Monday, June 17, 2019

Reality Bites, Leftist-Style

Friends, today I bring you some great articles.  The first one is strongly tempting me to write my own article about the issue.  The British, it seems, are banning advertisements than include "harmful gender stereotypes".  This is a gross affront to free speech, of course, but we can also assume that, as always, it will be PC leftists who will decide what's "harmful".  Remember, to them, the notion of racism against whites, or sexism against men, is a non sequitor.  They happily enable hate and discrimination, in fact, when the targets are people they don't like.  We also face the very real possibility that true stereotypes -- like that of the male scientist, or the female nurse -- will become impermissible in Britain, and soon in America too.  There are very real differences in how male and female brains work, mind you, that explain why some of these stereotypes are partly true...which is why the Left may eventually need to ban any acknowledgement of reality itself.  Don't put it past them.

The next article is a fascinating and very insightful look at the latest bout of irrationality among leftist environmentalists -- their crusade against plastic bags.

Finally, this is a great piece about how Democrats plan to win a "demographic victory" over Republicans and conservatives.  A massive surge in the numbers of Latino voters is indeed the preferred liberal recipe for a "permanent majority" in U.S. politics.  It isn't racist to point this out...and it isn't racist to question the political desirability of a demographic transformation either.


  1. I am starting to believe neither/or party live in reality, sad to say. In my 52 years of being on this Earth, I really don't think I have ever seen such visceral hate & political correctness.

    The first article about Great Britain banning stereotypes made me laugh, "Not all stereotypes will be banned, but those deemed "likely to cause harm or widespread {offense} will." And, who/whom pray tell gets to decided that? (rhetorical question, I know)

    Let's see next up is banning plastic bags. I think we ought to add straws to that one as well (being sarcastic). I do believe I read somewhere that NY state has implicated such a thing (banning plastic bags) and/or on will be taxed at the checkout counter by 2020. It all comes down to money, doesn't it? That really is the bottom line, sigh. Just tax us more.

    I read the article earlier this morning (read Townhall everyday). Demographic change is the last article--indeed it is not racist to point it out. However, it will be construed as such. This is the ultimate goal; to change the demographics and I might add possibly a New World Order? It should be interesting how the Supreme Court will answer the citizenship question that was set before them. Isn't there a quote by George Orwell--something about animals being equal, but some are more equal than others? Change is coming and I don't think it will be good but for anyone but the folks who are in charge (this goes back to the discussion from the other day about the elites).

    Another great and thought provoking topic, Dr. Waddy.{smiles}

  2. Linda, I agree -- the extent and virulence of intolerance these days is downright scary!

    You cut to the quick: banning "harmful" and "offensive" stereotypes begs the question of who will judge these things. Personally, I find the stereotype of the racist white person, or the sexist man, harmful and offensive...but I'm a white man, so no one cares what I think! Certainly no one in the elite media.

    I believe you're right about NYS banning plastic bags. Pity, because those things are useful, and it doesn't surprise me to learn that they are more environmentally friendly than the alternatives. Environmentalists seem to be about virtue signaling more than they are about helping the environment, per se.

    As I've said before, I don't believe that demographics doom either the Republican Party or conservatism, but rapid demographic change is a challenge that we have to face. The citizenship question ought to be a no-brainer for the Supreme Court. Frankly, I think it's irresponsible NOT to ask a citizenship question. The idea that the question is "intimidating" is a joke. Is it "intimidating" to ask people their race or their gender? If not, then citizenship should be a breeze!

  3. Dr. Waddy and Linda: Does the UK have a high court with the authority our Supreme Court has? I would guess that Parliament must have some power to review administrative law like these new stereotyping rules. I hate to see such things in Britain but its good that you helping to bring it to our attention.

    For the U.S., it all started during those bleary 3am marathon talkfests in 1965 freshman dorm rooms. "After all, what is the nature of reality? Why, all verities are artifice (pass the Ripple)now aren't they. So its ok to construct new ones out of. . . whatever, yes?" It has followed over the succeeding 50 years that everything is on the table. Free speech? All that it took just to pioneer the idea - "well what of it?Those in the know should say what goes and that's us and whatever anyone else thinks is IRRELEVANT."

  4. Dr. Waddy and Linda: Re: plastic bags: The appreciation of that well argued article requires the willingness to employ common sense and to eschew the irrational siren call of "feelings". It is so credibly argued that even some on the relatively near left might pay it heed. But for far leftists the light went out, the eyes glazed over and the vindictive outrage commenced to boil probably after the second or third sentence. Their guide and conscience, their "feelings", have been assaulted and that is the hue and cry for them to seek out the heretic and interloper as do white cells an infection.

    One can well imagine the histrionic and bilious reaction one such as Andrew Cuomo would have to this article being used to question his imminent ban on single use plastic bags in his principality. It would consist of malevolent expectoration at the very notion being considered and as such would be exemplary of the far left's attitude toward any questioning of that for which it has granted its imprimatur.

