How Do We Live Our Lives in an Upside-Down World?

I think most people reading this post know precisely what I mean by the title.  And it doesn’t have anything to do with lockdowns or pandemics or even the upcoming election, even though every one of those things highlights the craziness of the world around us.  But I mean to look at the world as a whole and address the larger issue of how we can make our lives better and also add to the effort to push the world toward a course correction away from the madness we see all around us.

The leftists are always fond of saying “act locally but think globally.”  In a sense that is what I’m saying.  But it’s more like think and act locally, think and act globally.  What we will need is a multi-track approach to existence.  We can’t use the same tactics with our family and friends as we use with the town government and PTA.  And we can’t use the same tactics with the state government as we use for our town.  And finally, we have a completely different situation on the national level.  There isn’t a one size fits all strategy.  Maybe surprisingly, the approach we take with family and friends is closer to the way we handle the federal government.  Unless you live in a deep red state there is a lot more opportunity at the national level for the kind of openness you can have with friends and family than is possible in many of the communities, we live in.

There are national organizations that are working to make government policy changes.  Look for organizations that advocate for clear cut goals.  Forget anything that’s generic Republican.  Look for someone who says “we are doing this.”  And then see if they say how they are going to do it.  And then ask them what they’ve already done to make it happen.  Some examples that come to mind are Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and the Federalist Society.  The ADF is known for defending in court individuals who are being prosecuted for laws that criminalize Christian beliefs.  Florists and wedding bakers who refuse to create products for homosexual marriages are prosecuted in blue states and forced out of business.  The ADF comes to their aid and is helping them to win their rights to religious freedom.  The Federalist Society has been a powerful force for resisting the unconstitutional actions of judges who put social advocacy above the law.  Many of the lawyers that are members of the federalist Society have gone on to careers as judges on the local and federal judiciary all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Supporting organizations that show results in the causes you believe in is an example of global action you can take.  Research the problems that you want solved and find out who is making a difference and then get involved.  Be critical and careful about who you support but don’t become pessimistic.  Donate money, time, or whatever else you have that can help.  Get to know what’s actually out there.  Educate those around you about the bad and the good.

Now what about the local side?  Obviously, you must get involved in the family and friends around you and do everything you can to protect them from the rot and confusion that surrounds everything in our environment.  For the young give them positive role models and provide normal alternatives for the debased entertainment that the popular culture and schools foist upon our young people.  Typically, you can find movies and books from the time before the progressive capture of the entertainment industries and many of these are vastly more entertaining than the propaganda currently being pumped out.  Sponsor activities that allow parents that you trust to join with you to give the kids healthy activities without the loaded messaging that the sanctioned activities always include in their program.  And make sure to get together with your family whenever you can.  A Sunday dinner with your children and grandchildren is one of the nicest ways of spending an afternoon.  A barbecue with your brothers and sisters and their families is a remarkable way to reinforce family solidarity.  Cousins talking about what’s going on in their lives is a great chance to reinforce family ties and lend help and maybe launch a family business.

And for yourself get involved in activities and social organizations that will allow you to find like-minded men whom you can befriend.  Build up a circle of friends who will make your leisure time enjoyable.  Also contacts of this type allow you to build a circle of acquaintances that may have a range of skills and occupations that you can draw on for your own needs.  After all, many of the tradesmen and business owners are on our side of the fence.  Why not throw your business to people that you like and agree with politically and culturally?

And finally, if you have the time and the inclination get involved in local politics.  This is the most difficult aspect of activism especially if you live in a deep blue state.  Basically, you will be in the belly of the beast and surrounded on every side by the enemy.  Everything you say and do will be scrutinized by progressives and measured against progressive dictates.  It would be like the scenes in that old movie “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” where normal humans try to pass themselves off as pod people.  Eventually some glimmer of emotion or humanity will expose them as “not of the body,” not part of the collective mind.  Working under such conditions would be painful and stressful but also has the potential of getting very important things done.

It’s important to make sure that while we’re all fighting the good fight, we also take care of ourselves and those we love.  What good is winning the culture war if we lose our happiness?  Enjoy your life and your family and friends.  Have fun and do good for those you love.  Think about what is important to you and make sure you take care of the important things.  Go outside and look at the amazing world that exists even in the hellish climate of New England.  Say a little prayer of thanks for the good things you have in your life and be grateful for your health and the health of those you love.  Use your time wisely and don’t let pessimism and depression get a hold of your mind.  Live!

