Mailvox: the Instapundit link

I’ve gotten several inquiries about the recent removal of the link to Instapundit from the Day Trips. The reason is pretty straightforward and doesn’t indicate anything negative about either Glenn Reynolds or Dr. Helen; I harbor a high personal regard for both of them. The fact is that I simply don’t read Instapundit any more now that it is All Antisemitism All the Time. After I observed something like 27 links to either “anti-semitism” or “antisemitism” in a single day, almost all of them by Ed Driscoll and Stephen Green, I simply stopped reading the site.

I don’t happen to find anti-semitism to be interesting, important, or relevant to my life, and I don’t consider it to be one of the top 50 current issues about which conservatives or Republicans need concern themselves. So, I expect you can understand that I don’t regularly read sites that consider it to be the primary topic of discussion.


Mailvox: free trade and satanic sovereignty

They have no response to the free mobility of trade argument and they know it. It’s very amusing to see how they are thrashing about and repeating their rhetorical dogma as if it is even relevant. A reader emails concerning a pair of Gene Epstein’s appearances on Tom Woods’s show:

Vox Day if you think that people should not buy foreign goods, foreign made goods, then exercise your individual sovereignty and stop buying foreign made goods. There is no argument there. The only argument is, do you have a right to not tell me to buy foreign goods. Of course you do not. But you certainly have the right to tell others, join me, in not buying foreign made goods.That’s your choice. So in a way, there should be no argument, between the likes of us and Vox Day, so long as he recognizes that he has no right to pass a law forcing us to not buy foreign made goods. So that approach, the understanding of individual sovereignty, I think is at the core of any vision that you want to live.”
– October 31, 2018

To which I respond: the concept of individual sovereignty is quite literally satanic. And a nation absolutely has the right to pass a law forcing its nationals to not buy foreign-made goods or utilize foreign-provided services, because if it does not do so, it will cease to be a nation. And every nation has the right to a) exist, and, b) defend itself.

When you had me on to address the protectionism of VOX DAY awhile back, I made the same point. My point, in this case again, is that Dan(McCarthy) is free to start a company called Buy American. A website that would sell consumer goods that are domestically produced and that back ventures that only employ American workers. He might get Ross Perot himself, who is still alive, to back it, along with the Sharks( TV Show Shark Tank). I would not participate, mainly because I regard myself as a Citizen of the World and from that position, I observe that the poor people of the world do not reside in the U.S. but in countries like China and I regard it as an inspiring win-win, that stores like Walmart can lift the living standards of Americans by selling them cheap goods, made by cheap labor abroad , while also lifting that cheap labor out of grinding $2 a day poverty.

So as a libertarian, I would have no right to object to Dan’s privately backed, buy American, American nationalism, conservatism venture. But what Dan is actually proposing, again, as VOX DAY was, as so many of the protectionists do, always, is to use the iron fist of government to force me to buy American against my will. As a flexible libertarian, I will tell Dan that he bares a very heavy burden of proof, if he wants to deny my rights in this way.

So our disagreement is hardly a level playing field, but even if there were a level playing field between us, Dan’s arguments are not convincing. So again, having established that Tom, and again, it’s the sort of thing I want us all to say to socialists and protectionists, the free market offers you the opportunity to practice your values. Get enough people to agree with you and you’ll become a powerful force in the free market. We might disagree but we have no right to object to what you are doing, so long as you do not impose the iron fist of government on us. Now, of course, now we can get to the consequentialist side of the argument….

Notice that Gene Epstein is not an American. He has no interest in the American nation. He is, to the contrary, “a Citizen of the World”. So, he has absolutely no rights that Americans need to respect. Protectionism is not merely beneficial economically, it is not merely necessary for a nation to thrive, it is a necessary policy for any nation that wishes to survive.


Mailvox: on my permanent record

A banned commenter wishes to establish something for the record and I am inclined to allow it.

But let the record show that you can not answer a simple question.

I admit I never thought I’d see the day that VD would run away from a question.  You are the guy who makes fun of people for being afraid to debate you.  Yet, a simple question has me banned.

Noted.
Tank

To which I responded:

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you’re not lying, you’re just a moron. I have refused to answer thousands of questions over the years. Yours was off-topic and did not merit any answer.

You’re also socially clueless. You come into my place making demands and “calling me out”, then act surprised when you’re thrown out?

I ban everyone who acts the way you do.  But yes, we’ll make sure the record shows this on the blog.

Every. Single. Time.

If you ever wonder why I exhibit such open contempt for gamma males, imagine having to deal with this sort of thing EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. the entitled little freakshows don’t like an answer you’ve given them, or the way you’ve refused to answer them, or how you haven’t responded to their email, or that you haven’t responded to them within their expected time frame, or have committed any of the myriad of deeply personal offenses that triggers their ever-bubbling sense of outrage.


