All Posts (29112)
Sort by
Source; Sent from an Internet friend.....
The Wall Street Journal reported on the insane spending of American public universities, with special emphasis on their proclivity for expensive building projects. What is this for, despite billions wasted on construction since 2000, classroom and faculty office space remained stubbornly insufficient and had not expanded for decades.
The nation’s public universities have been on an unfettered spending spree. They erected new skylines comprising snazzy academic buildings and dorms. They poured money into big-time sports programs and hired layers of administrators. Then they passed the bill along to students, inextricably tied to the nation’s $1.6 trillion federal student debt crisis. Colleges have paid for their sprees in part by raising tuition prices, leaving many students to take on more debt. That means student loans served as easy financing for university projects.
Construction is merely the most visible extravagance modern American universities have allowed themselves. They are also spending vastly more on personnel, especially administrators. Trustees demanded little accountability and often rubber-stamped what came before them. And schools inconsistently disclose what they spend, making it nearly impossible for the public to review how their tuition and tax dollars are being used.
Federally-backed student loans increased the amount that schools could charge, and they raised tuition to claim this money. For the most part, that amounted to expanding the ranks of those cadres responsible for managing funds, namely the administrators and their subordinate staff, as well as those things which administrators manage, such as buildings and the building of them.
The institutional apparatus of the university itself – including its central managers and its physical manifestation in the form of the campus – has absorbed the money. The existing administration and the better-connected faculty paid themselves more and deepened their expense accounts to some extent. The money could have been spent on core academic functions, such as hiring more professors, increasing faculty salaries to snag the best scholars, improving research funding and facilities or building more and better classrooms. Obviously, faculty have better-appointed offices and classrooms now than they did 30 years ago, but it is almost nothing in comparison to the money pissed away on worthless buildings and worthless managers. University administrations can’t so easily pilfer funds, so when they have an excess of them, they simply hire more managers like themselves.
As a general principle, in any political-economic system based on appropriation and distribution of goods, rather than on actually making, moving, or maintaining them, and therefore, where a substantial portion of the population is engaged in funneling resources up and down the system, that portion of the population will tend to organize itself into an elaborately ranked hierarchy of multiple tiers. As a corollary within those hierarchies, the line between retainers and subordinates will often become blurred, since obeisance to superiors is often a key part of the job description. Most of the important players are lords and vassals at the same time.
It is not a system that emerged to extract more money from taxpayers, customers, students or donors, but rather an institutional response to the abundance of these resources after the institution has collected them. The Principle of Managerial Self-Multiplication at work here. Increased funding is used 1st and foremost to expand those sectors of the bureaucracy which have initial control over these funds, and secondarily to give the expanded bureaucracy something to do. The faculty at almost all universities operate with substantial independence from the administration and they are arranged in self-governing departments. Hiring more faculty would not actually keep the expanded administration very occupied, and so a great part of the funds go into classic administrative projects, like construction instead. An important feature of all this runaway managerialism, is that almost none of it is about the core institutional mission itself. It is not about teaching students, or making tea or running an online encyclopedia. It is instead perversely recursive, addressed to the internal management of the institution itself.
As money enters a sufficiently elaborate institutional apparatus, there are endless opportunities for bureaucrats to direct the funds towards their own, internal purposes. Complexity plays a central role here; where no single person can comprehend how the institution as a whole functions, spending decisions become impossible to direct towards any rational purpose. Over time, the resources are commandeered in service of the separate, institutionally mediated goals of the managers, who strive above all to expand their own ranks.
Managerialism(***) is an ever-advancing process of decay masquerading as an administrative system, and it has become a defining pathology of Western civilization. Our lives are run by massive institutions in thrall to complex institutional forces beyond all human understanding, which every day become more convoluted, unpredictable and self-serving. This parasitic, tumorous growth now commands the resources of a great part of the economy, and it uses these resources to grow itself still further. Worst of all, nobody has any idea about how to stop it, let alone reverse its terrible progress.