I’ve listed a couple of organizations that I think are doing good work and making a difference to advance our interests, the Alliance Defending Freedom and the Federalist Society.  If you know of other organizations doing good work then please list them in the comments section along with an explanation of what their mission are.  All of us need to share information whenever we can.

My Take on Yarvin’s Essay “The Deep State vs The Deep Right”

Last night I clicked on the American Mind website and saw that Curtis Yarvin (aka Mencius Moldbug) had a new post up.  The title was “The Deep State vs The Deep Right.”  I find Yarvin’s ideas interesting but at the same time in some ways obscure.  In this new essay he states that the only way to overthrow a regime you live under is to undermine its authority with a more attractive idea.  He puts this in terms of aesthetics.  His case in point is the Czar.  According to Yarvin the Russians overthrew their government by first convincing everyone including the Czar that they needed to adopt the British outlook on life.  And since socialism was the religion of the British elites at that time what better way to emulate them than by taking their ideal and turning it up to eleven via Marx’s writings.  Yarvin’s point is that art (in this case the 19th century Russian novelists) had prepared the Russians for the replacement of the monarchy long before the Bolsheviks came on the scene.

Yarvin’s idea is that what is needed to overthrow the current neo-liberal order is an aesthetic to replace the aesthetic our current elites espouse. This is the confusing part.  When he talks of aesthetics and art he’s talking about books and music and movies.  You are probably asking yourself how does this get Nancy Pelosi off of the Speaker’s podium?  And that’s a fair question.  As much as I’d love to write the ultimate science fiction novel that shifts the balance of power from the Left to us, I don’t see how that happens.  Yarvin points to Bronze Age Mindset as a sort of first attempt at moving the aesthetic in our direction.  And maybe it is.  Apparently, it was very popular with younger men and showed there is a market for dissident ideas out in the real world.

Okay, so why should I care about any of this?   Well, because I kinda know what he’s saying.  The people who want to tell us what to do, say and think aren’t going to believe us when we say their ideas are wrong.  They think that what we believe and who we are is stupid.  They are convinced that what they believe and who they are is smart.  We are going to have to make our case in the court of public opinion.  We are going to have to show them that our ideas are better and stronger than theirs.

From the point of reason, it shouldn’t be too hard to convince people that things like screwing up the hormones of an eight-year-old boy and then castrating him is not sane.  But remember, we don’t have the microphone so we don’t get to tell the story on tv.  We’ll have to work on back channels like blogs and self-published books and podcasts.

But of course, that isn’t enough.  What I’m hearing from Yarvin is we’ll need to convince and recruit the intelligentsia in order to get the microphone we want and need.  That’s a pretty tall order but I think Yarvin’s got something there.  We have to get people who speak their language, academics and artists to make the case that our world view is sane and theirs is crazy.  Specifically, we’ll need some medical doctors and psychiatrists and ethicists to expose the nightmare logic at work.  We’ll need documentary and dramatic filmmakers to sway public opinion.  But first we’ll need judges and lawyers and cops and even politicians to have the courage to confront these lunatics who defend these practices and hold them accountable.

So, there’s the pipe dream we need to dream.  We have to turn the world upside down, or right side up if you look at it from our point of view.  And the first step is to identify the weakest points of the current system and attack them.  And to attack them we have to show the world what we would put in its place.  I would say that the beginning of such an enterprise requires a lawfare approach.  We’ll need a Circuit Court with jurisdiction over a blue state that has adopted the most flagrantly perverse law and have a lawyer challenge that behavior at the Circuit Court level and have it struck down.  That would trigger a storm that would catch the attention of national press and allow public opinion to hear our side of the story from the judges and the plaintiffs.  After the dust settles it will make a good book, an interesting documentary and maybe even a decent movie although we probably wouldn’t be able to get any A-listers involved.  But it’ll be a good start.

This idea highlights why it is such an important thing to have President Trump appointing judges to the Circuit and supreme Court in the numbers he is doing.  He is close to flipping the Ninth Circuit and that court rules over California and the rest of the Left Coast.  That is a place where a lot of wonderful damage can be done.  I think I see what Yarvin is talking about.

 

Now what do you think?  If you agree or sort of agree or even strenuously disagree, I’d like to hear from you.  This site is to allow me to have my say but also to here what everybody else thinks.  Leave a comment in the section below and get to have your two cents.

