The Embarrassments of Ideology – Rigid ideologies like DEI, climate dogma, and anti-Trump obsession keep collapsing under their own contradictions, leaving their loudest champions looking increasingly absurd. Also Michelle Obama, the country’s biggest “victim” and outside of Eric Holder, one of the biggest racists.
Recognizing that reality could begin a real conversation and serve as the foundation of real and much more meaningful reform, that is, needless to say, very sorely needed.
We are failing the students and they are getting nothing more than a piece of paper for their money, certainly not an education.
Masculinity, in its healthiest form, is a stabilizing force for truth, clarity, responsibility, and protection. It built the West, defended it, and preserved its freedoms. But today, the characteristics that once stabilized society are being recast as threats to it.
It is the liberal women who lead this, because they can’t get their way without demonizing those who are in their path to power. They don’t deserve the power that masculinity earned. They don’t deserve much past the blue hair and nose rings.
Childish behavior. The kicker is she did it with Keith Olberman, one of the biggest loser celebtards. Perhaps only DeNiro, Kimmel or Rosie O’Donnell are worse with TDS.
Indiana Fever phenom Caitlin Clark is clearly the face of the WNBA, there’s no doubt about that. But you know how a lot of people are today, they’ll just hate and lie like it’s nothing. But Clark’s teammate and unofficial bodyguard Sophie Cunningham, she isn’t playing that, taking to her “Show Me Something” podcast to clap back at haters who say Clark isn’t the face of the league.
It was announced Wednesday that Cunningham inked a contract with Colin’ Cowherd’s “The Volume” podcast company to launch her own, which was followed by her first episode later on in the day. And she got things off to an absolute bang!
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) June 19, 2025
But not to be outdone, was one of the magpies of the View. Whoopi Goldberg, multi-millionaire who lives around a ton of successful black people. She thinks blacks have it worse than the Iranians who are looking up for a 30,000 lb bomb to rein down on them. They live in poverty and the women are property, not partners or pick your word
Defense attorneys for Sean “Diddy” Combs are reportedly arguing that federal prosecutors “singled out” the disgraced music mogul because he is black, and claim authorities have demonstrated “bad faith” and “racial animus” in handling the case.
Combs’ attorneys made these assertions in a new court filing seeking to dismiss the music mogul’s prostitution charge, according to a report by ABC News.
In their court filing, defense attorneys claimed the charges against Combs are racially motivated, arguing that “no white person has ever been the target of a remotely similar prosecution” under the Mann Act.
“Mr. Combs has been singled out because he is a powerful black man, and he is being prosecuted for conduct that regularly goes unpunished,” defense attorneys Alexandra Shapiro and Marc Agnifilo wrote.
“Count Three should be dismissed because this is a clear case of selective prosecution,” the attorneys added.
The defense attorneys went on to cite former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D), who had “engaged in similar conduct but were never charged under the Act.”
The filing was likely referring to Spitzer having resigned as governor in 2008, amid a prostitution scandal that destroyed his reputation.
The music mogul’s defense team also reportedly argued that the “Can’t Nobody Hold Me Down” singer had used a popular and well-known escort service to bring people into his sexual activities, which the attorneys suggested is common practice among people of Combs’ status.
“Many couples, including wealthy high-profile couples, involve third parties in their sexual relationships, sometimes for implicit or explicit remuneration,” the filing stated.
“No federal prosecutor, in this district or any other, has targeted the company, its CEO, or its escorts. Nor has any prosecutor previously targeted any customer who purchased escort services from Cowboys 4 Angels,” the attorneys added.
As Breitbart News reported, Combs has been in jail since September 16 following a federal indictment accusing him of more than a decade of abusing, threatening, and coercing women and others, racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and obstruction of justice, among other crimes.
Apart from the federal indictment, the Buzbee Law Firm and the AVA Law Group announced in October that they would be filing at least 120 separate lawsuits on behalf of alleged victims accusing Combs, his associates, and other entities of additional crimes.
Weeks later, batches of lawsuits were filed against Combs — and in the subsequent months, additional suits continued to roll out.
Of all the things I loathe about the Democrat party, its celebration of victimhood takes the cake. As is true of all political parties infected with virulent Marxism, it does not seek to help those truly in need. It does the opposite. It seeks out people who might never have seen themselves as victims and convinces them otherwise. It is a party whose growth in membership is directly proportional to Democrats’ capacity to convert Americans into victims.
Once a person understands Democrats’ pathological need to harvest new victims, it becomes obvious that they are not in the business of solving problems. Fixing anything in society only reduces the number of future Democrats. By celebrating victimhood, Democrats are committed to making things worse today than they were yesterday and even worse tomorrow than they are today. Their growth model depends upon perpetual misery.