Mailvox: getting past gamma

After yesterday’s new Voxiversity release, I’m getting a number of emails like these:

I was recently introduced to you by Owen, and after learning more from your past post. I learnt that I am a recovering Gamma. Although you made it clear that you don’t like gammas, I am writing this email in the hopes that it is different for recovering ones.

While investigating it further, I have came upon this point of Gamma behavior:

Now that you think about it, in this last year or two you can recall several women cracking jokes at your expense, mocking you, degrading you to their friends, and otherwise holding you in low regard without any fear of consequences. 

It was during a group discussion and she mocked me at not being good with woman, coming to tears just thinking of it. (God, why am i so weak…) This one hits me the hardest as it has happened at a church group and I wasn’t able to defend myself, I didn’t know how to interact with women all my life.

They are good guys, and I tend to make it a habit of mine to make myself the butt of the joke to lighten the mood, but this humiliation cuts close to bone if I am being honest. I take humiliation from the guys regularly and are okay with it for the most part. Please talk more about how to move past that gamma stage if you would like.

First, let me make it clear that what I dislike so intensely about gammas is their common pattern of behavior. It’s nothing personal. I just dislike dishonesty, posturing, false poses of superiority, unasked-for criticism, passive-aggression, and cowardice, all of which happen to be behavioral attributes of the average gamma male. And I certainly approve of when a gamma finally gets sick of himself and decides he’s going to stop handicapping his potential by continuing to behave that way.

So, I very much recommend that every gamma who wants to improve himself read the following four posts at Alpha Game, the series titled Graduating Gamma:

  1. Step One: Physical
  2. Step Two: Spiritual
  3. Step Three: Emotional
  4. Step Four: Mental

Mailvox: failure theatre

A British insider interprets the latest Parliamentary procedures concerning Brexit:

HM Government has just cancelled the 13 and 14 March Commons votes for ‘no deal’ and ‘extension’.

The vote on the deal will proceed 12 March. HMG expects to lose by over 100 votes.

No one has said it, but I expect them to have a 3rd ‘meaningful vote’ on 26 March. We’re only having the 12 March vote because the Commons pushed Theresa May into it on 27 Feb.

Attempts to resolve the backstop on the Irish border are going nowhere. Barnier says that HM Attorney General Geoffrey Cox is seeking a legal solution to a political problem. We’ll continue with the ‘failure theatre’ right up to the end.

I think that they would prefer ‘no deal’ to an extension because an extension would require us to hold EU elections, where we would significantly boost the populist bloc.


Mailvox: a tale of two Marvels

WP explains the current Marvel situation:

There were two Marvel comics universes. (For simplicity I’ll say two though that is not accurate.)  One was the main one and one was the ULTIMATE universe which was meant to be a more gritty version which started in the year 2000.

The character Nick Fury was always a white man but in the ultimate version they made him a black man and they specifically made him look like Samuel L. Jackson. One could assume that they did this hoping to force the hand of higher-ups to cast Samuel L. Jackson for any future movies that were made.  That is what eventually happened.

Becoming the guy in charge of a 300 million dollar movie is hard.  Becoming the guy in charge of a comic book is much easier. Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury demonstrates that becoming the guy in charge of the comic can mean you decide how the 300 million dollar movie looks.

SJWs appear to have noticed this.  They made a WOKE replacement for all of the main Avengers.  Little black girl Iron Man, womyn Thor, Asian Hulk, black Captain America etc.

In recent years Marvel Comics seemed to want to force a female character to be their flagship character.  A big problem with this was that most of their female characters that people like were X-Men and Fox owned the movie rights to X-Men so those characters were neglected.  They decided to make Captain Marvel into their Wesley Crusher.

For reasons they also re-tooled Captain Marvel to be more repulsive and masculine, they did this repeatedly even though the comics were failures. With this in mind it’s notable that a Captain Marvel movie got made at all – no one cares about this character or could reasonably expect it to be very profitable.

Guys like Robert Downey Jr. eventually have to age out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  It would appear that the SJWs knew that and created the WOKE replacement comics to be the source material for the 2.0 Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Which may explain why Disney is looking to eject the comics altogether, since they know that Marvel Comics (SJW edition) is not only NOT going to plant more movie seeds, but is actively attempting to control the movie products. After all, if Disney wants SJW versions of the IP it owns, it is perfectly capable of producing them on its own. Soy Wars (nee’ Star Wars) is sufficient proof of that.


Mailvox: two links

John Hawkins is just a little behind on his reading

Respectfully, a phrase that has been in use for almost a hundred years and essentially means exactly the same thing as Christian values to the general public seems like a weird thing to choke on out of a 1500 word column especially since Jews aren’t a problem at all for America. No argument at all from me on how big of a factor immigration and immortality are for the country….