***. “The bourgeoisie [middle class] became decadent not because it was sensible and restrained but because it leveled the edifices of the sacred and the traditional to subject all things to acquisitive appetite and worldly power…in the post-Freudian world they have come to believe they do not indulge their appetite nearly enough…reducing themselves to merely workers, consumers or parasites…”---Jacques Maritian
“If asked about my guiding principles, I would always refer to my skepticism and even to my distaste for the spirit of the age and its fellow travelers….a healthy society depends on individuals who refuse to compromise their integrity, even if that means standing in opposition to what appears to be the majority opinion…republics die when citizens abandon politics to the unprincipled.”---Joachim Fest
Western civilization lives mainly under a single political concept, call it managerial neo-liberalism (or progressivism), that combines an emphasis on the values of individual satisfaction and the process of democracy with the domination of social life by those deemed as political correct experts or functionaries. Together these forces have led to the suppression of speech and religion, cultural particularity, individual choice and sexual distinction. The advertised goal, of increased freedom, instead in effect is that human life becomes what those in power say it is, with their implicit claim of the right to remake the most basic arrangement(1)
This process is implemented through the effort to overturn traditional notions of decency and order in the interest of a calculating (by erroneous) claim of progress is never satisfied. This ideology, term it Progressivism, leads inevitably to utter irrationality and eventually political, as well as moral, chaos. This is so since in such a setting, wanting to do something, the Nietzscheian will to power, becomes the criteria for what makes it worth doing. And the good of a thing can only be the satisfaction of preferences simply as such.
For it is a tenet of organizational and human behavior that freedom and equality destroy all limitations when treated as ultimate standards. The conundrum then is that the more the culture through politics maximizes freedom, the more it must narrowly limit what is permissible, lest it interfere with the required equality of freedom of the other, or the centralized monopolistic functioning of the government.
The result is that the neo-liberal state cannot allow people to take seriously the things they have traditional taken most seriously(2). What then becomes the operant condition of this managerial neo-liberalism is the suppression of how people can understand their lives when at odds with the neo-liberal view. Those who do not accept this transformation, no matter how sound, developed, accurate and superior their stance, are to be excluded from public discussion—demonized and attacked as cranks who oppose freedom, equality, and reason.
Neo-liberal principles, in the long-run then, cannot compromise, cannot exist simultaneously with and must ultimately destroy every other non-liberal value and institution, especially the very ones that neo-liberal ideologies need to survive and continue. For the problem is that the idea of equal freedom (which must be defined in terms of the individual as the recipient) as the highest goal (the goal used as the tool for aggressively expanding monopolistic government domination of all human lives), cannot be made consistent with itself. If individual preference is supreme, whose preferences win when the difference cannot be reconciled? How is freedom consistent with government effectiveness, equality and the view that so-called experts ought to determine and guide what everyone does? For the enormous complex, bureaucratic, heavily regulated leviathan must require uniform centralization and strict limits on disturbing factors like enterprise, competition and choice of, by and for the individual.
Under such conditions formal and informal traditional institutions that democratic, free and open societies depended upon start to fall; family life disintegrates, religion turns to mush, neighborhoods become less neighborly, entertainment propagates ever cruder habits and attitudes, employment ties and loyalty weaken, cultures separate, understanding and tolerance dissolve. The politics of such a culture then becomes ever more irrational and manipulative, with social peace having to be purchased by bribing the discontented and the parasites who are told they are free, equal, happy, and in charge but, in reality, are the exact opposite.
“Neo-liberalism, which claims to create and own modest, sensitive tolerant and rational setting that lets everyone follow his own best understanding of how to live, turns out to impose a system that must give immense power to an irresponsible ruling class and tries to force the whole of life into patterns radically at odds with natural human tendencies.”—James Kalb
A universal law that even societies must adhere to is that error cannot sustain itself. What allows the managerial neo-liberal regime to sustain and continue functioning currently are habits of loyalty, sacrifice and understandings of natural goods and purposes. Managerial neo-liberalism continually undermines those, it cannot even justify them.
The process to reform all this does starts with truth. Humans are certainly capable of adhering to truths of reality more concrete than rather maligned abstractions such as social justice or global consciousness. If truth comes first, principles such as freedom, equality and human nature can be seen from an inclusive perspective that can give each due credit without tyrannizing over the others. When something else comes first, irrationality and oppression inevitably must follow.
“The obvious truth---that it is necessary to repress the permanent possibility in human nature of brutality and barbarism ultimately inevitable from relativism -- never finds its way into our schools or the press, or other mass communication.” --- Theodore Dalrymple
“It’s easy to blame the masses indoctrinated by our public school monopoly and liberal biased media but, blame should fall on those who knew better but failed out of self-interest to take a stand”---Robert Beum
“The first step towards sound reform is to adopt the principle not to concede basic points in order to get along but to insist on principle in every possible setting… Tradition must be illuminated and renewed by reason, reason must be tempered and steadied by tradition...We can hope to keep our own minds rich, insightful, and prudent. We can share such wisdom as we have with family, friends, and colleagues. Thereby keeping alive the heritage of Western civilization, despite its cultured despisers, for the time when it will, most assuredly, be wanted and needed again.”—R. V. Young
“Do not give in to evils: fight back ever more boldly.”---Virgil
“There are many dangers in life, and safety is one of them.”---Goethe
“Courage is stiffness before the seductive corruption of men.”---Joseph Conrad
(1) For example, the redefinition of marriage, or the creation out of pure fabricated penumbra a right of abortion in effect makes mankind its own God, political correctness its sacraments with human politics then the authoritative expression of his mind, spirit and will, making the substance of the separation of church and state a subtle but substantial joke.