Two Nations Under One Flag

Yesterday I said that my co-worker hated President Trump so much that he was ecstatic at the idea that the economy would be tanked by the COVID-19 outbreak because it would throw the election to Biden.  Think about that.  He would rather see his beloved 401K devalued than let a conservative run the country.  That seems to me to be a marker.

We’re not just philosophically different.  We are two enemies trapped in the same cell.  We don’t just dislike each other we can’t tolerate each other’s presence.  And yet we have to interact with them every day and everywhere.  But it’s a very lop-sided arrangement.  They know we exist by virtue of the resistance we give to laws they make to afflict us.  But we are surrounded by their institutions.  We are submerged in their culture.  We are drowning in it.  We have to hear their propaganda 24/7 on every television channel, every social media site, every newspaper, every pop song, every movie screen.  They propagandize our children and run the human resources department of every company in the country.  They’ve even taken over almost every pulpit in every church.  We need our own space.  But how do we keep it when any attempt to go our own way is protested, harassed and criminalized?

What will need to be done is form an underground.  And the best way to do that is in plain sight.  My personal favorite idea is to form our own church.  How exactly that is done is the detail that needs to be worked out.  Should it be an existing denomination that has a very hands-off attitude toward parishes or should it be a new sect?  I tend to think a new sect is the better way.  That way no one enters it thinking it is something than what it turns out to be.

Theologically, it would be traditionalist.  It would stress scripture.  It would adhere to the traditional church teachings on marriage, family and personal behavior.  It would reinforce the traditional roles for men and women in the family and the community.  And church business would be governed by a group of elders which consisted exclusively of married men who have children.

Once a church was up and running all the other programs that a church sponsors could reflect the community this church represents.  Youth sports programs, community charitable programs, outreach to the poor and elderly, community entertainment like theater and music programs.  We’ll have to replace the scouts with our own version of that once useful organization.  And, most difficult, but a truly worthy goal would be a school.  But a school would be very difficult because keeping the progressives out would be a constant war.  And the government would make it its highest priority to force it into compliance with the progressive norms they so dearly love.

So, to start with, religious instruction would be an important program.  It would be something that prepared children to recognize the errors in the surrounding culture and provide them with coping mechanisms to allow them to exist in that outer world without letting it poison their minds.

Another aspect of the church would be community networking.  It would encourage members of the church to practice solidarity and support each other in business relationships and social groups.  It could produce a list of preferred service providers and craftsmen for the various trades that a community needs and, in that way, help make the community more self-supporting.

And finally, church social functions like dances and clubs could be an opportunity for young people to look for love.  What better place to find a mate than among families that already see eye to eye on values?

I am very interested in getting all kinds of feedback on the practical problems in starting such a community.  If anyone has information or links to similar endeavors I’d be obliged.  And if you have any different but equally useful ideas on building something for our side feel free to comment or send me an e-mail.

This Year’s Supreme Court Docket

I went through the Supreme Court Docket and picked out the ones I thought could have a major impact on social, political and constitutional issues.  This will be a very important year for a whole host of issues that conservatives are very interested in.  We will find out if Roberts is an enemy.

The issues include:

  1. Trying to force employers to put up with transgender insanity.
  2. Trying to force employers to put up with homosexual insanity.
  3. Trying to stop the federal government from doing its job removing illegal aliens
  4. Trying to force the government to uphold the expired DACA program.
  5. Ruling on New York City’s unconstitutional gun laws.
  6. Ruling on attacks against the religious freedoms of groups and individuals

Below is the list of the relevant cases.

 

October Term 2019

October Sitting

R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, No. 18-107 [Arg: 10.8.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on (1) their status as transgender or (2) sex stereotyping under Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins.

 

Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, No. 17-1618 [Arg: 10.8.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2.

 

Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, No. 17-1623 [Arg: 10.8.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether the prohibition in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), against employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” encompasses discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation.

 

Kansas v. Garcia, No. 17-834 [Arg: 10.16.2019 Trans./Aud.; Decided 3.3.2020]

Holding: The Kansas statutes under which respondents were convicted are not preempted expressly or by implication under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.

 

November Sitting

Barton v. Barr, No. 18-725 [Arg: 11.4.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether a lawfully admitted permanent resident who is not seeking admission to the United States can be “render[ed] … inadmissible” for the purposes of the stop-time rule, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(1).

