2020-08-18

Recent posts.

Wasn't that long ago, I made fun of conspiracy nuts. These days, I buy ALCOA wrap according to my hat size. Times change.

*

Leftists love "states of emergency" because then all normal constraints and expectations are waived. Day-to-day technical and managerial competence is no longer scrutinized because "it's an emergency!" Any kind of action, no matter how ill-advised, can be justified because it's "doing something".

*

If you take 50 random people off the street, and you want to find out which ones are alcoholics, invite them all into a bar and buy them each ONE drink.  And then watch to see what happens.  Because some people can't stop at just one.

Those 50 people are the 50 state governors.  The COVID-19 crisis gave them their first taste of unchecked, raw, 200-proof power.  And we saw which ones got drunk on it.

*

The Covid scare campaign (as distinct from the virus itself, which nobody disputes is very real) appeals to a certain strain of vanity: the conviction that "I am among the selfless few, bearing the burden for an ungrateful and ignorant humanity".

*

The "new normal" needs to be a Big Government that has been de-fanged, de-clawed, and neutered.

*

The left tells you "don't have a stable family" because they want you to fail.

The left tells you "don't be active in your church or synagogue" because they want you to fail.

The left tells you "don't be on time for work" because they want you to fail.

The left tells you "don't learn history and grammar and mathematics" because they want you to fail.

The left wants to stigmatize and discredit all the things that contribute to success, because they want you to fail.

*

The key thing about "climate change" is that there is no quantifiable metric and therefore no target for success. If you are targeting actual pollutants, you can work for a compromise.  You can get the enviros and the suits to sit down across from each other at a big mahogany conference table and hammer out a deal that neither side is thrilled with but both sides can live with.  You can say "our goal is < so-and-so many PPM of mercury or lead or SO2" and then either you meet that goal or you don't. But with "climate change" the goal is ever-shifting and is defined by unaccountable authorities.  There is no solution because the problem is not meant to be solved.

Fundamentally it is like masking in that it disaggregates the individual actor from responsibility for individual consequences. Any act is presumed to have potentially infinite negative effects. It's an application of the "butterfly effect" to suit a particular agenda.

So with masking, exactly as with "climate change", you are expected to feel guilty literally for breathing.

*

There's a deliberate strategy to decouple moral reasoning from the objective, observable consequences of your actions. Global warming, pandemic masks. It's so that your sense of guilt can be properly manipulated.

*

'Thus the principle of the unity of humanity, so noble in theory, rapidly divides mankind into two camps:  those who are regarded as favoring the good of mankind, in they adopt the empire's categories for determining what is beneficial and right; and those who are regarded as opposing the good of mankind, in that they insist on thinking in terms of the customary categories of the tribe, which the empire invariably condemns as primitive and barbaric.' - Yoram Hazony

*