Americans saw this self-destructive phenomenon play out during Obama’s presidency. Before the 2008 election, race relations between black and white Americans had steadily improved since the ’60s. Racism was widely rejected as a repugnant practice of the past. In fact, discrimination based upon the color of a person’s skin had become so offensive that courts were dismantling affirmative action programs that explicitly prioritized race over merit. A lot of Republican voters, unhappy with their party’s nomination of Senator John McCain, crossed lines and voted for Barack Obama’s nebulous promise of “hope and change” with the expectation that a post-racial America would take root.
President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder chose another path. They looked for ways to inflame racial tensions. They deconstructed a half-century of American racial progress by routinely injecting racial controversy into matters that had nothing to do with skin color. A black Harvard professor is detained in the Democrat stronghold of Cambridge, Massachusetts? That’s because all cops are unconsciously racist (even the black ones). A black male dies in a confrontation with a neighborhood watchman? That’s because black boys are hunted outside their own communities. Americans don’t want to pay more for worse health care? That’s because wealthy white Americans are too selfish to understand the appeal of socialized medicine.
Whenever policymakers fought Obama administration policy, charges of racism were not so subtly leveled against them. Instead of finally terminating affirmative action programs and other race-based discrimination, Obama and Holder reinvigorated an otherwise dying system of racial preferences and rebranded discrimination as a “virtue” under the umbrella of the Marxist tripe we know now as “diversity, inclusion, and equity.” When Obama was elected, race relations inside the United States had never been better. After eight years of an Obama-Holder strategy to make every policy dispute a racial dispute, race relations had severely deteriorated. There is perhaps no better example of how backward Democrats’ notion of “progress” truly is.
Setting aside the tangible social harm that Obama and Holder inflicted upon Americans, it is not difficult to understand why they chose division over unity. Had President Obama framed his election victory as vivid proof that Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream was reality — proof, in other words, that the content of an American’s character matters much more than the color of that American’s skin — a generational struggle against racial prejudice would have been largely resolved.
Had Obama declared victory over racism, he would have become a transformational figure in American history. But Democrats are not in the business of solving problems. Solving problems diminishes the supply of potential victims. And Democrats’ political success depends upon an ever-growing class of self-identifying victims.
When seen from this perspective, it is easy to understand how cancerous the Democrats’ governing philosophy is. Unity — or the cultivation of a common national identity and purpose — is antithetical to Democrats’ Marxist directive to rally the “oppressed” against their “oppressors.” By design, Democrats cultivate grievance and conflict. They isolate subsets of American society, convince those subsets that they are victims, and cynically exploit Americans’ shared desire to seek justice for the oppressed. For Democrats, whether some isolated group has actually been treated unfairly or unjustly is irrelevant. They stir social passions by maximizing perceived insults felt from real or imagined grievances. Then they feed on those passions to create explosive political movements capable of transforming imaginary victimhood into real political power.
Since the nineteenth century, Marxism has tried to cultivate grievance among a majority of blue-collar workers, but America’s working class has stubbornly resisted. However bad working conditions might have been in the United States since its inception, the country long maintained the highest rate of intergenerational social mobility in the world. The children of indentured servants became farmers. The children of farmers became skilled tradesmen. The children of skilled tradesmen became entrepreneurs. The children of entrepreneurs became lawyers, bankers, and even politicians.
In other words, for most of America’s history, the United States has been a “land of opportunity” unburdened by traditional strictures of social caste. Marxists found it difficult to create a class revolution when American workers were too busy making money and buying land. Coincidentally or not, intergenerational social mobility in the United States declined only after the rise of the Federal Reserve central banking system, the implementation of broadly enforced income taxes, growing encumbrances upon private property, and the rapid expansion of the twentieth-century regulatory state.
He’s got enough Fentanyl in him to kill a horse. Let’s not overlook the Meth. He was a criminal committing a crime, not a hero.
They just needed a victim to set up the money laundering by a Marxist group. Who else is Marxist? Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, and other mass murderers in history who stole governments, laundered money, and tried to take down Western Civilization starting with God, the family, free speech, and private property.
What did BLM do with the money? Bought houses, cars and bling. They started no groups or agencies that actually helped blacks get on their feet.
The decision by a top soccer team to withdraw LGBTQ rainbow jackets after a Muslim player protested has drawn criticism from a woke former player. Tim Howard, a New Jersey-born ex-goalkeeper for Manchester United, attacked his old team for deferring to current player Noussair Mazraoui, who said he would not wear an LGBTQ jacket, citing his Muslim faith. This prompted the team to abandon the jackets entirely so Maraoui would not be “isolated.”
