Friday, September 18, 2020

Tories Gotta Tory

Shocking news everyone! It turns out that giving that scorpion a ride across the river worked out badly after all. 

Who could have predicted that a famously publicity hungry media luvvie would make like a low-rent Martin Luther as soon as the time was right? 

Oh, yeah, everyone - except the genius set at Conservative Central Office. These guys keep lecturing the supposed knuckle-draggers in the conservative base about the importance of electability, then they go out there and step on a rake. 

And that's not even the worst of it. The whole reason the public gave the Tories an eighty seat majority is disgust with this kind of thing. The Tories were voted in precisely because the public have had enough of Metro-liberals being parachuted into top jobs despite never being elected to a parish council. 

We wanted a change but instead we got Continuity Cameron!

Sunday, September 13, 2020

The Empire Has Always Been At War With Eastasia

Good news everyone! It's now legal to say that John Boyega's character in Disney Star Wars was a waste of space.

I wonder what's changed? 

Oh yeah: this

Stunning and brave, you guys! 

Needless to say, some of us pointed his character was worthless *at the time* - and do you know what we got called?

Free clue: it wasn't 'insightful movie critics'.

Lest we forget, Johnny Boy was happy to prop up the phony baloney 'black stormtrooper' nontroversy (it was really phony). He knew exactly why he was hired and he was happy to cash the cheques.

But that was then and this is now.

It takes a lot to make the Demon Mouse look like the good guys, but I think he's managed it! It's right there in his comments about writing black characters.


What does that even mean? Was Lando Calrissian a black character? How about Mace Windu? Or were they actually just good characters? Not letting this loser hijack these movies with his racial obsessions may have been the only smart thing Disney actually did.

Just like the old American line about the guy who was born on third base but claims he hit a triple, this guy was given a multi-million dollar participation trophy but now we're all supposed to pretend he was cruelly robed of his shot at an Oscar.

Tuesday, September 01, 2020

Guardian Writer Outraged By Sexual Non-Harassment

Even an experienced student of leftist pathology such as myself can occasionally be surprised by just how angry leftists get about people minding their own business.

Here's the latest candidate, Laura Bates, feminazi extraordinaire, enraged by the thought of men aggressively and with malice aforethought..... having no interactions with women at all. 

At this point I'm picturing John Cleese's Frenchman in 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail':  Now go away or I shall ignore you a second time.

Besides, I am reliably informed that a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle so, you know, swim along Princess!

At this point, you may be thinking 'hey, isn't she the kind of witch who complains about harassment any time a guy so much as looks in her general direction'? 

Yes, yes, she is. In fact, that very article includes a link to another writer whining about 'street harassment' (i.e. member of the lesser sex daring to speak to a princess without written permission in triplicate). Now here's a group of men who aren't harassing, talking to or even acknowledging women in any way... and that's bad too!

I guess what we have her is a lemon-sucking version of Goldilocks: she wants men that don't hit on women too much, or too little, but just the right amount. Either that or it's Schrodinger's Stud, a guy who simultaneously hits on and doesn't hit on women.

Which is actually close to the truth, of course. Schrodinger's Cat sits there patiently, existing in both states right up until his box is actually opened. That's what these hags want: men waiting until the exact moment they're required and then immediately performing whatever service is asked of them with no consideration whatsoever for their own needs or wants.

If you think sexism is a real thing, then that's a thing that's surely sexist.

That's what's really underlying all this. Hence we get paragraphs like this:

It started with rumours: women reporting that men in their offices had suddenly started declining meetings with them or were insisting on leaving the door open. A human resources consultant reported executives telling her that they would no longer get into an elevator alone with a woman. Suddenly, it began to snowball – story after story of men abruptly cancelling business lunches or avoiding women they had previously mentored.
And? Why exactly would men put themselves in harm's way? 

Hey, if talking to a woman in the street is a dreadful imposition, what is the demand that men should be all but forced to have lunch with women?

Just for the sake of this stupid argument, what's the quid pro quo here? Do women have any corresponding  responsibilities to men? At all?