 

County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, No. 18-260 [Arg: 11.6.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants originate from a point source but are conveyed to navigable waters by a nonpoint source, such as groundwater.

 

Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, No. 18-587 [Arg: 11.12.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.

 

Trump v. NAACP, No. 18-588 [Arg: 11.12.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.

 

McAleenan v. Vidal, No. 18-589 [Arg: 11.12.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.

 

Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media, No. 18-1171 [Arg: 11.13.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether a claim of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 fails in the absence of but-for causation.

 

December Sitting

 

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York, No. 18-280 [Arg: 12.2.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether New York City’s ban on transporting a licensed, locked and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the commerce clause and the constitutional right to travel.

 

Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, No. 17-1498 [Arg: 12.3.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): (1) Whether a common-law claim for restoration seeking cleanup remedies that conflict with remedies the Environmental Protection Agency ordered is a jurisdictionally barred “challenge” to the EPA’s cleanup under 42 U.S.C. § 9613 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; (2) whether a landowner at a Superfund site is a “potentially responsible party” that must seek EPA approval under 42 U.S.C. § 9622(e)(6) of CERCLA before engaging in remedial action, even if the EPA has never ordered the landowner to pay for a cleanup; and (3) whether CERCLA pre-empts state common-law claims for restoration that seek cleanup remedies that conflict with EPA-ordered remedies.

 

Ovalles v. Barr, No. 18-1015 [Arg: 12.9.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether the criminal alien bar, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), tempered by 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), prohibits a court from reviewing an agency decision finding that a movant lacked diligence for equitable tolling purposes, notwithstanding the lack of a factual dispute.

 

Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, No. 18-776 [Arg: 12.9.2019 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether a request for equitable tolling, as it applies to statutory motions to reopen, is judicially reviewable as a “question of law.”

 

January Sitting

 

Babb v. Wilkie, No. 18-882 [Arg: 1.15.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which provides that personnel actions affecting agency employees aged 40 years or older shall be made free from any “discrimination based on age,” 29 U.S.C. §633a(a), requires a plaintiff to prove that age was a but-for cause of the challenged personnel action.

 

Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, No. 18-1195 [Arg: 1.22.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether it violates the religion clauses or the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution to invalidate a generally available and religiously neutral student-aid program simply because the program affords students the choice of attending religious schools.

 

February Sitting

 

U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith, No. 19-67 [Arg: 2.25.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether the federal criminal prohibition against encouraging or inducing illegal immigration for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and (B)(i), is facially unconstitutional.

 

Nasrallah v. Barr, No. 18-1432 [Arg: 3.2.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether, notwithstanding 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), the courts of appeals possess jurisdiction to review factual findings underlying denials of withholding (and deferral) of removal relief.

 

Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, No. 19-161 [Arg: 3.2.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether, as applied to the respondent, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2) is unconstitutional under the suspension clause.

 

June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, No. 18-1323 [Arg: 3.4.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital conflicts with the Supreme Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.

 

Russo v. June Medical Services LLC, No. 18-1460 [Arg: 3.4.2020 Trans./Aud.]

Issue(s): (1) Whether abortion providers can be presumed to have third-party standing to challenge health and safety regulations on behalf of their patients absent a “close” relationship with their patients and a “hindrance” to their patients’ ability to sue on their own behalf; and (2) whether objections to prudential standing are waivable – per the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th and Federal Circuits – or non-waivable per the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C., 2nd, and 6th Circuits.

 

 

March Sitting

 

Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc., No. 18-956 [Arg: 3.24.2020]

Issue(s): (1) Whether copyright protection extends to a software interface; and (2) whether, as the jury found, the petitioner’s use of a software interface in the context of creating a new computer program constitutes fair use.

 

Tanzin v. Tanvir, No. 19-71 [Arg: 3.24.2020]

Issue(s): Whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, permits suits seeking money damages against individual federal employees.

 

Carney v. Adams, No. 19-309 [Arg: 3.25.2020]

Issue(s): (1) Whether the First Amendment invalidates a longstanding state constitutional provision that limits judges affiliated with any one political party to no more than a “bare majority” on the state’s three highest courts, with the other seats reserved for judges affiliated with the “other major political party”; (2) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit erred in holding that a provision of the Delaware Constitution requiring that no more than a “bare majority” of three of the state courts may be made up of judges affiliated with any one political party is not severable from a provision that judges who are not members of the majority party on those courts must be members of the other “major political party,” when the former requirement existed for more than 50 years without the latter, and the former requirement, without the latter, continues to govern appointments to two other courts; and (3) whether the respondent, James Adams, has demonstrated Article III standing.