“Any team, any organization should always do what is right. And if one player chooses not to take part, they are entitled to do that, Howard complains. However, he warns players opting out of doing “the right thing” will have “eyes on them.”
“Teams don’t have to protect players. Teams should focus on the greater good, not the beliefs of one individual,” he insists, declaring he “tend[s] to have a problem with any faith or any religion that doesn’t put human rights first.”
In common with many leftists, Howard goes on to suggest people have to agree with his social politics to be good Christians—despite Mazraoui being a Muslim—saying, “Jesus knelt beside beggars and sinners and thieves—people from all walks of life.”
While this is true, Jesus disapproved of sin—saving a woman accused of adultery from being stoned but instructing her to “sin no more,” for instance.
Multiple New Testament texts affirm that homosexuality is a sin, according to the Christian faith.
And thank the Lord for that. Nothing makes me happier than to get rid of this useless pile of crap that let certain groups of grifters exploit social mores and common sense laws to act the fool. Almost all of them did it for money or what I call get evenism. That of course is some perceived justice for their butt-hurt feelings of not getting their way, so they acted up. Almost all of what they based their activism on was or is wrong, factually, morally, or any other way.
It’s always about power and money
Let’s just get back to acting like human beings and not SJW or revenge-bots because of being ignorant.
The obvious is that they are run by liberals. It’s the same group of people who were protesting in the 60’s that never left school and took it down the drain.
Now DIE, CRT, victimhood, affirmative action and other nonsense policies have made the sheepskin and education you were supposed to get worth little to not much.
Gone are the days when the best tried their hardest to get in and then get ahead. Besides being woke, the Ivy’s discriminate against Asians and Whites, forcing them to have higher entry standards so that the schools can manipulate their quota’s.
It’s not fair to the students who don’t get in, nor to the students who did get in but can’t keep up. At this point, I could get into the failure of the education system feeding the colleges, but that’s not the point.
While Harvard is the poster boy for the issue, it by no means has a stranglehold on this problem. The California schools are just as woke and have been since hippies.
Since I’m taking university classes right now (Hillsdale College), I’d advise students and parents to evaluate carefully how they spend their money, not waste it.
More on Meritocracy:
We need to return to meritocracy and not diversity for the sake of appearances. It’s not fair to anyone and is only a position of bending over to the woke. Stop it.
Harvard President Claudine Gay claims that she is being forced to resign because of racism. As Greg Gutfeld aptly observed on Fox, Gay is not a victim of racism — she was appointed because she is the beneficiary of racist policy. Ms. Gay is a sterling example of how DEI is the antithesis of meritocracy.
While it may seem that Gay is on the chopping block because of plagiarism or her defense of calls for anti-Jewish genocide, the real reason for her downfall is her lack of qualifications for the job. She was appointed not because she was the best or the brightest, but because she fit the diversity profile that Harvard wanted. Gay is the perfect symbol for a university that has become a bastion of left-wing ideology and the enemy of meritocracy.
Does Harvard really want diversity? If you are a conservative professor, try to get hired at Harvard. People who demand diversity, such as the people who run Harvard, are against viewpoint diversity — also known as free speech. Diversity means “it is great to look different as long as you think the way I do.” Conservatives need not apply.
If Nobel prizes couldn’t get more ridiculous, Harvard and Gender Studies brings you this:
The Harvard professor Claudia Goldin has won the Nobel economics prize in recognition of her groundbreaking work examining wage inequality between men and women.
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said on Monday that Goldin’s research “provided the first comprehensive account of women’s earnings and labour market participation through the centuries” to reveal “the causes of change, as well as the main sources of the remaining gender gap”.
She becomes only the third woman to win the prize, after Elinor Ostrom in 2009 and Esther Duflo in 2019. The prestigious award is worth 11m Swedish kronor (£819,000).
Wage inequality is liberal speak for men are bad because they work hard to support their families. Females who don’t take time off to raise a family are earning the same. It is victimhood 101.
You can read the rest of the story here, but it is so stupid that I couldn’t be bothered to copy anymore. Both Harvard and the Nobel Committee continue to delve to new depths of meaninglessness. Both are a farce and have lost any creditability they once had. They gave Obama a Peace Prize before he’d done anything. He turned right around and bombed Libya, Afghanistan and drone killed a lot of people.
So Chuckles clown’s son just decided to trash America. His loser, the Spare, is a direct descendant of George III. George went crazy, likely from inbreeding. Those genes look like they re-surfaced.
Here’s a guy who had everything. He didn’t have to work other than to show up at events and not be a retard about it. He had access to millions, servants, castles for homes, private yachts and planes and all the perks to enjoy a life. He had access to all the women he wanted.