1. So, about that hundred years….

2. Jews aren’t a problem at all for America…. 

Judeo-Christian values are NOT and have never been “exactly the same thing as Christian values”. Or, for that matter, Jewish values. In fact, the term is considered to be offensive and anti-semitic by many Jews. From the Jewish Press: There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values:

Let’s be clear: Far from “sharing” one tradition, Orthodox Jews are prohibited from marrying Christians, setting foot inside a Christian church—and we can’t even drink from an open bottle of kosher wine that has been used by a Christian. We reject the Christian idea of salvation, we abhor Christian divine teachings on every subject, and we are repulsed and outraged by incessant attempts by Christian missionaries to bring us into their fold.

It is particularly disturbing when Klinghoffer makes statements which reveal his complete assumption of elements of New Testament Pauline ideology, for instance, the requirement that wives submit to their husband’s authority. There is no mandate on precisely how a woman should behave with her husband—Jews expect the happy couple to work it out for themselves. Also, while divorce may be a tragedy, and God cries, it is in no way banned—in Judaism, that is. The story in Christianity, and Klinghoffer’s “Judeo-Christian Biblical America,” is different.

Incidentally, we have more in common with Muslims than we do with Christians; Jewish law permits Jews to enter a mosque… but not a church….

Jews and Christians differ on every single fundamental principle—even on the meaning of core Scriptural texts. More crucially, Christians rely on the Old Testament for legal delineation; whereas Jews rely solely upon our rabbinic tradition. We never, ever turn to our Bible for legal guidance, only to our rabbinic literature. To suggest that our Sages had anything at all in common with the likes of Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Carter or Pat Robertson is a slap in the face of 2500 years of scholarship.

“Judeo-Christian” is as valid a concept as happy-joylessness, or tall dwarves. Klinghoffer’s yearnings for this repugnant “ideal” is a deviant phenomenon without a trace of commonality in traditional Jewish thought, ancient or modern.

A conservatism that quails from accepting the fundamental distinctions between Judaism and Christianity is inevitably doomed to be one that cannot accept the distinctions between male and female, good and evil, and American and Not-American.


Mailvox: dealing with SJWs

A reader writes concerning the outcome of her decision to take action with the family SJW:

I wrote to you a little while ago, detailing some of the pain and agony my SJW sibling had put our family thru in the last year, and you advised us to dump her, saying that it wasn’t worth it.  So we had dumped her locally recently, holding family events just with our adult children and grandchildren, and they’ve been delightful and relaxing.

But I was concerned about when my elderly parents return from [REDACTED] this spring and felt we’d have to go back to the SJW abuse for their sake. I’ve been thinking since your note, and had a talk with my dad this week, and we reviewed the history with sibling, including my family’s behavior (which my dad feels has been pretty exemplary), and he pretty cheerfully agreed that our family should do things separately from sibling at this point.

He’s at a loss, because he says SJW never listens to anything he tries to tell her, and hasn’t for years, but he also doesn’t believe that we should be treated so badly, including our adult children. I wish she could get a different perspective that values family over politics, but she has a history of bad decision making, and I am just really relieved that we can look forward to a summer that is positive and relaxing when my parents return, that we won’t be baited, ambushed, sabotaged or abused at my parents’ home, and that my parents see the situation and appreciate what we’ve been through with her. Anyway, thanks so much for your straightforward advice and encouragement.

I don’t take the idea of excising a family member, or an entire branch of the family, from one’s life lightly. But it is precisely because family is so important that it is vital to excise serial bad actors from the family without regret, because they have a reliably destructive effect on everyone in the family.

If a family member makes it clear that they have no interest in maintaining familial harmony, or simply refuses to behave in a civil manner, then one should not hesitate to leave them to their priorities and exclude them from family activities. They have already made their choice, one is simply honoring it and permitting them to experience its consequences.

The prodigal son would not have learned from his experience had his father not permitted him to reach rock bottom and repent. Enabling an abusive family member is not helping them, to the contrary, it is complicity in their abuse.

Please note that that notwithstanding this singular email exchange, I am not beginning a career as an advice columnist. Since I am not an advice columnist, I simply ignore the vast majority of emails sent to me seeking advice. I do macro, not micro, and to the extent that I ever offer micro advice, it tends to be considerably more brutal and succinct than you are likely to be seeking.


Mailvox: thoughts on the Brexit theatrics

Notes from a British Brexit observer:

Reviewing in retrospect, Tuesday seems to have been mostly theatre.

Fundamentally, it is a Leaver population, but a Remainer parliament, Remainer cabinet and Remainer prime minister. Ordinary Labour party members are Remainers. Ordinary Conservative party members are ‘no-deal’ leavers.

The Independent Group are nonentities who will immediately lose their seats at the next election. They are powerless and irrelevant, but get a hearing in the media because they have all the correct opinions. They have only one donor, a retired Jewish property developer.