 

U.S. Agency for Int’l Development v. Alliance for Open Society Int’l, No. 19-177 [Arg: 3.25.2020]

Issue(s): Whether – when in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc., the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment bars enforcement of Congress’ directive, which required respondents, United States-based organizations that receive federal funds to fight HIV/AIDS abroad, to “have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking” as a condition of accepting those funds – the First Amendment further bars enforcement of that directive with respect to legally distinct foreign entities operating overseas that are affiliated with respondents.

 

Pereida v. Barr, No. 19-438 [Arg: 3.30.2020]

Issue(s): Whether a criminal conviction bars a noncitizen from applying for relief from removal when the record of conviction is merely ambiguous as to whether it corresponds to an offense listed in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

 

Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635 [Arg: 3.31.2020]

Issue(s): Whether a grand-jury subpoena served on a custodian of the president’s personal records, demanding production of nearly 10 years’ worth of the president’s financial papers and his tax returns, violates Article II and the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

 

Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715 [Arg: 3.31.2020]

Issue(s): Whether the Committee on Oversight and Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives has the constitutional and statutory authority to issue a subpoena to the accountant for President Trump and several of his business entities demanding private financial records belonging to the president.

 

Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 19-760 [Arg: 3.31.2020]

Issue(s): Whether the Committee on Financial Services and the Intelligence Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives have the constitutional and statutory authority to issue a subpoena to creditors for President Donald Trump and several of his business entities demanding private financial records belonging to the president.

 

Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, No. 19-267 [Arg: 4.1.2020]

Issue(s): Whether the First Amendment’s religion clauses prevent civil courts from adjudicating employment-discrimination claims brought by an employee against her religious employer, when the employee carried out important religious functions.

 

St. James School v. Biel, No. 19-348 [Arg: 4.1.2020]

Issue(s): Whether the First Amendment’s religion clauses prevent civil courts from adjudicating employment-discrimination claims brought by an employee against her religious employer, when the employee carried out important religious functions.

 

April Sitting

 

Chiafalo v. Washington, No. 19-465 [Arg: 4.28.2020]

Issue(s): Whether enforcement of a Washington state law that threatens a fine for presidential electors who vote contrary to how the law directs is unconstitutional because a state has no power to legally enforce how a presidential elector casts his or her ballot and a state penalizing an elector for exercising his or her constitutional discretion to vote violates the First Amendment.

 

Colorado Department of State v. Baca, No. 19-518 [Arg: 4.28.2020]

Issue(s): (1) Whether a presidential elector who is prevented by their appointing state from casting an electoral-college ballot that violates state law lacks standing to sue their appointing state because they hold no constitutionally protected right to exercise discretion; and (2) whether Article II or the 12th Amendment forbids a state from requiring its presidential electors to follow the state’s popular vote when casting their electoral-college ballots.

 

Trump v. Pennsylvania, No. 19-454 [Arg: 4.29.2020]

Issue(s): (1) Whether the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and the Treasury had statutory authority under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to expand the conscience exemption to the contraceptive-coverage mandate; (2) whether the agencies’ decision to forgo notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing the interim final rules rendered the final rules – which were issued after notice and comment – invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act; and (3) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit erred in affirming a nationwide preliminary injunction barring implementation of the final rules.

 

Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania, No. 19-431 [Arg: 4.29.2020]

Issue(s): (1) Whether a litigant who is directly protected by an administrative rule and has been allowed to intervene to defend it lacks standing to appeal a decision invalidating the rule if the litigant is also protected by an injunction from a different court; and (2) whether the federal government lawfully exempted religious objectors from the regulatory requirement to provide health plans that include contraceptive coverage.

The Age of Entitlement – A Book Review

Christopher Caldwell’s book, “The Age of Entitlement – America Since the Sixties” is a hard book to read.  As I described in several places it took me much too long to finish because many times I had to stop after about fifteen minutes of reading and put it down.  It was too painful to hear the seemingly endless litany of defeats, betrayals and acts of cowardice by our elected officials and their bureaucratic, academic, legal and corporate co-conspirators.  And yet I think this book should be read by anyone who doesn’t know the full history of how we have been stripped of our constitutional rights based solely on our European ancestry and normal male identity.  It is so infuriating to read, that it serves as the perfect eye-opener for anyone who still thinks that affirmative action and political correctness are harmless and just.