All of this and he threw it away for a domineering racist B actress who has such a case of entitlement that she got Harry to throw everything away. For what?
These types of marriages have low percentages against them for lasting. Then, he has to play the prodigal son and crawl back to the palace with the kingdom of England against him for being an Benedict Arnold and trashing his homeland. He’s consigned himself to to loserdom because of a mean girl who didn’t get her way. She played the race card to pretend that being a royal was somehow a victimhood issue.
Even Chris rock said about her whining that her white in-laws were worried about the color of their kid was in-law problems, not race problems. He said that black people were more interested in the color of the baby than others. Why is it that the half-black/white group seem to be the biggest whiners and play the race card the quickest (Obama, Lewis Hamilton, Kaepernick, and on and on….)
I have European in-laws. They love to trash America. I know it is because everyone hates number one or those who have done better. I’ve got news for them and Harry, you can’t make yourself better by bringing others down. I’d rather not talk to them than hear their whining. They just repeat what they read in the liberal press. They can’t even get their facts right.
Harry has managed to piss of both England and now America. It sucks to be inbred. It sucks even worse to be led around by an ungrateful little bitch with an ax to grind.
Grow a set Harry.
He, like my in-laws are wrong about America, and he played the fool for a girl.
The signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 brought a new era and good riddance to the tone-deaf aristocracy under King George III.
With the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788, America’s new experiment in self-rule was formally initiated. This document established the framework for the U.S. government, both its institutional structure and the rights of its citizens.
Today, the United Kingdom’s Prince Harry doesn’t understand this, apparently. We’ll get to that shortly.
The Framers of the Constitution were heavily influenced by Enlightenment ideals, including the power of human agency, importance of individual rights, necessity of religious freedom, fundamentality of a just society, and primacy of seeking the truth. They created a system of government that, first and foremost, would not interfere in the development of these virtues.
Thus, “American” values include individual liberty in the pursuit of happiness, respect for the equal rights of others, limited government shaped by the consent of the governed, a merit-based system of rewards, and the pursuit of truth as a societal virtue.
Today, each and every one of these values—along with the system that upholds them—is under vigorous attack by powerful subversives for whom they are anathema.
These subversives seem driven by one of two primary impulses.
The first is as old as humankind: the satisfaction of the base human passions. This includes, especially, the accumulation of wealth, exercise of power, and the indulgence of sensory pleasures (and, typically, all three simultaneously). This group includes the so-called globalist elite who view a strong U.S. driven by American values as an obstacle to its insatiable appetite for wealth, power, and consequence-free physical indulgence.
The second group is driven by dogma. These are the disciples of Karl Marx and fellow travelers who believe that once some group attains social primacy, that group will use its power to tweak all the institutions in a way that ensures the continuation of the group’s dominant position.
This includes legal institutions, government structures, culture, language, and even rational thinking. This “systemic” lock-in is so resistant to change, so the story goes, that the only solution for the oppressed is to completely destroy the institutions.
Marxist values include limited liberty in the pursuit of equity, unequal rights in the pursuit of diversity, unlimited government shaped by the consent of the oppressed, a system of rewards via identity-based notions of inclusion, and a rejection of the very notion of truth.
Note that, while these two types may be united in their animus toward the U.S., it is axiomatic that a single individual cannot truly be both. That is, one cannot be a wealth- and power-maximizing hedonist while, at the same time, fully embracing Marxist values. Or so it seems.
Yet, here we face the perplexing case of Prince Harry, a descendant of King George III himself. Following the prince’s attacks on the British Commonwealth, he has turned his attention to bulldozing American values.
This is perplexing because, on the one hand, Harry, Duke of Sussex, enjoys all the privileges of the globalist elite. Yet, on the other hand, he enthusiastically embraces the anti-American values of Marxist dogmatists.
It is difficult to imagine how Harry deals with the implied internal contradictions without blowing a gasket—much like the “supercomputer” in Season 2 Episode 24 of TV’s original “Star Trek,” which self-destructed when Kirk presented it with a logical dilemma. Perhaps a dogged fixation on the object of animus common to both groups, the U.S., is enough for Harry to keep it together.
Alternatively, the answer may lie in really believing that there is no such thing as objective truth. After all, Kirk’s AI antagonist was hard-wired to adhere to logic. The logical demands of Marxist dogma are much more elastic.
Exhibit 1 is the prince’s bestselling autobiography “Spare,” a canonical instance of the postmodern genre in which knowledge is “positional” and one’s “lived experience” takes precedence over logical, fact-based arguments.
