Wednesday, September 12, 2018

Laughing at Islam

I am not going to take the bait and spend time trying to ferret out the identity of the New York Times’ “anonymous” letter writer  who claims that he is a member of the Trump administration and that he and several other members of the Trump staff are “resisting” the President.

“I am part of the resistance inside the Trump Administration. I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.” For the past few days, the world has been engrossed in an elaborate guessing game to unmask the author of the now infamous anonymous September 5th NY Times Op-Ed.

Enough said. As a kid, I didn’t much like the game, Pin the Tail on the Donkey, either. So, I’ll go directly to the subject, which is the many ways that Islam  can cause laughter.

I opened my last column, “Casper the Unfriendly Ghost” with:

To get to the nub of this column, Allah is a “nothingburger,” a ghost, much like Robert Mueller’s pursuit of a connection between Donald Trump and the Russians.  Allah is as much a creation of man as is Casper the Friendly Ghost, a cartoon character drawn on boards by illustrators who have shot glasses of whisky at hand, for films, comic books, and newspaper panels.

There was no connection between Donald Trump and the Russians for Mueller to uncover (fruitlessly and tediously for over a year now, an investigation that  hovers in cost between  $17 million and $30 million), but there is at least one definite connection between Russians and presidential candidates, between  Hillary Clinton,  Barack Obama, and the Russians worthy of investigation (Uranium One), but which Mueller and his Deep State colleagues refuse to launch. Then FBI Director James Comey spiked any legal actions against Clinton. Mueller and his cohorts would rather chase after ghosts and imaginary specters and protect their contemptible ilk than search for justice.

Just as Muslims prefer to believe in a ghost. Perhaps the most hilarious ritual is the salah,  when Muslims remove their shoes or sandals and “pray,” and then fall to their knees and  bow and flash their derrieres to Allah in “submission.” Aside from raising their hind- ends they also are obligated to bang their foreheads on the ground. The person with the most visible black and blue mark on his forehead is considered to be very devout.  I know that the “submission’ to Allah is the standard explanation for the ritual, but it still strikes me as Muslims offering their butts for Allah to kiss, or they are mooning the deity, or the West.

Of course, Islam is no laughing matter, when one recalls all the jihadi attacks on the West and around the world in the name of Islam.

And then there’s Wuḍū, a ritu – not to be confused with The Twist performed in preparation for prayers, typically done in preparation for formal prayers (salat) and also before handling and reading the Qur'an. Impurifying activities that invalidate Wuḍūinclude urination, defecation, flatulence, deep sleep, light bleeding, and sexual intercourse. Many businesses and schools have had installed special bathrooms where Muslims can wash their feet and other parts of their anatomy without interfering with non-Muslims needing a restroom.

One must ask oneself: “Does it really matter what a Muslim washes if he cleans his derriere with a bare finger, and leaves the filth on a wall as though it were chewing gum left on the bottom of a movie theater seat? Is this cultural enrichment, or is it restroom diversity?”

Lacking water, it is permitted for a Muslim to use stones to wash any part of his body, especially his private parts and armpits.  Allahu Akbar! If you believe in something, do it for Allah! It will please him. Ouch!”

Islam also has the voluntary, slap-happy ritual of female genital mutilation or (FGM), which is practiced to rob women of sexual pleasure with government sanction just about everywhere. Women enjoying sex is verboten; in the Islamic universe, it’s assumed this is a Muslim “man’s world.”

Mass mooning the West, or inviting Allah to kiss their butts?
In addition, Islam is noted for spreading peace and goodwill. Its St. Franicis of Assisi- like record is indisputable, as meticulously detailed in Robert Spencer’s The History of Jihad. The Koran, the Hadith, and Reliance of the Traveler (the latter not to be mistaken for an AAA tour manual) are replete with glad-handing homilies to Muslims to befriend an infidel and join a Jew in the Hebrew hora.

The Islamic doppelganger of that hora is the Sufi version, which is about as joyous as undergoing amputation on a battlefield. Complimenting that is another Islamic, collectivist “ring around the Rosy May poll” version, also of Sufi origin. To participate in this men-only dance one needs to have imbibed at least a spoonful of L-dopa to get one into the dance mood and become “hip.”  Flawless footwork and deodorant are very crucial; shoes optional.  Not exactly the Gym Dance in West Side story (women need to be added in place of the wide skirts worn by the dervishes) but it might do for the time being, although it’s not the Mambo.