(2) “Family, religion, particular culture, and local autonomy resist external supervision and control.”---R.V. Young
Source; Sent from an internet friend...
Climate models, the supposed science for claiming there's a climate crises, routinely run too hot, both hindcasting and forecasting far more warming than is actually measured by surface stations, weather balloons, and global satellites.
Research from the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama, published in Theoretical and Applied Climatology, concludes the Earth is not as sensitive to additions of CO2 as has been assumed, because of flawed assumptions about feedback loops, because almost no models properly conserve energy, because various other factors mitigating CO2 and impacting temperatures are ignored or inadequately modeled.
Despite 30 years of refinements and revisions, and multiple iterations and versions of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project models, climate simulations have been unable to significantly close the projected gap or settle on a unified number. As a result, 80% of climate models project larger, steeper global warming trends, since 1970, than actual observations record and trend data reveals.
2 scientists have worked for over a decade to develop a single-dimension climate model which incorporates time-dependent forcing-feedbacks of temperature departures from energy equilibrium to match measured ranges of global-average surface and sub-surface land and ocean temperature trends during 1970–2021. Their model produced a climate sensitivity estimate of 1.9℃ in response to a doubling of CO2. If warming is partly natural, it would further reduce climate sensitivity.
The science of climate change knows very little about the factors which impact climate sensitivity(1). Climate models have been specifically developed and designed to produce 1 output: average global temperature, a made-up metric. If there is no certainty for climate sensitivity across climate models, then there is certainly no reason to trust or enact public policies in response to any of the ancillary extreme weather outputs and projections that climate models forecast in response to different emission concentration pathways.
In the end, science hasn’t produced a solid measure of climate sensitivity and what drives it. Science hasn’t produced and modeled concentration pathways that reflect actual emissions. Scientists can’t agree on how various forcing factors, like solar activity, clouds, large-scale ocean currents, and aerosols actually impact temperatures, much less how to incorporate them into climate models. Scientists disagree about how various ecosystems and component parts of them might respond to warmer temperatures and what feedback loops they might produce, contributing to or detracting from general warming. And scientists don’t know what features and physical mechanisms might remain unaccounted for, rather than just difficult to model—forcing factors or features that impact temperatures and long-term weather patterns on local, regional, or global scales that remain unknown at present.
With all this in mind, climate science, rather than speaking with confidence of an impending climate crisis absent the cessation of fossil fuel use, adopt the humility of Socrates, who understood how little he actually knew, or, per Einstein, “The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don’t know.” The public would certainly be better served if rather than proclaiming the science is settled, admit there are a lot of unknowns and because the stakes are so high, advised policy makers to proceed with caution, adopting policies(2) that are flexible and allow adaptation in the face of an unknowable future.
1. A Statistics Norway report claims that climate research operates with too short time intervals to be able to determine whether the influence of CO2 on temperatures has a statistical correlation. Other factors such as cloud formation, solar activity, and ocean currents have a significant impact, the researchers claim. Key properties of global climate models and statistical analyses conducted by others on the ability of the global climate models to track historical temperatures show that standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures.
Statistics Norway points out huge gaps in the climate models, like their inability to account for forcing factors beyond CO2, like water vapor, solar activity, internal natural variation based on large-scale periodic shifts in oceanic and atmospheric currents and activities, and other stochastic, seemingly chaotic and unpredictable occurrences, which have historically affected temperatures across different time scales.
The statistical methods and analysis used by Statistics Norway strongly suggests these factors likely play a much more significant role in present temperatures and temperature trends than is assumed in climate models or understood by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Analysis shows that temperature variations over various time scales, especially longer time scales, are neither accurately represented by climate models nor explained by assuming CO2 and other trace anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions are the sole or even primary factor driving present temperatures.
Others have long pointed out that climate models run too hot and consistently fail to accurately reflect past temperatures when hindcast without significantly forcing (aka, lying) them to match actual measured temperatures. Statistics Norway’s statistical analysis is providing independent confirmation of what previous research has indicated about the limits of models. Its analysis goes further by pointing toward specific alternative factors which could be driving temperature changes—factors which honest researchers and scientific bodies say merit further research to determine if better accounting for them could provide an improved understanding of climate change.