“Spare” is riddled with historical inaccuracies and objectively untrue claims, such as identifying Harry as Henry VI’s great x7 grandson.
Harry also writes about his general disdain of history, recalling a visit to the Royal Burial Ground at Frogmore with his father, now King Charles III:
A lifelong student of history, [Pa] had loads of information to share, and part of me thought we might be there for hours, and there might be a test at the end. Mercifully, he stopped, and we carried on.
Harry had no interest in more formal lessons from his history teacher, identified as a Mr. Hughes-Games:
So it came as a roaring shock when I realized that Mr. Hughes-Games believed me to be the odd one. What could be odder, he said to me one day, than a British prince not knowing British history? … It wasn’t just that I didn’t know anything about my family’s history. I didn’t want to know anything.
Once the problem of being a self-hating elitist is solved, all the other anti-American values can follow.
For example, Harry’s flagrant disregard for the rule of law, as evidenced by his illegal drug use in passages such as this:
I had been doing cocaine around this time. At someone’s country house, during a shooting weekend, I’d been offered a line, and I’d done a few more since.
Or his disregard for the truth, as evidenced by his unwillingness to release his U.S. visa paperwork.
Or his indifference to human dignity, as evidenced by his macabre discussion of kill counts in Afghanistan, including:
I could always say precisely how many enemy combatants I’d killed. And I felt it vital never to shy away from that number. … So, my number: Twenty-five.
Or his inability to understand democracy, about which U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, tweeted: “Love being lectured on democracy by an actual prince.”
Still, one marvels at Harry’s ability to forge ahead as the embodiment of two mutually inconsistent dispositions.
Is it a maniacal focus on the common object of animus? Is it the dogmatic rejection of logic itself?
British author Alexander Larman suggests that the answer is simply that Prince Harry, at 38, “is even more stupid than we thought.”
The usual players are trying for the most exposure. It’s pride month of course, but no one is proud this year as everyone that goes woke loses billions of dollars, their reputation or their customers. Just ask butt light, Tar-gay, Starbucks, the LA Dodgers or Cracker Barrel.
Females are getting erased by trannies in sports and advertising, and people get arrested for desecrating pride flags…it’s a dog eat dog world to be the pinnacle of woke.
EXCEPT, the winner of the victim competition.
It turns out that the Muslims are at the top of the list. They hate the trannies, females, liberals and everyone who gave them the red carpet, but turned out to be useful idiots when the Muslims said Allahu Akbar and F/U to your lack of morals.
Trannies, feminists, liberals all have to take a back seat for this round of the contest. In the end, the left always eat their own as the different constituencies that make up their base can’t all be the favorite.
Also, Muslims kill people who don’t agree with them. The other victims just try to out whine the others.
In 2015, many liberal residents in Hamtramck, Michigan, celebrated as their city attracted international attention for becoming the first in the United States to elect a Muslim-majority city council.
They viewed the power shift and diversity as a symbolic but meaningful rebuke of the Islamophobic rhetoric that was a central theme of then Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign.
This week many of those same residents watched in dismay as a now fully Muslim and socially conservative city council passed legislation banning Pride flags from being flown on city property that had – like many others being flown around the country – been intended to celebrate the LGBTQ+ community.
Muslim residents packing city hall erupted in cheers after the council’s unanimous vote, and on Hamtramck’s social media pages, the taunting has been relentless: “Fagless City”, read one post, emphasized with emojis of a bicep flexing.
In a tense monologue before the vote, Councilmember Mohammed Hassan shouted his justification at LGBTQ+ supporters: “I’m working for the people, what the majority of the people like.”
While Hamtramck is still viewed as a bastion of multiculturalism, the difficulties of local governance and living among neighbors with different cultural values quickly set in following the 2015 election. Some leaders and residents are now bitter political enemies engaged in a series of often vicious battles over the city’s direction, and the Pride flag controversy represents a crescendo in tension.
“There’s a sense of betrayal,” said the former Hamtramck mayor Karen Majewski, who is Polish American. “We supported you when you were threatened, and now our rights are threatened, and you’re the one doing the threatening.”
For about a century, Polish and Ukrainian Catholics dominated politics in Hamtramck, a city of 28,000 surrounded by Detroit. By 2013, largely Muslim Bangladeshi and Yemeni immigrants supplanted the white eastern Europeans, though the city remains home to significant populations of those groups, as well as African Americans, whites and Bosnian and Albanian Americans. According to the 2020 census some 30% to 38% of Hamtramck’s residents are of Yemeni descent, and 24% are of Asian descent, largely Bangladeshi.
After several years of diversity on the council, some see irony in an all-male, Muslim elected government that does not reflect the city’s makeup.