Caldwell walks us through the years, starting with the Civil Rights struggle against segregation in the South and shows the gradual but continual evolution of that movement from a crusade to end discrimination against blacks to a concerted program to discriminate against whites.  He shows how the logic went from successfully ending the unconstitutional denial of equal rights for blacks into implementing the unconstitutional practices of affirmative action, with its abrogation of free speech, freedom of association and property rights based on not equality of opportunity, but rather equality of outcome.  And since these decisions were made by unelected judges who were basically answerable to no one, no recourse was possible.  For every white man the burden of guilt never had to be proved.  It was always assumed.

After this Caldwell walks us through the expansion of the civil rights movement to embrace other “victims.” Next was women with the adoption by the left of abortion on demand and equal rights for women in the work place and the delegitimization of traditional marriage.  After this we get homosexual rights, immigrant rights and on to the explosion of immigration.  Finally, we come to the present day where demonization of European identity and culture is all pervasive.  We reach a point where open contempt for the native-born Americans is open and threatening.  We see these people marginalized and starved out of their homes by industry and government leaders who openly connive to replace them with immigrants legal and illegal.  They end up on welfare and waiting for death under the soporific influence of  cheap and plentiful opioids that have purposefully been allowed to flooded our streets and countryside.

Throughout Caldwell points out how the leaders of the conservative cause are always woefully unprepared or even unwilling to challenge incredibly unpopular programs and laws.  Time after time a leader will run for office on a platform to defend or revive some part of life that the progressives are undermining and again and again, we witness either a defeated attempt or no attempt at all to prevent the destruction of our way of life.

And at the heart of most of these campaigns are the progressive lawyers and judges working hand in glove with the progressives in the bureaucracies and in the non-profit foundations.  These foundations were set up by the elites that use them to push for the programs that they support but do not affect them personally.  Their schools and homes and families are above the level of being disadvantaged or impinged upon by these forces, unlike the common people that they demonize whose lives are thrown into chaos by these anti-social measures.

Equally distressing is seeing how the leaders of industry sided with the progressives in order to gain access to cheap labor by both exporting jobs to the third world and importing these third world workers right here in the United States as either legal or illegal immigrants.  And once the Tech Revolution was in full swing, we are walked through how the American men who dominated this industry adopted the progressive cause and used their new found tools to obliterate the brick and mortar retail landscape of the entire United States.  And with the diminution of newspapers, radio and television as advertising channels, communication companies like Google and Facebook now get to decide who is allowed to do business and who is not.  And they decide it based on whether they like your politics.

So, we reach the present day where any dissent from the official narrative that demonizes white men is not just shouted down but answered with de-platforming, unemployment, physical assault and sometimes criminal prosecution.  And as the book signifies on its last page.  That is what gave us the Trump presidency.

Personally, this book reinforced in my mind the necessity of challenging affirmative action in front of a conservative Supreme Court.  The fig leaf that affirmative action employs to shield its unconstitutional nature is the importance of “diversity.”  But since diversity doesn’t appear in the Constitution, a brave and honest court should strike down all the quota driven fairness devices and strip the Federal and State bureaucracies of their discriminatory mechanisms.  All that needs to be asserted is that equality under the law doesn’t need to provide equal outcomes for every individual.  Some people are smarter or stronger or more hard working or crueler or more beautiful or taller or shorter or luckier.  I can live with those things and believe me there are enough things that I wish I could do that I can’t.  But facing that is called sanity.  And it’s far from a bad thing.

I highly recommend this book.  It’s about time that someone published something as honest and informative on the subject of America’s descent into the maelstrom of social justice insanity.  It’s time that we throw our support behind whichever men are brave enough to lead the fight back to sanity.  And I know it won’t be easy.  As Steve Bannon said “If you think they are going to give you your country back without a fight, you are sadly mistaken.”  He’s right.  They will fight at every step.  If the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action, the big cities will riot and burn.  Well, that’s nothing new.  But it’s the only way back to a world where fairness and freedom even have their original meanings.

Good work Christopher Caldwell.  You wrote a horrible, urgently important, good book.  Bravo.