This study provides a concise analysis of various factors which have historically impacted temperature variations. It also provides an original statistical time-series comparison of temperature trends—as understood from temperature reconstructions of historical temperatures based on proxy data and, more recently, of temperature data from various modern measurement technologies—and climate model reconstructions which assume carbon dioxide concentrations drive most temperature changes. SN states: "Recent work on statistical analyses on the ability of the GCMs to track historical temperature data … raise serious doubts about whether the GCMs are able to distinguish natural variations in temperatures from variations caused by man-made emissions of CO2...we find that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be strong enough to cause systematic changes in the temperature fluctuations during the last 200 years.
This study does not some come from organization that can be portrayed as fringe or funded by interested parties, or a narrow group of climate researchers who can be dismissed (wrongly, of course) as climate deniers, the IPCC and other scientific bodies will have to contend with and take account of this report’s findings going forward.
Andrew Montford recently produced a new paper for Net Zero Watch which demonstrates that it is almost an impossibility for new renewable power construction to decrease consumers’ electric power prices.
2. Net Zero Watch makes transparent the economic, political, and normative implications of climate change policies. It details a series of effects any new windfarm construction imposes on the grid and the types of costs it adds to people’s power bills, which make it virtually impossible that adding any new windfarm to the grid would ever reduce consumer prices.
In order to reduce bills, a new generator generally has to force an old one to leave the electricity market—otherwise there are 2 sets of costs. But with wind power, you can’t let anything leave the market, because there might be no wind.
Renewables need subsidies, they cause inefficiency, they require new grid balancing services that need to be paid for; the list of all the different effects is surprisingly long. There is only 1 way a windfarm will push your power bills, and that’s upwards.
6 distinct ways that adding a new wind farm to an electric grid will add new costs that are almost impossible to offset:
1.The inefficiency effect. The added cost related to the need to switch fuels and operate plants less efficiently, meaning higher costs per unit of energy produced, as new generation, especially subsidized intermittent generation is added to the grid.
2. The capacity market effect. The cost added to get now non-competitive generating units to continue operating rather than shut down to ensure sufficient power is available during emergencies or peak demand
3. The levy effect. The actual cost of the subsidies needed to get expensive wind farms built and approved--their capital, legal, and regulatory costs.
4. Constraints payments
5. Artificial inertia
6. The transmission effect
The wind may free, but harnessing wind power is far from it.
Additional info:
https://www.aclimateconversation.com/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Climate+Change+Weekly+%23486%3A+Models+Can+t+Agree+on+Climate+Sensitivity&utm_campaign=CCW+486
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-deploying-20000-climate-activists-making
https://www.newsmax.com/michaeldorstewitz/renewable-thunberg-green/2023/10/20/id/1139046/
https://www.dailywire.com/news/cost-of-driving-electric-vehicle-equal-to-paying-17-33-per-gallon-of-gasoline-study-finds
https://www.businessinsider.com/auto-executives-coming-clean-evs-arent-working-2023-10
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2023/10/24/mega-jolt_the_costs_and_logistics_of_plugging_in_evs_are_about_to_become_supercharged_987493.html#/find/nearest?country=US
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/true_costs_of_evs_revealed_by_bombshell_report_out_of_a_texas_think_tank.html
https://freebeacon.com/california/newsom-praises-chinese-ev-company-that-botched-taxpayer-funded-contracts-in-california/
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/ap_whiteknuckles_its_way_through_being_a_green_pusher.html
Source; Sent from a Friend Online.....
This enemy does not just want to annihilate Israel, which would already be reason enough for a war; this enemy wishes to overthrow the West and enslave us all under the Sharia, smothered by the crazed Islamic sects in which they militate, surrendering conscience, life, and will. They sacrifice their own children as human shields; how were they going to respect the babies of the enemy? And at the same time, what kind of war can you have with an enemy who respects not their own lives, nor that of their people, nor that of a baby?
Whose side are the United States and Europe on? Tributes to terrorists have been held upon their streets without the authorities breaking them up or arresting those people who support the most vicious terrorists. In the media we find individuals calling for equidistant debates, as if what has happened could allow for equidistant. And most importantly: Why the hell are we funding this?
The West is harboring the devil itself inside the ghettos of its big cities — especially in Europe, where the day before yesterday in French, German, English, and Danish cities there were, true to God, jihadist parties in Islamic neighborhoods to celebrate the barbaric attacks.
The time has come for a change of cycle — the time to save Western civilization. Full resources, full ability, full intelligence, full unity, and full determination are needed. It is time to condemn and pursue Islamic terrorism for real, in Israel, in the United States, in France, or wherever, until it is defunded and extinguished, to at least give our future generations a chance to live in peace and freedom.