The resolution, which also prohibits the display of flags with ethnic, racist and political views, comes at a time when LGBTQ+ rights are under assault worldwide, and other US cities have passed similar bans, with the vast majority driven by often white politically conservative Americans.
And this one.
Muslim parents have their children stomp on LGBTQIA+ pride flags at a protest against the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board in Canada. Video by @TheRealKeean. #Pridepic.twitter.com/psotRdcMPj
They manage to lower the bar every time I hear from that school. Here is the spin.
Former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is taking on a new role in education, less than a month after she left office.
Beginning this fall, Lightfoot will teach a course at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health tentatively titled “Health Policy and Leadership,” according to an announcement from the school.
Lightfoot, who left office on May 15 after losing re-election, will serve as the Richard L. and Ronay A. Menschel Senior Leadership Fellow at the school beginning at the end of August.
The Menschel program, according to the school, “offers a rare opportunity for those who have recently served in top-level positions in government, multilateral institutions, nonprofit organizations and journalism to spend time at the school mentoring and teaching students who aspire to similar roles. Lightfoot will hold regular office hours to meet with students, faculty and staff during her time on campus.”
“As mayor, she showed strong leadership in advocating for health, equity, and dignity for every resident of Chicago, from her declaration of structural racism as a public health crisis to her innovative initiative to bring mental health services to libraries and shelters. And of course, she led the city through the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Michelle A. Williams, dean of faculty at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, according to CBS News.
Here is the reality.
She got paid to call everything racist that didn’t go her way, and oversaw the deaths of many hundreds of black people. The city got worse under her tenure and a democrat failed to get elected in place where republicans are extinct.
What is she going to be able to bring to the discussion at Harvard? How to fail? How to mis-govern? How to claim victimhood?
What kills me is that people are paying so much for this kind of crap going on. It used to be valuable to get the sheepskin. It meant you actually learned something. Now? Read on. It pays to be a victim though. You get attention and entry.
It’s springtime, which means its college admissions season. And, for thousands of American families cursed to bear the wrong skin color, this means a rude encounter with the new American regime’s priorities.
On Feb. 23, Twitter anon Peachy Keenan relayed the story of a friend’s niece, and her faceplant during last year’s admissions cycle.
Go read the rest at the link, but if you aren’t in the hierarchy of victimhood, you ain’t gettin’ in. Most hurt – Asians and whites.
As affirmative action likely comes to an end later this SCOTUS term, higher ed will not give up its obsession with racial preferences, it’ll just eliminate the key type of evidence relied upon by the Asian students in the Harvard case: Standardized test scores.
Yep, the Asians take a hit because the school would be mostly that group, as they are the most qualified to go. But no, you are not the right victim.
But after his native Florida adopted legislation restricting LGBTQ rights, Nobles, who is gay, is planning to find a similar environment in a different political climate. The 19-year-old says he wouldn’t have to worry as much about discrimination or even physical assault in California.
“I came to reality and realized that I might actually have to involve those things into where I go, because you never know where I might be going,” Cody said, expressing concern about the possibility of having to attend school in “a place that has a record of hate crimes or a very old-fashioned point of view when it comes to gender.”
“For me personally, I just naturally assumed I was going to college down here,” he said. “But if things got worse, then I suppose I would have no choice.”
More victimhood. I haven’t read about physical assaults on that group recently, but don’t confuse the narrative with facts.
Hate hoaxes are good for more than garnering the sympathy of fools. They can also be used to shut down free speech, as with flyers blaspheming against sacred sexual deviants that were found on the campus of Massachusetts Institute of Technology:
The incident came in the wake of a two-month-old MIT faculty resolution that defends freedom of speech and expression — even speech some find “offensive or injurious.”
Even some college professors are getting fed up with the climate of fear that prevents the free exchange of ideas.
A report released in mid-January by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression … found that “Large portions of MIT faculty and students are afraid to express their views in various academic settings. Faculty and students are at least as afraid of each other as they are of the administration.”
Oh good. The Frankfurt School of Communism will now dumb down their student population even more.
I could go on and on, but I think you get the drift. I would like to hear of a University that promotes fairness based on meritocracy. Those would be the kids I’d hire.
Oh, and woke sucks again. It ruins everything it touches
I mean, the headline says it all really. First, take it because it is safe and effective. Then, it was a pandemic of the unvaxxed. Stop blaming those of us educated enough not to get jabbed for your problems. I knew they were lying from the beginning about the mRNA lie.
I didn’t make anyone get jabbed. My position is everyone has to decide for themselves. The facts are coming out now, along with the consequences, but they were there the whole time.