Link to Part Two of Curtis Yarvin’s “The Clear Pill”

Without a doubt Yarvin must have a dizzying intellect.  Reading his narrative is like taking a graduate course in sociology from Einstein.  I feel like I’ll need to read it three more times to make sure I followed all his points.  Basically he’s explaining why Progressives believe the nonsense they believe.  He used climate science as an example and it is interesting.  Support for the Progressive worldview allows Leftists to feel good about themselves by believing that the warming narrative makes sense.  It’s a dense read but if you liked Part 1, you’ll have to continue down the rabbit hole..

The Clear Pill, Part 2 of 5: A Theory of Pervasive Error

 

 

22NOV2019 – American Greatness Post of the Day – Attack of the Groypers – Christopher Roach

The Dissident Right has been abuzz for weeks about the “Groypers” and their jabs at Charlie Kirk of TPUSA.  Mr. Roach has a good summary of the situation and a pretty even handed take on the facts.  Seems like some progress has been made in the last decade or so resisting the astro-turfing of the Establishment Right.  A good article to read if you’re interested in what’s going on in the culture war.

 

 

 

A Champion of the Common Man for what Ails the American Republic

Last Tuesday I wrote a post about awakened Christians and what practical steps they could take to finally fight back.  The inimitable War Pig commented back, “In other words, they need a modern-day Martin Luther.”  And that really got me thinking.  The Right has been wandering in the desert for thirty years and only saw any success when Donald Trump appeared.  Are we just waiting for the right man to come along to start a modern-day cultural reformation?

America has known several religious revivals in her history but it seems this will have to be something different.  It’s not a religious revival it’s more like a societal purge.  Instead of just Martin Luther we need another Andrew Jackson thrown in for good measure.  What is needed is a Normal Man’s Revolt.  The societal authorities have led us down a rabbit hole and we’ve come out in Wonderland.  A Wonderland where everything is backward, upside down and inside out.

But we know the things that are wrong and we can push back on those things.  We want our freedom back again.  Our positive and negative freedoms both.  We don’t want the government telling us who we must and mustn’t hire, promote, fire, play golf with or bake cakes for.  What we can or can’t say.  We don’t want them telling us how to raise our kids or where they have to go to school.  We don’t want them spying on us.  We don’t want them giving away our money to foreigners or people who don’t want to work.  We don’t want the government to reward companies for exporting jobs to China.

And we certainly don’t want them telling us that a man in a dress is a woman.  Or that an eighty-pound four-foot eleven-inch woman is a Navy Seal.  And we don’t want them to force our churches to recognize practices that contradict the teachings of their faith.  We need a modern-day Moses to lead us back to the Promised Land and by promised land I mean sanity.

We need someone to step forward and have the courage to speak the truth.  It’s time to tell the social justice scolds in the Media, the tech companies, the schools and the corporate HR departments that we don’t believe what they’re saying and we aren’t going to play by their rules anymore.  It’s going to take a preacher.  He’s going to have to preach the gospel of liberation.  Liberation from all these petty tyrants who collectively have left us in chains.  He’s got to stir the people up and give them hope and unite them.  President Trump wants to be that man.  I hope he succeeds.  Because the need for such a hero is desperate.  Someone must fill it or we will become a nation of serfs.

The surprising thing is that once the truth comes out it will be like a landslide.  For decades people have been intimidated into silence, afraid of losing their jobs, their families, their freedom.  But if someone just once speaks the truth from a big stage with a big megaphone the dam will burst and there will be a tidal wave of truth.  Just like when Donald Trump was brave enough to say that illegal immigration wasn’t virtuous but a crime everybody was relieved to see that they weren’t alone.  People will accept the Big Lie because they know the powerful are protecting it.  But if once a brave voice shouts from the rooftops that the emperor has no clothes then everyone will laugh and put an end to the charade.

We need a champion and a leader and we need him now.  Support President Trump in every way you can.  He is our best hope to restore sanity to this nation.

 

04NOV2019 – American Greatness Post of the Day – A Great Awakening to the Fight is Upon Us

Mark Bauerlein has written an article that confirms what many including myself have been saying for a long time.  The sleep walkers are starting to awake.  Even the most timid of the social conservatives have admitted to themselves that they can’t negotiate their way out of the trap the Left has them in.

He also links to a speech that Robert George gave at the Catholic Information Center that goes into painful detail just how beaten the social conservatives have been by their enemies.

Finally they both say the words they have been afraid of uttering all these years.  The Left is the enemy, this is war and if they don’t want to be forced into the re-education camps they’ll have to fight.

Finally.