Despite biden’s full-throated support for Israel, his regime kept Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who enjoyed a cozy relationship with former Trump, at arm’s length. The decision reflected left-wing ideological anti-antisemitism for Israel, the nature of biden’s base, which includes liberal urban Jewish voters as well as liberals in general sympathetic to the actions of jihadist palestinians.
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince and de facto ruler mohammed bin salman, while “underscoring the Kingdom’s unwavering stance in standing up for the Palestinian cause” does NOTHING to help them establish a productive, civilized, peaceful "nation." He certainly avoids mentioning his country's deep involvement in creating the palests condition and he's absolutely against providing them any position in his country, like biden is with all the illegals flooding into the US. Iran’s state news agency blamed “the crimes of the Zionist regime and the US’s green light the cause of the destructive insecurity.”
“Israel has become the great excuse for much of the arab world, the way for regieme to deflect from their own failures.”---Fareed Zakari
The Arab position is that the current state of affairs in the Middle East is because of Israel.
Yet:
* The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel.
* The mass murder in Sudan, where the Moslem regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel.
* The Algerian murders of hundreds of civilian in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel.
* Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endangered Saudi Arabia and butchered his own people because of Israel.
* Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of Israel.
* Syria's Assad did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in El Hamm Syria because of Israel.
* The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel.
* The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with Israel.
* ISIS had nothjng to do with Israel
Israel has a historical, sociological, and legal right to exist. See Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz’s the case for Israel, where he starts each chapter making the best case the Palestinians have on each issue and then refuting it, for more information. Israel is a pluralistic society. Israel allows religious freedom. Arabs make up approximately 20% of Israel’s population and have full civil rights. Arabs also make up 20% of Israel’s governments. Israel is the only Middle East nation and culture were gays at full equality and civil rights under government.
The root of the trouble is that the Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard and without Israel. The 22 member countries of the Arab league have a total population of 300 millions. They have a land area larger than either the US or all of Europe. These 22 countries, with all their oil and natural resources, have a combined GDP of half of the GDP of California. The gaps between rich and poor are beyond belief and too many of the rich made their money not by succeeding in business, but by being corrupt rulers. The social status of women is far below what it was in the Western World 150 years ago. Human rights are below any reasonable standard, while Libya was elected Chair of the UN Human Rights commission. The total number of scientific publications is less than that of 6 million Israelis. Birth rates in the region are very high. Yet almost everybody in the region blames this situation on the United States, on Israel, on Western Civilization, on Judaism and Christianity, on anyone and anything, except themselves.
So Islam is at war with Western civilization. Why? There are the 4 main reasons:
1). Suicide-murder. It is a potent psychological weapon whose direct impact is relatively minor. It creates headlines. It is spectacular. It is frightening. It is cruel. And it is a war! Most suicide-murders also have nothing to do with poverty and despair. The poorest region in the world, by far, is Africa. It never happens there. Desperation does not provide anyone with explosives, reconnaissance and transportation. A suicide-murder is simply a horrible, vicious weapon of cruel, inhuman, cynical, well-funded terrorists, with no regard to human life, including the life of their fellow countrymen, but with high value to affluent Arabs hungry for power. The only way to fight this new weapon is the offensive way. As with organized crime, it is crucial that the forces on the offensive be united and reach the top of the pyramid. You must go after the head of the "Family."
2). Words, or more precisely, lies. Words can be lethal. They kill people. An incredible number of people in the Arab world believe that 9-11 never happened, or was an American provocation or, even better, a Jewish plot. The Western press, directly or indirectly, gives credence to this insane belief by reporting them as if they could be true. It is a daily routine to hear the same leader making opposite statements in Arabic to his people and in English to the rest of the world. Incitement by Arab TV has become a powerful weapon of those who lie, distort and want to destroy everything. Watch Al Jazeera. You will not believe your own eyes. They call the actual murderer the "the military wing," the one who pays him, equips him and sends him is called "the political wing" and the head of the operation is called the "spiritual leader." Such Orwellian nomenclature is used every day not only by terror chiefs but also by Western media. These words provide an emotional infrastructure for atrocities. Joseph Goebels, who said that if you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it, would be proud.
3). Money. Huge amounts, which could have solved many social problems in this dysfunctional part of the world, are channeled into spheres supporting death and murder. The inner circles are primarily financed by terrorist states like Iran and Syria, until recently also by Iraq and Libya and earlier also by some of the Communist regimes. These states, as well as the Palestinian Authority, are the safe havens of the wholesale murder vendors. And the Islamic religious, educational and welfare organizations brainwash a new generation with hatred, lies and ignorance, blaming everybody outside the Moslem world for the miseries of the region.
