used the telephone myself to get my messages out to people.

If you swim in the sewer, you get dirty. Do not go around complaining about your opposition talking to people when you are stealing their information. For the worm can turn: and in politics, inevitably, it will.

The woman and the dragon

The woman and the dragon (not the blog, the passage)

The lectionary readings take us into Revelations, which is one of those parts of the Bible I avoid. I dislike allegory, and find the prophets, with their symbolism difficult. I prefer things to be straightforward: one may not like the teaching, but one can understand it.

So why am I blogging on this? Well it goes back to a post a couple of days ago. Satan is real: there is truly evil in this world.

And fighting evil is our duty. As the nations know their time is short, and become more fixed and adamant that their errors are correct when defeat and destruction are right in front of them, so it is here. Christ rose: that is the defeat of all that is evil, and evil rages while it can.

For it is not the last enemy that will be defeated.

Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back, but he was defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death. Therefore, rejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them! But woe to you, O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows that his time is short!”

And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle so that she might fly from the serpent into the wilderness, to the place where she is to be nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. The serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, to sweep her away with a flood. But the earth came to the help of the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth. Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.

(Revelation 12:7-17 ESV)

The last enemy to be defeated is death.

But in the meantime, note that the opposition will rage. There has been a war against those who are of faith, from the time of Enoch, before the flood, until now.

For the interpretation of this passage is fairly plain. The offspring of the woman are those who hold to the testimony of Jesus: the woman is the Church (or the Christbearer[1], either work). And the war in the heavens mean that evil is contained: but it is contained where we are.

One should therefore pray for Christ to come. But I hesitate: for in this time of evil and when we are opposed souls are being lost. Let us pray that our witness will bring people to contrition, and from contrition to salvation.

I’m speculating, but I think the reason why God delays the endgame is because he is being merciful, and does not want us to damn ourselves: the spirit of this age, however, belongs to the Dragon, to that which is evil, and damn well wants to make sure we are lost.

1. If one of the Orthodox theologians can explain how this fits with the concept of theodokos I would appreciate it. I think it is not Mary, but instead the Church. But this is revelations: one is speculating.

2. Sunshine Mary (and no, the photo did not come from there) is back reblogging other people, so she is back on the blogroll.


Against the progressive Lawyer.

This is one of those mornings that the lectionary kind of acts as its own commentary, and as one considers the text, we need to ask who has understanding? Who are the Pharisees of this age? And who are the lawyers? And a rebuke against the prosperity gospel, for many who appear rich are standing on an unsteady pile of other people’s money, or got their seed cash by nefarious means.

Be not afraid when a man becomes rich, when the glory of his house increases. For when he dies he will carry nothing away; his glory will not go down after him. For though, while he lives, he counts himself blessed —and though you get praise when you do well for yourself— his soul will go to the generation of his fathers, who will never again see light.

Man in his pomp yet without understanding is like the beasts that perish.

(Psalm 49:16-20 ESV)

True wealth is not measured in the kilograms of gold or silver you have, or the number of your cattle, or the size of your toy chest. It is not measured by the number of letters after your name. It is instead a culture of righteousness, of connections. CKG_2218_NEF_embedded

Consider that the Pharisee is akin to the Puritan or Dominican — he wants people to live rightly. There is a truth within that: Jesus himself said that the Pharisees sat on the seat of Moses. They had their theology fairly together. And the lawyers made case-law, and case-law was binding the people in precedent, while the Pharisees made regulations (for the people’s’ “own good”) that equally enslaved.

While Jesus was speaking, a Pharisee asked him to dine with him, so he went in and reclined at table. The Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash before dinner. And the Lord said to him, “Now you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. You fools! Did not he who made the outside make the inside also? But give as alms those things that are within, and behold, everything is clean for you.

“But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it.”

One of the lawyers answered him, “Teacher, in saying these things you insult us also.” And he said, “Woe to you lawyers also! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers. Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. So you are witnesses and you consent to the deeds of your fathers, for they killed them, and you build their tombs. Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute,’ so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation. Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering.”

(Luke 11:37-52 ESV)

How does this now work in this time? Well, our public religion is no longer Christian: I wish that it was. Instead it is a post modern syncretic blend of atheism and paganism. The modern activists, like the lawyers,, take away the key of knowledge. They do not want us to understand. They do not want us to love, to grieve, to feel shame, to repent, to fail (again) and (again) turn for salvation. They do not want to acknowledge a law: instead they want us to keep regulation upon regulation.

We may not tithe our herbs, but we are vegan and gluten-free.

We may not give to the poor, but we boycott and protest.

We may say there is no law, but we damn those who do not fit into the neat categories of our progressive plantation. For all must obey, all must be slaves.

I am speculating now, but I wonder if the Pharisees and Lawyers of Jesus time will damn us. If the cities Jesus said were under judgment in Galilee will say that they are more justified.

For this generation takes the words of Christ, and has decided that they are not to be spoken, not to be discussed, not to be proclaimed. They have proclaimed that all must be comfortable: we cannot confront, and instead we must remain under bondage in this life, with perdition to follow.

And this is within the church. For we have stopped preaching the law, we have stopped confronting, in the false hope that if we are therapeutic and understanding this will lead to salvation. This is not the case. Firstly, within therapy one organizes people to confront their own errors of thinking. Secondly, the law is needed for salvation: we need to understand, painfully and repeatedly, that we need the Spirit of God to do good, for if we listen to our own desires we will descend into a slothful decadence.