In fact the evil cow can't even keep her story straight. Here's she is at one point complaining about the reaction to MeToo:
Critics claimed that the movement was a pitchfork mob: a “witch-hunt” designed to topple men from their jobs and lives, without so much as an attempt at due process.
Well, yeah! Notably she not only can't explain why that's not true, but only four paragraphs later she has this to say about a doctor worried about false accusations:
His apparent implication that such accusations are simply random, based on no wrongdoing whatsoever, went unchallenged in the piece.
So it's not a witch hunt, but even if you're innocent, you still must have done something to be accused in the first place, am I right girls? 

Reminder: we are in a world where you can get fired for making the Corporate Mean Girls 'uncomfortable'. 

Who - any man, let alone someone who's spent years building a medical career - would risk dealing with a bunch of evil lunatics like this? 

Monday, August 17, 2020

Did I Mention They Hate You?

Why, yes, yes I did. 

And just to ram the point home, here's Julie Burchill confirming that our watchdog media are even more incestuous, corrupt and insular than the political class. 

Apparently, it's super important to name and shame blue collar suspects even when they haven't, strictly speaking, done anything but naming the, actually convicted, pervert friends of La Cosa Media? Not so much. 

Reminder: even on LBC - which markets itself as the voice of the man on the Clapham Ominibus - you can still switch on when you wake up and make it through to lunchtime without hearing a single presenter who's not a public school educated second generation media luvvie. As for the likes of Times Radio and Radio 4....

We should totally give the media a bail out!

Of course, Julie B still can't identify the final piece in the puzzle.  I guess writing for a libertarian site means this whole topic is what artillerymen would call 'Danger Close'. When it comes to nonces, liberals and libertarians all agree that the real issue is the dreadfully unnuanced takes of the lower orders (and, also, they're super sophisticated for refusing to call absolute depravity what it is). 

Using air quotes round perfectly accurate words like evil or pedophile is treated as an actual argument by these hipster douchebags. Meanwhile, wanting predators caged is tacky and crude.... I guess it's  sort of like the super important difference between drinking pints and drinking drams of Old McMolester.

They're smart and you're stupid and that's all you need to know, peasant.

Thursday, August 06, 2020

Hey, Did Someone Say 'Culture War'?

Crikey! Even the squishes are Guido Fawkes are talking about C****** W**. Yep, they've finally noticed that the average university campus is like that line from The Blues Brothers - they have both types of ideology: Blairite and Corbynista.

I'd give them a John McClane style 'welcome to the party, pal' but if you want to know the real reason why  Respectable Conservatives have suddenly decided to start referencing the huge gray thing in the room, take a look at what they posted later in the day.

Yes, indeed. Confidence in scientific advice is collapsing for some reason. We're just lucky that there are no big issues requiring scientific input in this country right now.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, normal people are starting to wonder if there's some kind of connection between the bias in Academia and the terrible quality of its output.

Consider our nation's (apparent) modeler in chief, Neil Ferguson. Looking at his track record, I'm not sure he could predict an uptick in the death rate for members of the avian community in December. More to the point though, his track record is not just bad, it's consistently bad. Basically, he's doing science, but not the sort you can use to predict things or where you need to update your theories if reality keeps letting you down.

You know, that type of science.

Needless to say, I think most of us had worked out the secret of his success even before we got introduced to his bit on the side, Helga von Wokenheit, Head of Globalism at the Global Institute for Globalism.

The point is not just that bias on campus leads to jobs for life for the suitably woke (though it does), or even that bright up and coming conservative academics need to either take a vow of silence or change careers (that's true too), it's that you can't have a healthy intellectual environment where everyone has to carefully walk the tightrope of approved ideology. It's hard to be innovative when out of the box can mean out of a job.

All this just leads to a bigger issue. The genius set at Tory HQ have refused to tackle issues like this on the grounds that they're too dangerous politically. Better just to kick the can down the road.

Hey, how's that working out for you guys?

As Trotsky would say - and he would know - you may not be interested in culture war, but culture war is interested in you. There are real world consequences to letting lunatics take over vital sectors of the country. Never mind whether or not taking on Professor Snootlington is really that high risk politically anyway, the choice is either to face the political risks of meaningful reform or face the political risks of dealing with the inevitable results of a dysfunctional and corrupted system.