4). Breaking laws. The civilized world believes in democracy, the rule of law, including international law, human rights, free speech and free press, among other liberties. They respect religious sites and symbols, not using ambulances and hospitals for acts of war, avoiding the mutilation of dead bodies and not using children as human shields or human bombs. Never in history, not even in the Nazi period, was there such total disregard of all of the above as we observe now. But now we have an entire new set. Do you raid a mosque, which serves as a terrorist ammunition storage? Do you return fire, if you are attacked from a hospital? Do you storm a church taken over by terrorists who took the priests hostages? Do you search every ambulance after a few suicide murderers use ambulances to reach their targets? Do you strip every woman because one pretended to be pregnant and carried a suicide bomb on her belly? Do you shoot back at someone trying to kill you, standing deliberately behind a group of children? Do you raid terrorist headquarters, hidden in a mental hospital? Do you shoot an arch-murderer who deliberately moves from one location to another, always surrounded by children? All of these happen daily in Iraq and in the Palestinian areas. What do you do? It cannot be avoided.
The problem is that the civilized world is still suffering an illusion about the rule of law in a totally lawless environment. In the same way that no country has a law against cannibals eating its prime minister, because such an act is unthinkable, international law does not address killers shooting from hospitals, mosques and ambulances, while protected by their Government or society. International law does not know how to handle someone who sends children to throw stones, stands behind them and shoots with immunity and cannot be arrested because he is sheltered by a Government, or how to deal with a leader of murderers who is royally and comfortably hosted by a country, which pretends to condemn his acts or claims to be too weak to arrest him. The amazing thing is that all of these crooks demand protection under international law, and define all those who attack them as "war criminals," with some Western media repeating the allegations.
The picture is not pretty. What can we do about it? In the short run, fight and win. But before you fight and win, by force or otherwise, you have to realize that you are in a war, and this may take Europe a few more years. In order to win, it is necessary to first eliminate the terrorist regimes, so that no government in the world will serve as a safe haven for these people. Look at the map of Western Asia. Terrorist states still remain remain.
It is also necessary to eliminate the financial resources of the terror conglomerate. The subtle differences between the Sunni of Al Qaeda and Hamas and the Shiite of Hezbollah, Sadr and other Iranian inspired enterprises, is put aside when it serves their business needs, all collaborate beautifully. It is crucial to stop Saudi support. To monitor all donations from the Western World and international relief organizations to Islamic organizations, and to react with forceful economic measures to any small sign of financial aid to terrorism.
In the long run -- educate the next generation and open it to the world. The inner circles can and must be destroyed by force. The outer circle cannot be eliminated by force. Here we need financial starvation of the organizing elite, more power to women, more education, counter propaganda, boycott whenever feasible and access to Western media, Internet and the international scene. Above all, we need an absolute unity and determination of the civilized world against all three circles of evil, specifically as it relates to Iran. Iran definitely has ambitions to rule the area. It has an ideology which claims supremacy over Western culture. It is ruthless. It has proven that it can execute elaborate terrorist acts without leaving too many traces. Iran sponsors terrorism, it is certainly behind much of the action, it is fully funding the Hezbollah, the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which has performed acts of terror in Europe, South America, Uzbekistan and Saudi Arabia. It leads a multinational terror consortium.
It is also important to act decisively against the campaign of lies and fabrications and to monitor those Western media who collaborate with it out of naivety, financial interests or ignorance. Above all, never surrender to terror. For if the Arab world is ever to adopt free elections, free press, free speech, a functioning judicial system, civil liberties, equality to women, free international travel, exposure to international media and ideas, laws against racial incitement and against defamation, and avoidance of lawless behavior regarding hospitals, places of worship and children, then the solution can never be for other democratic states to turn away and surrender to terrorism. If democracy is just free elections, then the most fanatic regime will be elected, the one whose incitement and fabrications are the most inflammatory. It will happen if the ground is not prepared very carefully. On the other hand, a certain transition democracy, as in Jordan, may be a better temporary solution, paving the way for the real thing, perhaps in the same way that an immediate sudden democracy did not work in Russia and would not have worked in China.
Further information:
Evil
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6338811074112
https://freebeacon.com/democrats/black-lives-matter-will-not-condemn-affiliates-that-glorified-hamas-attacks/
students, like nazis students of the 1930's
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6338863954112
Next?
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6338811083112
https://johnkassnews.com/standing-with-israel/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=standing-with-israel
https://thefederalist.com/2023/10/11/the-u-s-money-trail-with-iran-is-worse-than-you-think/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-u-s-money-trail-with-iran-is-worse-than-you-think&utm_term=2023-10-11
https://freebeacon.com/media/media-bias-israel-gaza-war/
https://nypost.com/2023/10/11/heres-what-the-legacy-media-is-calling-hamas-so-far/
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-hamas-oddly-silent-4-major-issues-hiding-plain-sight
https://www.newsmax.com/jeffcrouere/joe-biden-economy-border-security/2023/10/09/id/1137557/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/border-patrol-issues-safety-alert-threats-agents
Source; Sent from a friend on the internet...
