Rebuttals of the Week #22: My generic Left ideology is better than your generic Right ideology!

Don’t Look At This Page: Both sides of American politics are rotten to the core and serve big business and the Military Industrial Complex.

Going to Getugly: That’s probably true. The whole Trump thing of course is that this guy was the first guy to come along who was not entrenched in that establishment and who represents the only opportunity to push back against that system . That’s why everyone who is part of the establishment hates his guts and is desperate to depose him… including most of the Republican establishment. By the way… it’s not just ‘American’ politics. Australian politics is a branch plant of the same system.

Don’t Look At This Page: Trump is very much part of the establishment. His policies are designed to make the 1% even wealthier. He is a hardcore capitalist. Bernie Sanders could have been a real alternative and would have stopped the wealthy plundering the poor and the middle class, but the Democrats screwed him over because he was a threat to the wealthy capitalists who also run the Democratic party. Hillary was a crook. The U.S system is rigged and as you correctly assert, so too is the Australian system.

Going to Getugly: As soon as you start regurgitating generic slogans like “the 1%” you are demonstrating that you are just another group-thinker who believes that the prepackaged ideology that you’ve given yourself over to is better than the prepackaged ideology you are railing against...”Bernie Sanders is the cult leader who you should think has all the answers!” Ridiculous. It’s not picking one ideology over another ideology. It’s recognizing that the problem is ideology itself. Cultivate the capacity to think for yourself. Develop some genuine principles and privilege the pursuit of truth… not the pursuit of what is gratifying for you to believe.

Advertisements

State media in Canada and Australia use Toronto tragedy to promote the same ideological narrative

abccbc

This is a great demonstration of how the mainstream media in the English speaking world are now essentially a single entity that circulates homogeneous, constructed and noticeably ideologically slanted narratives.

The same threadbare, tangential fragment of salacious material that the state broadcaster at the top of the world in Canada has leapt upon to sex-up the pointless act of barbarism that occurred in Toronto last week is simultaneously being torqued for its sensationalist value by the state broadcaster at the bottom of the globe in Australia.

So what if “we don’t have proof that these conditions led to the horrific van attack in Toronto that left 10 dead and 14 injured” as the CBC freely acknowledges in its version of the script?  What’s the point of a reputable news organization refraining from divisive and irresponsible speculation when it can justify it by simply pronouncing “it’s worth discussing regardless”?

And so we have ‘The Dawn of the Planet of the INCELS’ story-line. We will be contending with it for the foreseeable future. Proceed to set your hair on fire and run around hysterically exaggerating out of all rational proportion the threat posed by a handful of obscure Internet nerds who can’t get laid.

But the media is only using  this nonsense about ‘incels’ as a literary device. The real intention is to insert their favourite ideological narrative into a tragedy that has no inherent meaning of its own. The unambiguous takeaway that both the CBC and the ABC are propagandizing to their respective hemispheres is that the proper focus of your rage, your blame and your fear is on “white” people, on “men” and on those who do not conform to ‘progressive’-Left ideology.

CBC: “Combine powerful online echo chambers, the perceived decline of the white male, a surge in online troll culture and groups of angry and alienated men, and you have a powerful cocktail for dangerous radicalization.”

ABC: “They’re primarily straight, white dudes who claim to be plotting violent revolution because women won’t have sex with them.”

The CBC explicitly identifies a “hatred of social progressive values”  as one of the officially sinister characteristics motivating all of the lunatics who have deliberately mowed down pedestrians in a rented van in Toronto. From the first one ever to this latest one. Which is also the first one ever.

This is apparently sufficient evidence of an irrefutable pattern to those in charge of our state broadcasters… whose sole purpose it seems is to expose the public to their biases.

If you are a taxpayer in Canada or Australia who has internalized this ideology… then you probably regard having  your generic preconceptions mirrored back to you by your publicly funded media as something like responsible journalism.

Those of you who still prefer independent thinking might be inclined to feel like you’re not exactly getting your money’s worth.

 

cbc 2abc 2

Canada’s largest newspaper now mainstreaming anti-white racism

Things are changing folks. And not for the better.

This op ed by national columnist Vicky Mochama was published in the Toronto Star this week:


star


The Star is the biggest newspaper in Canada. It has always been known as a decidedly Left-of-centre publication. But as the extreme far Left has come to dominate Leftist thinking in general, the Star has kept pace and has moved to reflect those extremes. By presenting radical ideological concepts in the most mainstream, ubiquitous platform imaginable… they are attempting to shift the public’s perception of these extreme ideas and to normalize them.

The Star has truly ‘jumped the shark’ this time. Publishing articles in a still widely read mainstream newspaper that promote the concept of ‘whiteness‘ as a social ill that society has failed to ‘grapple with’ is signalling that racist ideology of the far Left and the collective demonisation of white people is perfectly normal and acceptable.

It’s actually quite shocking to see the same intellectually barren and contemptible ideas that were once confined to loony, hyper-partisan web sites like Huffington Post and Buzzfeed now presented as credible mainstream editorial content.

If that wasn’t bad enough… these types of far-Left ideological screeds are almost always terribly written. How these people manage to write for a living is a complete mystery. For example, Mochama uses a 2017 mass shooting by Alexandre Bissonnette at a Mosque in Quebec in which six people were killed… an almost unheard of category of crime in Canada… as evidence of the scourge of ‘whiteness’. She writes:

“His crime is exceptional; he, however, is not. Bissonnette is as Canadian as the good old hockey game.”

Mochama makes no attempt to reconcile the contradiction in characterizing Bissonnette’s actions as ‘exceptional’…. in other words, anomalous in relation to the behavior of every other Canadian… while insisting that he simultaneously personifies the very essence of what it means to be a Canadian.

The explanation for her indifference to the logical incoherence of her reasoning is obvious: she is far less concerned with making logical sense as she is with conveying her feelings of animus and contempt for white people. The goal is not to communicate a rational insight or to say something objectively true. It is strictly to let you know that she personally makes an equivalence between this despicable mass murderer and white Canadians in general.

Does Mochama ever get around to connecting any of these disparate dots to show how a crazy gunman, white people as a race and Canadian society come together to support the gaseous concept of ‘whiteness’?

Nope.

She just carries on… stream of consciousness style… presenting what appear to be random, fanciful interpretations which she feels no urge to justify or connect to anything objectively real. To be honest, it’s more like reading the personal journal of someone whose purpose for writing is merely to disgorge the flurry of subjective impressions running through her head rather than making coherent, reasoned arguments.

For instance, she says that because Bissonnette is white, “his murderous anger was given the benefit of the doubt. The guns he killed with were purchased legally without a hint of an obstacle. His whiteness provided cover for a deeply dangerous violence.”

You’re probably asking yourself….what the hell is that supposed to mean?  “Because he is white, his murderous anger was given the benefit of the doubt.”  Really? How do you quantify that? “His whiteness provided cover for a deeply dangerous violence.” It did? How does that work?

Perhaps you are giving Mochama the benefit of the doubt and assuming that she must have elaborated and clarified how these intangible premises relate to something that can be objectively evaluated or demonstrated.

Nope.

Mochama just carried on with a completely different set of premises, personal impressions and tenuous connections between things that are not obviously related.

You may think I’m being unfair and selecting bits from her column out of context to emphasize the incoherence of her thesis. I can assure you that I’m not. I will provide a link below to the original article for you to judge for yourself.  Be prepared… it’s a very irritating read.

link: Every time is the right time to grapple with whiteness in Canada