The number of Conservative MPs on the payroll vote (have some sort of government job) who are threatening to resign for the purposes of preventing ‘no deal’ has notably dropped from 25 last week to 15 this week. Only 6 of them have their heads above the parapet. I could see a situation where it is actually only these 6 who are actually prepared to resign 27 Feb or 12 March. It is notable that nobody resigned at today’s Cabinet meeting. They all know that they are finished at the next election if they vote to prevent ‘no-deal’. They will probably be ‘de-selected’ by their local parties anyway – our version of ‘primaried’.

At Cabinet today, the PM promised that on 12 March, she will allow Commons votes on her deal, on delay, on ‘no deal’, and on another referendum – assuming that the Speaker agrees. Those calling for a referendum deliberately want to skew the question to guarantee the result they want – a full Remain. Conservatives that break ranks are likely to be countered by rust-belt Labour MPs breaking ranks in the other direction. No one wants to break ranks, because it will finish their careers, but they will if they have to. Caroline Flint is our version of Joe Manchin, and her group could vote for Cocaine Mitch. Caroline also has genuine principals – “that’s what my voters want, I disagree, but will do what they want.”

Remember that analysing by electoral district, 2/3 of the districts voted to Leave. If the current crop of MPs refuse to vote to leave then we’ll choose a new crop that will.

Cameron’s referendum gambit was taken because he could see that we were simply starting to vote for whoever was necessary to obtain Brexit, which was going to doom the Conservative Party. By having a referendum, he hoped to isolate the EU issue from the rest of party politics and prevent the replacement of the politicians. Well, we’re seeing that the politicians may have to be replaced and the referendum did not bring catharsis, only paralysis.

People forget that the Leave vote is so huge that if translated directly into the Westminster electoral system, it would result in more than 2/3 Leaver MPs. This is what Cameron was trying to prevent by holding the referendum.

We need a new bunch of politicians anyway because the current crop have revealed their universal uselessness. The whole point of Brexit is to make different policy choices. We’re going to need a better lot than the current crowd to make and implement those choices.

I am still optimistic that we can get ‘no deal’ reasonably soon, but if it takes longer, then so be it. Theresa May’s deal is worse than remaining. If we can’t escape cleanly, better to team up with Salvini and gum up the works.

Jeremy Corbyn has secured his position within the Labour Party for the moment by agreeing to support another referendum, but I think he has doomed the Labour Party at the next general election. The Conservatives were already making inroads into Rust-belt districts in 2017, taking mining and manufacturing areas that had voted Labour for the last 90 years, on the strength of Brexit.

Wednesday is going to be interesting because there may be an attempt to seize control of the legislative agenda from the government. But unless they are able to seize the agenda (doubtful) the real action has been postponed yet again to 12 March. Theresa May is basically hoping that people will blink. But no one has much incentive to blink.


Mailvox: got a question for Jordan Peterson?

An Australian reader informs us that you can submit questions for Jordan Peterson to answer during his upcoming appearance on QANDA, an Australian panel show where audience members can ask questions via a video upload.

Ask a Question

Do you have a question for the Q&A panel?

Q&A is our national conversation. We want questions from every corner of Australia.

Send us the text of your question on this web form or by using your ABC account.

Include your contact details and if we shortlist your question, we’ll get in touch to show you how to ask your question by Skype, video or web.

Have fun, if you are so inclined. In the meantime, the New Zealand media is deciding that Jordan Peterson is more tedious than a threat of any kind:

On Wednesday, the crowd can hardly contain their excitement. As we wait for Peterson, someone brings a couple of water bottles on the stage and applause breaks out. When Peterson enters, people stand up and roar with delight. He sits down, opens his laptop and starts talking.

Soon, tired self-help advice comes: “Look for beauty during dark times”; “Wake up at the same time every day”. Peterson says if you want to achieve anything in life, you need to make sacrifices. When he was a PHd student and trying to write a book, he used to party and drink a lot. He realised that in order to achieve his goals, he had to sacrifice his drinking. Wow, what triumph of the will. What a brave tale of conquest against all odds.

After about half an hour, he finally says something I don’t know. When we dream, our body is paralysed so we don’t act out our dreams and only our eyes are moving. Sometimes we don’t quite wake up and we can’t move and that’s when people hear voices and see aliens. Well, I have experienced this half-awake state without realising it was perfectly normal to be paralysed for a few seconds, and it was terrifying. I feel a bit like that now – the room is hot, the guy next to me is manspreading and I am in the middle of the row so I can’t move. I feel trapped in Peterson’s interminable stream of consciousness. My chaotic brain is lost and wishing for some male order. I keep yawning uncontrollably. The thought of getting an ice cream after the show keeps me awake.

I was expecting sensational insights, or at least controversial thoughts, but most of what we are getting is self-help gibberish. Maybe Peterson is not so such a threat to humankind after all.