There is no FBI report on the number of murders and other violent crimes committed by the illegal immigrants biden has invited across our southern border. Why is that? Maybe they're too busy spying on Catholics?
It is clear that the highest-profile anti-Semites in America are the left-wing democrat House Jew-hating Islamists, Reps. rashida tlaib and ilhan omar. They help to explain a surge in attacks against American Jews and the growing anti-Semitic sentiments on university campuses. Big Tech is giving those haters a pass, but prospective employers are not. Insurrection anyone?
According to a Harvard/Harris poll, only the police and military are more respected than Israel.
Then again, “palestinian authority” gets 17% support, and hamas has a 14% positive rating — which is to say, 14% of your neighbors have taken the side of a medieval religious cult that’s vicious enough to cut Jewish babies out of mothers before beheading them. If 14% of Americans supported ISIS or al Qaeda or the Nazi Party, would you be concerned?
The BObama types, who do the perfunctory throat-clearing about Israel’s right to exist before going into the usual reasons it should not. This faction is a growing concern in the left-wing/democratic Party.
According to the Harvard poll, 36% of “liberals” of all ages agreed that the hamas unprovoked brutal attack on civilians was justified. While antisemitism isn’t the exclusive domain of left, full-blown hamas apologists are now deeply embedded in left-wing institutions such as universities, major newspapers, cable news, progressive politics, think tanks, and the State Department. They have the kind of disproportionate reach and institutional respect that cosplaying Nazis standing in front of Disney playing with themselves can only dream about.
Of course, barbarians hate Israel! Surrounded by enemies, Jews transformed an unforgiving desert into a 1st-rate civilization. Did anyone imagine the Holocaust would temper the bitter jealousy? That’s like heterosexual white coeds claiming to be “binary” to earn woke street cred. You’re still pretty, and they still hate you.
The conflict is far larger than disaffected immigrants cheering mass murder by invading paragliders. This is an endemic problem. Israel can’t do much about the neighborhood, but why on Earth is the U.S. importing preposterous hate-driven foreigners from 3rd-rate cultures? The failure of their ancestors to create anything worthwhile, certainly compared to the stupendous accomplishments of the West, is too glaringly obvious. Inviting millions upon millions of them here, to gawk at, take advantage of and then denigrate our magnificent civilization, is a guarantee of perpetual strife and resentment. It could never work. It was always an insane idea.
Instead of trampling on the free speech rights of people who hate the West, how about avoiding the problem altogether by leaving them where they are? They’ll like it! Vastly fewer “white supremacists” to oppress them. And all the joys and benefits of what they have created--their homeland. They can hate us all they want. Just do it from their own countries
“Puerilism is the attitude of a community whose behavior is more immature that its intellectual and critical facilities would warrant.”---John Huizinga
Western societies have experienced a serious deterioration in their moral values. What they’ve experienced can be linked to what’s been defined as the deadening effect of the "mass man"; a loss of responsible freedom under the Leviathan state. This loss includes the collapse of recognizable standards of beauty in art; a weakening of educational standards; the marginalization of religion and the dominance of a materialistic culture based on jejune entertainment and instant gratification. What can explain this apparent breakdown in the values that had been central to Western civilization? What are the causes?
Perhaps this decline is the result of an absence of adequate metaphysical principles, objective values having an existence not dependent on one's feelings and subjective attitudes. Objective values that are propositions that embody universal truths. Propositions which are able to characterize a number of different particulars. In other words knowledge, which is a product of reason; and beliefs in universals and principles which are inseparable from the life of reason
Modern philosophy, summarized by the term neo-liberalism, has tended to reject the reality of universals and in their place instead assert that all abstract ideas are, in fact, ideas of particular things ultimately are derived from the senses. However, if all knowledge is reducible to personal experience or sensation, there can be no moral or aesthetic value other than what seems valuable to each person, based on what he feels at any given moment. In that self-centered and self-indulgent refusal to recognize the world as it really is the essential core of the notion of decadence. It is a barbarianism that rejects the cultivation of the intellect and seeks only power or physical comfort, du’ jour.
In a moral philosophy, termed here as classic-liberalism, the very notion of obligation, what "ought" to be done, implies the existence of objective moral values. In contrast, the relativism of neo-liberalism denies both the objectivity of moral law and the existence of objective limits on personal conduct. Neo-liberalism then, which holds that all knowledge results from sense experience and that there is no other order of reality, has a devastating practical effect, since the values inherent in the moral order provide people with principles to live by.