A study published in August in the Journal of BioMedicine actually claims in its abstract:
Fear mongering and misinformation being peddled by people with no scientific training to terrorise people into staying unvaccinated is not just causing people to remain susceptible to viral outbreaks, but could also be causing more side effects seen in the vaccination process. This brief review will offer data that may demonstrate that misinformation perpetuated by the anti-vaccination movement may be causing more deaths and side effects from any vaccine.
Yes, apparently all those people suddenly dropping dead of heart attacks and strokes are being stressed into it by us anti-vaxxers warning them about heart attacks and strokes.
Now, if you’re thinking that’s the most ridiculous thing you’ve ever heard…well, you’re wrong. He’s done the research:
A mini review of published literature has been conducted and found that mental stress clearly causes vasoconstriction and arterial constriction of the blood vessels. Therefore, if subjects are panicked, concerned, stressed or scared of the vaccination, their arteries will constrict and become smaller in and around the time of receiving the vaccine.
See, they’re not dying because the vaccine gave them a heart attack…they’re dying because they were afraid it might.
Everyone has heard if you tell a lie often enough, people will believe it.
I grow weary of the obfuscation that comes from Washington these days. When there is someone offended or spouting off, I look behind the scenes now to wonder what are they are going to do to us this time, or what are they hiding that they don’t want us to see?
Trying to get the actual news from the MSM ended a long time ago. How do they call themselves the news with what is being said on TV/Radio/Social Media/other. It is embarrassing that they can blatantly lie on camera or under oath. An event happens and it either is not covered, or is embarrassingly propaganda-ish.
I see things like the crisis that is building on the border, the debt, the emboldening of unfriendly countries to act out in aggression. I know that it is happening and why. Being told that it is climate, Covid or race related, or someone is being a victim or that everyone is not equal. This grows old. It is a cover for putting in an agenda that isn’t the main story.
They are covering for Covid, the Afghanistan debacle, the Border crisis and the 3.5 trillion dollar infrastruction/Socialism bill. There will be something they talk about to distract attention away from what they are doing.
Things are what they are. People know that dogs have 4 legs. I wonder when they have had enough if they just surrender and try to ignore things or say what is really happening. Of course to do that you will be a *-ist, fill in the blank for who you offended this time. Best guess says you are racist right now.
With all the minority identity groups out there vying for political power, social media control, fund raising and media presence; how do they stack up when they compete for hierarchy? At some point, when the power and money is being doled out, the queue is determined by some order. Who are these groups and how do they vie for power?
Author disclaimer: I have no dog in this hunt. I am a pattern watcher and try to learn from them. Human nature is hard to understand and explain due to it’s ever changing allies and favored group status depending on circumstances. I was watching the groups at the last election and wondered how you coalesce a group of disparate people with conflicting causes as a voter block.
Who are they?
While this isn’t a comprehensive list and I am not discriminating as I just Googled it, the last election revealed the groups of Black Lives Matter (BLM), LGBTQ (apologies if I omitted a letter), Islam (including ISIS), socialists, Antifa, environmentalists and feminists. They each compete for their cause and have usually selected an enemy with whom they are opposed to, but are now conflicting with each other in the power grab. They for the most part have an ideological position (some more than others) and garner the lion’s share of media attention.
What happens when the identity groups who desire to command the headlines conflict for attention and finances?
I also am merely an observer of trends. The consolidating power of the above listed groups is becoming a relevant discussion regardless of where you source your information. I’ve excluded the typical mainstream media as sources of information on both sides as their coverage is either too conservative or liberal. Their inherent bias excludes them from this conversation. I also excluded Hollywood and celebrities since they have a limited integration with the real world and often spout declarations for others which they do not adhere to. When you get to the heart of their talent, they pretend to be others and to take their opinions seriously is difficult at best.
Here are non-comprehensive, yet representative examples of identity group disagreements.
These are two significant voter populations when added together.
What surprised me that it was during the last election cycle and both groups made up a voting block for the same candidate. From said article:
BLM held Toronto Pride hostage, unless their demands, which included excluding police from the parade, were immediately met.
(Pride parades typically have contingents of LGBT cops and firefighters, and booths set up by the local LGBT officers’ group at the accompanying street festival.)
Judging by their success in forcing Toronto Pride to capitulate, I suspect we’ll see Black Lives Matter groups protesting more Pride parades in the future. And as a longtime national and international LGBT rights activist, I have a problem with that.
In my internet search for protests, it seems that BLM also protested and shut down Bernie Sanders and Hillary whom they supported. It goes without saying that they all protested Trump, but that is not the point of my curiosity as I assumed this was a given. This alone is surprising since both are a part of the coalition of voters candidates need to be elected per the aforementioned 2008/2012/2016 campaigns.
