Category: Government
June 7, 2008
 … and get yourself comfy, because this one’s gonna take some time of your day.
First things first: a quick tip o’ the lid to Kate over at SDA for putting something up on this first. It’s a series of posts by Mencius Moldbug over at Unqualified Reservations and it’s not exactly something that you’re likely to file under “light reads” — and you’re sure as hell not going to agree with all of it; I know I don’t — but, as usual, it’s usually the stuff that you have to plough through that gives you the most to think about.
The posts are written as something of an open letter to all those Progressives® out there who have been buggering things up for so long. And no, I haven’t had anywhere near the time to get through all of them yet. Here’s a few excerpts to wet yer whistles, though…
If you are an open-minded progressive, you are probably not a Catholic. (If you are, you probably don’t take the Pope too seriously.) Imagine writing an open letter to Catholics, suggesting ways for them to free their minds from the insidious grip of Rome. That sort of thing is quite out of style these days – and in any case, how would you start? But here at UR, we are never afraid of being out of style. And as for starting, we already have.
Let’s take a look at this independence thing. What exactly is a multilateral declaration of independence? Since it’s not this?
Well, on the sweet and good and true side, MDI seems to involve a change in the ethnicity of government officials. Foreign officials are replaced by native-born officials. Clearly, for example, it would be an outrage for true-born Americans to be governed by a dirty no-good Mex – oh, wait. We’re progressives. We’re not racists. Ethnicity means nothing to us.
“Too weird.” Indeed, weirdness is the mother of doubt. Is it not slightly weird that a twenty-year member of the Church of Hate Whitey could become not only the leading candidate for the Presidency, but the candidate who stands for racial harmony? Is it more weird, or less weird, than the fact that Robert Mugabe had no interest in T.S. Eliot?
The thing is: these things don’t seem weird to me. In the progressive story of the world, they are mysteries. They can be explained, but they need to be explained. In the reactionary story of the world, however, they are firmly in dog-bites-man territory.
The proposition is neither new nor mysterious. We’ll call it Dr. Johnson’s hypothesis – from this quip by the great Doctor. Of course this is not a hypothesis in the scientific sense of the word – we cannot prove it, nor will we try. It is just a phrase you can agree with, or not.
The great advantage of Dr. Johnson’s formulation is that it has a pleasant boolean quality. You can agree or disagree. It is pretty hard to be indifferent. Let’s take it for granted that, as a progressive, you disagree, and we’ll try to figure out what might change your mind.
So here is my claim about government: as a progressive, your theory of government – its history, its principles, even its present-day structure and operation – is nonsense.
Here are the basics: a government should be secure, effective, and responsible. None of this is rocket science. The only secret is that there is no secret.
Let’s define and analyze these qualities individually, assuming the others in each. When we explain how to make a government responsible, we’ll assume it is secure and effective. When we explain how to make it secure, we’ll assume it is effective and responsible. Etc.
In fact, dear progressive, you fear and loathe democracy. Moreover, you are right to do so. Representative democracy is a thoroughly despicable system of government. It is dangerous and impractical at best, criminal at worst. And you hate it like the poison it is.
But first, let’s nail down our terms. The great power center of 2008 is the Cathedral. The Cathedral has two parts: the accredited universities and the established press. The universities formulate public policy. The press guides public opinion. In other words, the universities make decisions, for which the press manufactures consent. It’s as simple as a punch in the mouth.
The Cathedral operates as the brain of a broader power structure, the Polygon or Apparat – the permanent civil service. The Apparat is the civil service proper (all nonmilitary officials whose positions are immune to partisan politics, also known as “democracy”), plus all those formally outside government whose goal is to influence or implement public policy – ie, NGOs. (There’s a reason NGOs have to remind themselves that they’re “non-governmental.”)
Like I said, it’s long as hell and some of it will likely piss you right off. But it’ll make you think…
May 10, 2008
 This is good. It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
It looks like, even in a place as Leftbotâ„¢-infested as Ontario, some things are still no-brainers. This one is such a no-brainer that 94% can’t find anything wrong with it (wondering what the hell is on the other 6%’s mind just creeps me out).
I have to admit that I’m a little disappointed that such a sensible bill wasn’t introduced by a conservative MPP. The truth is that the private member’s bill in question was put forth by a … ahem … Liberal. 😯 Aw, screw it. A good idea is a good idea, no matter where it comes from and the way things have been going in this province for a while now, I’ll take my good news where I can get it. Here’s to Liberal MPP Laurel Broten! God bless the lady.
In case you’re somehow wondering, John Q. Ontarien is right behind this bill (no surprise):
“Woe to any party that obstructs this,” Nanos said. “I don’t think it’s the issue of whether this should pass, but if somebody does have a problem with it, it should probably be incumbent on them to figure out how they can fix the problem so it can pass.”