If, as neo-liberalism contends, a statement that X is good or bad is only a verbal ejaculation of emotion, morality is both irrational and wholly subjective. But that premise is erroneous. "This is good" is not the same as "I like this." "This is good" is both cognitive and normative; it gives us objective information about something other than ourselves. This is the critical point in moral discourse, where we are taken beyond sensory and subjective feeling into an objective realm of value. The universe contains an objective moral order, which subsists independently of our awareness of it.
The neo-liberal approach weakens us in many ways. Judgments of approval, in the absence of standards of value, become little more than reactions to present stimuli. There is no longer anything to bequeath to the future. The society becomes immersed in the present. Without historical memory, neither culture nor moral order is possible. The quest for immediacy puts society on the path in which we can no longer recognize evil and depravity. Standards of propriety are abandoned because they might inhibit self-expression. The most permanent feature then becomes a compound of humbug, pretense, and vulgarity, which we can identify as "Hollywood values", which means either we will value nothing at all, or we will value experience in itself. This is precisely the condition of decadence. It manifests itself in exclusive concentration on material things, insensitivity to beauty, ignorance of history, a utilitarian attitude to education and indifference to religion. All of these defects are present in modern Western civilization.
Classic-liberalism argues that no particular configuration of matter on any particular occasion can exhaust the universal values of order, coherence, resemblance, and regularity. These universal values, therefore, cannot be wholly supplied by ourselves-they are outside of us and transcendent. At the heart of all of these values is the virtue of self-discipline, which teaches us that we have certain responsibilities that have to be fulfilled, that good character comes through objective values. When the discipline of the permanent values is forgotten, citizens become spoiled, arrogant, and impious. This is the condition of decadence.
The prevailing neo-liberal values of today require neither discipline nor intellectual rigor. They rest upon sentiment and sensation, not reason. They reflect a society in which true excellence and distinction are regarded with suspicion. Where everyone seeks to shift blame to someone else, and government is expected to make people happy. That is the substance of spoiled children, who believe that luxury is an entitlement and seek scapegoats to conceal their own defects. These attitudes are symptomatic of a society in decline, and they are likely to lead sooner or later to a diminution of freedom.
Although Democracy may be a workable model for political relationships, it cannot be a principle of order in social and cultural life. However, the great danger in the disappearance of objective criteria is the impact it has on justice and civic virtue. It gives rise to resentment, repression and rebellion against every kind of distinction and authority. It feeds mass democracy's detrimental distrust of genuine ability and intellectual excellence.
Decadence is manifested politically in the love of power for its own sake-in particular, the aggrandizement and worship of the state. In contemporary political theory, planning, efficiency and an explosion of rights are seen as ends in themselves. There is a real danger that society will evolve toward Huxley's Brave New World, in which material comfort will be offered to everyone in exchange for the abolition of freedom and initiative. The more functions the State takes over from the individual, the fewer there are for the individual to be capable of exercising for himself. In a bureaucratic society fewer and fewer people listen. The result is the increasing institutionalization of ignorance. As Christopher Dawson observed: “The more ignorant men are, the more inevitable their fate.” Inevitable because such a system, as John Lukacs said: “… involves something that has nothing to do with an IQ or with functions of the brain: it involves not an inability to think about certain matters but an unwillingness to do so.”
Voters will therefore welcome increased dependence on government for health, education, welfare, and the other burdens of life, so long as they have access to the bread and circuses of everyday enjoyment. Increased dependence, in turn, leads to corruption. In periods of strain and crisis, this habitual neo-liberal way of life, lacking any foundation in principle, will crumble and collapse and ultimately to despotism. The Leviathan state then is part and parcel of the cultural decline. And the Leviathan state, in the form we find in Western civilizations today, requires supported, in its current stage, by Positivist legal reasoning.
Additional info:
https://freebeacon.com/culture/watch-anti-semitism-on-full-display-in-pro-palestinian-protests/
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/life_is_cheap_in_the_arab_world__and_the_west_wont_grasp_the_evil.html
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/rep_sheila_jackson_lee_is_an_abusive_boss_with_a_vile_potty_mouth.html
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/sheila-jackson-lee-leaked-audio-disparaging-staffer
https://thefederalist.com/2023/10/23/compare-how-university-elites-responded-to-george-floyds-death-and-the-innocent-israeli-massacre/
https://johnkassnews.com/from-einsatzgruppen-to-college-campuses/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=from-einsatzgruppen-to-college-campuses
https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/watch-joe-bidens-senior-moment-of-the-week-vol-65/