Which is very evident in this generation. If we love God, we will obey his commands. And in this time, that will make us stand out, and standing out, we will attract hatred.

So be it. There are more important things than the approval of those who want to enslave us.

Are the SJWs the Jacobins of this time.

I agree with Lenin. I am an intellectual and a property owner, which makes me middle class, in French Bourgeois, and as such I am hated by all good revolutionaries. And I see the Jacobin terror as an example of the tyranny of the mob: of arbitrary, mass murder. Lenin did not: he saw rivers of blood as part of a revolution. To quote Pravda, from 1917: it is worthwhile noting that you see the beginning of political correctness and Social Justice Revolutionary work here: for the correct historian is the revolutionary, that proletarian who has never got grease on his hands, and only has calluses on his soul.

Bourgeois historians see Jacobinism as a fall (“to stoop”). Proletarian historians see Jacobinism as one of the highest peaks in the emancipation struggle of an oppressed class. The Jacobins gave France the best models of a democratic revolution and of resistance to a coalition of monarchs against a republic. The Jacobins were not destined to win complete victory, chiefly because eighteenth-century France was surrounded on the continent by much too backward countries, and because France herself lacked the material basis for socialism, there being no banks, no capitalist syndicates, no machine industry and no railways.

“Jacobinism” in Europe or on the boundary line between Europe and Asia in the twentieth century would be the rule of the revolutionary class, of the proletariat, which, supported by the peasant poor and taking advantage of the existing material basis for advancing to socialism, could not only provide all the great, ineradicable, unforgettable things provided by the Jacobins in the eighteenth century, but bring about a lasting world-wide victory for the working people.

It is natural for the bourgeoisie to hate Jacobinism. It is natural for the petty bourgeoisie to dread it. The class-conscious workers and working people generally put their trust in the transfer of power to the revolutionary, oppressed class for that is the essence of Jacobinism, the only way out of the present crisis, and the only remedy for economic dislocation and the war.

Yeah, and the bastards made many saints and martyrs in their bloody attempt to make revolution continue, to the point of burn-out and failure.

Now the trouble is that Leninist logic remains one of the tools of the radical: if you cannot make a person agree with you, they must be silenced: they must be disempowered, they must not have the franchise.

Instead one must continue down the same path of revolution: it may no longer come out of the barrel of a gun, but instead is embedded within the state. The sufragettes now run league tables of feminist progress.

Now the tactics of the left are the same: to obtain power and then freeze out those who are seen as enemies. This is now being seen, not with mere words or threats, but with doxxing — publicising where people live — and making false calls to emergency services, often with the hope that the police will turn up, armed, and arrest the person (or he will be killed by the cop acting, unwittingly, as an agent of class justice, starting a terror. The parallels with the Jacobins are there, but the second aim of getting the general public to mistrust the state is also thought to be useful, as it may set the grounds for further revolution.

however. the cultural Marxists forget that the state is them, and the people who are being mistrusted are them.

The other error Lenin made which the SJW continue is that lenin lied. COntinually. As a revolutionary act. He relied on the Red Army — run by Trotsky, who his acolyte Stalin killed — to enforce this truth. That may work if you control all means of public discourse, but it does not work if there is a single place where people can speak honestly.

For then people will remember, share, and get angry.

NK Jemisin told precisely the same sort of lie, although she lied about me being a “a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole” rather than being “a self admitted white supremacist”. Again, I have never described myself as any of those things. Of course, if we know one thing about the pinkshirts, it is that they have a problematic relationship with the truth.

In any event, what Sparklepunter is trying to do is to “fix-and-freeze” the opposition, in order to DISQUALIFY me, and through me, #GamerGate. But not only is his attempt to do so inept, but the very fact that he made it at all demonstrates how the gamerhating pinkshirts are overmatched. It’s an intrinsically 2GW way of thinking, to make contact, then call in for fire support. But even if he did manage to somehow completely disqualify me – a dubious proposition in light of more than 10 years of failed attempts that have only seen my site numbers grow – it wouldn’t matter any more than a USAF drone strike killing yet another “al-Qaeda Number Two”.

In this regard, #GamerGate and the response to it has been a fascinating illustration of 2GW vs 4GW. And it is an illuminating lesson concerning the truth of William S. Lind’s statement, “almost always, the state is losing.” In this case, applied 4GW marks the end of the media’s ability to control the narrative.

Lenin thought the state could define truth. He was wrong. Truth is not a dialectic. Truth is what is on the ground. And no amount of intersectionality, post modern snark, and SJW temper tantrums can change that. Far better to name the problems we have, test solutions for them, and move on together. The irony that the state is falling away from our discourse as we move from a period of mass media and from mass production to a maker and hacker culture is lost on these people, stuck in the mindset of a Victorian revolutionary. we are moving to a time where there will be a series of commonwealth type groups, shared alliances, and smaller states. The imperial model (shared by the EU, the Soviets, Chinese, Indians and in the USA) carries too big a cost.

Far better we live quietly and care for our neighbours. Let the Jacobins return to the pages of history: let us not repeat their bloody errors. For in the end, the Jacobins who survived being killed by each other were destroyed by the society they tried to expunge.