May 5, 2008
 … it seems that there are still a few things left that politicians, if they’re smart, should refrain from buggering about with. One such thing seems to be the Lord’s Prayer.
Some of you might already know that, a while back, the Christianophobic McGuintyites got it into their pointy little heads that the time had come to scrap the reading of the Lord’s Prayer at the openings of the Ontario Legislature. So, in the midst of such brainy ejaculations as “It is time to move beyond the daily recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in the Ontario Legislature to a more inclusive approach that reflects 21st century Ontario,” McGuilty and his cohorts did what Fiberals do best: they blew a bunch of my money on some dumbass plan to study the issue to death before going ahead and trying to pull off whatever damned stunt they want to, anyway. One little problem this time: things don’t seem to be going according to plan…
Speaker Steve Peters, who is heading up a committee to examine replacing the Lord’s Prayer with another reading, says thousands are giving their opinion on the divisive debate through the legislature’s website.
The traffic was so great when the committee first set up the online form that it temporarily crashed the website, prompting hundreds of calls to Peters‘ office. [That would be at 416-325-7435 in TO or 519-631-0666 (insert irony here) in St. Thomas, if you’re interested in giving this dick a piece of your mind. -D]
It’s not as if this crap hasn’t been tried before. But hey, if McGuilty thinks he can get away with it, more power to him. Anything that will rub my fellow Ontarians’ noses, good and hard, into the steaming pile of stupidity that was re-electing this asshole, can’t be all bad. How else will they learn?
Reap what you sowed, boneheads…
April 28, 2008
 It must be Monday. Only Mondays do stuff like this, probably because they just know that I’m going to still be hungover from the weekend. 🙄
Everybody pulls a boneheaded maneuver every now and then, but when it comes to stupidity of the good old, bag-o’-hammers variety, nobody — as in nooooooooooooobody, a la Mel Lastman — can beat the trufflesnufflers in Canada’s unelected, unaccountable, Grit-puppet Upper Chamber. As if we didn’t have enough reason to want to get rid of this gaggle of dorks already, the denizens of the Chamber of Snoozing Second Thought® jammed their asshats on to their pointy little heads and twisted the screws just a little bit tighter. Peter Worthington tells us a bit about it: (more…)
April 25, 2008
 … then I don’t know what the hell will.
We all, whether we want to admit it or not, have serious misgivings about the intentions of increasing — and increasingly belligerent — Muslim populations in western nations. El Inglés, a contributor over at the Gates of Vienna, takes a good long look at things we’d rather not have to think about, let alone discuss, and drags some of the monsters lurking under the bed of the western psyche into the light of day while he’s at it. Being no fan of the Multicult Koolaidâ„¢, I’ve done this sort or writing myself before, but not quite to the extent that this fellow has.
You likely won’t agree with most of the essay (I don’t) and you sure as hell won’t like it. The problem is that it’s one hell of a compelling work, and disagreeing with it is a job and a half unto itself. The essay begins with a simple, and damned grim, assertion:
A few months ago, I wrote “The Danish Civil Warâ€, a fictional scenario which served to structure a consideration of various issues relating to the rise of Islam in Europe and the likely consequences thereof. The essay finished with the conclusion that Islam constituted an existential threat to the survival of European civilization, and that Islam’s influence on Europe therefore needed to be eliminated. It further concluded that, logically speaking, the various ways of achieving this goal could be broadly subdivided into three categories:
- inducing Muslims to leave of their own free will,
- mass deportations, and
- genocide.
(Hereinafter referred to as options one, two and three, respectively)
[…]
Having now had several months in which to further consider this issue, it seems to me that my conclusions in this regard can be considerably refined. For reasons that I hope to make clear in this essay, I no longer believe that it is possible to solve the problem that Islam has become by means of option one, and I have little confidence that even option two could constitute an effective tool in this regard. I therefore predict that Europe is being swept into a position where it will be forced to choose between relying overwhelmingly on option three and surrendering. (more…)
April 22, 2008
 The hat’s off once again to Edmonton’s favourite Elmer Fuddette, Hunter, for posting this ahead of me (along with a knowing wink to frmgrl, one of her regular commentators who clued her in to it in the first place).
Some folks have been asking why I haven’t sounded off about the Great Raid That Wasn’tâ„¢, which was supposedly carried out by the RCMP on the Conservative Party of Canada. The simple answer is, that I haven’t had the time lately.
But I’ve got a few minutes now, and here’s what I think. The most important thing that was removed by Elections Canada from the CPC offices (and yes, it was Elections Canada doing the searching and not the RCMP) was something that had nothing whatsoever to do with Tory financing practices, but was also one thing that they could never have gotten their hands on otherwise. Are you ready? Here it is… (more…)
« Previous Page — Next Page »
|