    This is a long since proven and fully to be expected stance for the American left. They have majisterially concluded that "global warming" on a scale unprecendented in the geographical history of the good old earth is happening JUST NOW and that its origin is surely, surely, human perfidy. That such a view affords them justification for the utopian reform they sought in the 20th century, to the tune of 100 million innocent dead,in the economic and political spheres with completely catastrophic consequences, is of little moment to them beyond the consideration of minor tactical adjustments.

  5. Dr. Waddy and Linda: The obvious difference between the Cuban Americans who know just what leftist RULE means and the mostly Mexican or Central American Hispanics(excepting older Nicaraguans; they know what Marxist government does) who do not, is obvious in the transformation of California. Heck, I suppose if I came from those hell holes I wouldn't bother myself about what I'd see as minor political differences. All I'd know is that EL Jefe isn't on my back. But the difference between those views puts paid to a charge of purely racial animus against those who seek order on the border.We know the Cubans know from bitter experience just what is at stake.

    Of course the left seeks votes from wherever it may get them. "Its OK, once we take over we'll restore order, oh yes!". Leftist revolutions always devour their own.

    Meantime: "let's give law breaking intruders all the privileges of citizenship - licenses, the right to vote ( but that's all, you don't think we'd give them any more do you)? ("Not much we wouldn't"). "And in enfranchising the convicted, including returning to them their "right" to vote, let's also excuse their pot related crimes; no matter that they broke the law as it stood at the time of their conviction. Why, but for that they are paragons and those of them who chance to vote will vote for us, yes"?

  6. Jack, I believe ultimately the House of Lords is still Britain's highest court...but in general free speech is held in less regard in the U.K., and remember even here we have broadcasting standards (indifferently enforced). I would suspect these regulations will survive any challenge.

    Yes, I'm pretty sure that the Left won't engage in a rational debate about the future of plastic bags. One image of a weepy polar bear with his snout caught in a Wegman's bag would surely be enough to convince them to ban the horrendous things -- and perhaps to elect our first polar bear president in 2024???

    It would be interesting to poll recently arrived "asylum-seekers" on their views of socialism... Sadly, it's a fairly popular ideology in Latin America, so I fear the Dems' assumptions that these new model Americans will be model Democrats is often true.

    1. Indeed, Dr. Waddy, the House of Lords is still Britain's highest court. I just read where a young man plead guilty of 3 d printing a gun, wow. So much for "free speech or free this or that" in Britain--there is a back story concerning that conviction. (

      Thanks for the thought of the weepy polar bear (grin).

      Jack, thanks, you crack me up and I always look forward to your comments, smiles.

  7. Dr. Waddy: And yet the forces of freedom have insolently risen time and again in the "Sceptered Isle". The UK may have its equivalent of the real America and maybe it will mobilize. Its vehicle could be the Brexit party, upon which it may rally to defy or defeat presumptuous politically correct pronunciamentos forced by a snobbish and spineless elite, beyond the Brexit issue which first recruited them. I know that, lacking a Bill of Rights as relatively precisely and somewhat recently defined as our own, they do have more restrictive sanctions on expression but their democratic spirit yet obtains - its been tested before.

    If I were an immigrant from Mexico and Central America I think I would be amazed by the prosperity of the U.S. and the freedom from the completely corrupt and arbitrary policia and militaria I knew at home. If approached by a Dem party activist I would say, "sure, I'll support you. I know from experience that if you freely recruit me you must be tolerated by the powers which be and I couldn't care less what you propose - yeah, I'll support you! You must be from El Jefe up here and he's sure alot better than El Jefe down there. Just assure that I and my family can stay in this paradise, yes?"

  8. Linda, you will like my latest article, I think, which tackles the vanishing rights of Britons. You're correct -- their right to keep and bear arms vanished long ago. Funnily enough they were safer in Sherlock Holmes' day, when you could slip your revolver in your pocket and go anywhere...

    Anonymous, you sound a lot like Jack -- which you may regard as a very high compliment indeed. :) I agree that the Brexit Party could be the start of a rebirth of real British democracy. That's why the Tories are determined to strangle it in its crib. As for "immigrants" from Latin America, no doubt they are aware that the Dems want them to stay in this country, and that carries some weight. On the other hand, the Dems also want their MS-13 neighbors to stay too, and that may give the more law-abiding in these communities some pause!

  9. Dr. Waddy: "Anonymous"was me and I have no idea why I was consigned to that role. Anyway, , I agree that the American left countenances any material or substantial philosophical or otherwise arguable support for its unsupportable views. We of Attica know better, so sorry you think you know more!

  10. Dr.Waddy: To clarify: I worked with many veterans of the Attica "riot". And in saying "so sorry you think you know more" I am not addressing those such as you,Dr. Waddy, who I know honor the views of those of us who have had direct contact with dangerous felons, day by day.

  11. Jack, I just assumed you were referring to your long stint as an inmate at Attica. Your reputation precedes you! Ha ha.