Then there is the recent Linda Sansour dust up revealing this dichotomy:
What the West needs to know is that in the Muslim world, jihad is considered more important than women, family happiness and life itself. If we are told, as Linda Sarsour said, that Islam stands for peace and justice, what we are not told is that “peace” in Islam will come only after the whole world has converted to Islam, and that “justice” means law under Sharia: whatever is inside Sharia is “justice;” whatever is not in Sharia is not “justice.”
Rebelling against Sharia is, sadly, for the Muslim woman, unthinkable. How can a healthy and normal feminist movement develop under an Islamic legal system that can flog, stone and behead women? That is why Sarsour’s jihadist kind of feminism is no heroic kind of feminism but the only feminism a Muslim woman can practice that will give her a degree of respect, acceptance, and even preferential treatment over other women. In Islam, that is the only kind of feminism allowed to develop.
It further goes on to say:
Sarsour apparently identifies as a feminist. Sarsour’s kind of feminism, however, embraces the most oppressive legal system, especially for women: Islamic religious law, Sharia. Sarsour’s feminism is supposedly for empowering women, but it twists logic in a way similar to how Muslim preachers do when they claim that beating one’s wife is a husband’s way of honoring her.
Here is the dichotomy:
Pro-Sharia feminism is a perverted kind of feminism that could not care less about the well-being of oppressed Muslim women. Sarsour’s logic concerning women does not differ much from that of Suad Saleh, an Egyptian female Islamic cleric, who recently justified on Egyptian TV the doctrine of intentional humiliation and rape of captured women in Islam. Saleh said, “One of the purposes of raping captured enemy women and young girls was to humiliate and disgrace them and that is permissible under Islamic law.” There was not even a peep in Egypt’s civil society about such a statement.
Based on this proof, we hereby request that the UNHRC’s CESCR begin an immediate investigation into this matter, and, if you concur that ANTIFA is culturally appropriating ISIS, that you use all means at your disposal to put a stop to it. You could start by visiting this ANTIFA website, which contains links to many of its affiliates throughout the world.
Sincerely,
ISIS High Command
PS: You might mention to the ANTIFA punks that in quite a few aspects, we are at war with the very same people, organizations and ideas, and, in fact, Western civilization itself. So, if you could arrange a sit-down over tea with us, and them, it might serve all of our interests, and provide a holistic, inclusive resolution to our complaint.
Islam appears to have support from the media and the left side of the political sphere as does the other listed minorities claiming status. One can see the obvious conflicts.
Socialists
It appeared that quite a bit of traction was gained by the Bernie Sanders crowd. It seemed to have enough momentum to be a winning group within its’ primary. Somehow, it was defeated by a political machine by what is being revealed as suspicious activities.
Ross Wolfe argues in The Charnel House, the identity politics that arose in the 1960s, ‘70s and ’80s developed in reaction to the identity politics of actually-existing socialism itself:
The various forms of identity politics associated with the “new social movements” coming out of the New Left during the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s (feminism, black nationalism, gay pride) were themselves a reaction, perhaps understandable, to the miserable failure of working-class identity politics associated with Stalinism coming out of the Old Left during the ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s (socialist and mainstream labor movements). Working-class identity politics — admittedly avant la lettre — was based on a crude, reductionist understanding of politics that urged socialists and union organizers to stay vigilant and keep on the lookout for “alien class elements.” Any and every form of ideological deviation was thought to be traceable to a bourgeois or petit-bourgeois upbringing. One’s political position was thought to flow automatically and mechanically from one’s social position, i.e. from one’s background as a member of a given class within capitalist society.
If there is limited money, how does the donor decide who gets it without upsetting other groups?
How do you herd this group of cats to vote together when trying to win an election? It worked twice, but failed recently and there is finger pointing as to why.
Council member Larry Gossett said he didn’t like the idea of power-washing the sidewalks because it brought back images of the use of hoses against civil-rights activists.
The criteria used to judge that is two-fold: the perceived grievance and victimhood status of the group (more = better), and the amount of room within it for ideological and political pluralism (more = worse).
So I guess you have out victim everyone else. By doing so, it disrupts the coalition of identities required by one of the political parties to win elections. I suppose it is a popularity contest to win the money and the status.
My final observation is that human nature is the constant here. People are selfish enough to grab power and money when possible. Most do not have the ability to argue from multiple positions on the same subject and are ideologues for their cause.
This alone is going to make a coalition such as the one that voted in the president in 2008 difficult. Being a female wasn’t enough of a victim status in the 2016 election.
These are things I ponder as we wind our way down the path of being a country.
Delusions of Adequacy 