Tuesday, September 04, 2018


Your culture or social milieu

So, you were curious about Intersectionality and how it works? This is Intersectionality 101; we're here to help you learn how powerful and influential you are. Especially if you’re white. Intersectionality is closely connected to the Catholic doctrine that a newborn baby is automatically stained with a sin even though he is patently blameless. That doctrine is a partner of intersectionality, which may even derive from the notion of Original Sin.

I left this comment at the end of my column on “Whiteness.”

Not discussed here is how “whiteness” is inexorably linked to the bizarre idea of “intersectionality” which is a sticky sump of Marxist thought, in which “whiteness” is a culpable “power broker” in how it contributes to the oppression of minorities, gays, women, and people who wear blue socks. A description of intersectionality resembles instructions on how to assemble a jigsaw puzzle of one of Jackson Pollack’s canvases of smears, streaks, drips, and blobs.

The first thing is that you are probably white and can read this before your mind grows dull and you nod off. But read in full, it will nevertheless cause you to experience an epiphany and ignite excitement in your synapses and urge to tell your friends about it and refer them to this column. That’s you exercising your white privilege. You’re sharing your experience, for good or bad. You cannot predict where or when your experience will affect others. News of it might wind up in Sweden or the Sudan or affect someone in Indianapolis.  And mysteriously oppress a “marginalized” person who is not white.

And if someone sees this and objects to it, he might go on a stabbing or acid-in-the-face attack, but you would be to blame, you and every other white who exuded his vile, white cultural imperialism. So many other colored jigsaw pieces are interlocked with your white one, and with countless other white pieces, that even if you did not intend to influence a colored piece’s mind or actions, it can happen nevertheless, because of the sheer volume of white influences.

As Wikipedia points out:

Intersectionality is an analytic framework which attempts to identify how interlocking systems of power impact those who are most marginalized in society.  Intersectionality considers that various forms of social stratification, such as class, race, sexual orientation, age, disability and gender, do not exist separately from each other but are interwoven together.

Thus, your recommendation can influence the thinking or values of someone who is “pro-gun,”  is an advocate of freedom of speech, is pro-capitalism, against open borders, an opponent of unlimited Mexican and Islamic immigration, and supports a host of other “white” ideas and causes. You never know how your agreement with them will serve to sustain the ubiquity in society of those ideas and causes throughout the culture. The prevalence of such ideas can smother the values and practices adhered to by “marginalized” groups, such as Muslims.

The religious beliefs of Muslims can be unjustly marginalized by the constantly voiced assertion that Sharia, an integral element of Islam that governs Muslim lives, is incompatible with the Constitution. The assertion can come in many forms, all calculated to belittle Muslims and their beliefs: cartoons that mock Mohammad, editorials that criticize certain Islamic rituals, its treatment of women,  books that examine Islam and its history, and vociferous speeches that denigrate Islam and Muslims (intentionally or not)  – a Muslim is surrounded by these things every day. He has Muslim organizations that answer these phenomena (such as the Council of American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR) with the goal of having his beliefs accepted as normal and in some cases even adopted by non-Muslim institutions. But the Muslim is touched by white jigsaw pieces wherever he turns. It is continual vilification and denigration to reduce the stature and esteem of being a Muslim, or to make him think he is backward and a third-class citizen and persuade him to keep his place 

The religion of Scientology is also subjected to the same malign intersectional process in the name of white ”civilization.”  And the Amish. And Kabbalah. There are numerous other kinds of intersectionality—black, Asian, Jewish, Hispanic, Indian, Middle Eastern, and so on – and while they exert  some power, they all default insidiously in little, hard-to-trace ways but often in blatant, imperious, and arrogant condescension, to the white.

Civilization – an arbitrary construct, at best – owes everything we take for granted today, in medicine, science, technology, the arts, politics, to whites, and the white narrative pointedly neglects to mention our heritage in marginalized and vanished societies of color, such as the Black Athena of Egypt and ancient Timbuktu, where surgery, agriculture, and astronomy were first pioneered and developed, among many other fields of endeavor.

It is time for the bias of white intersectionality  to be knocked from its prominence and hubris and reduced to a just relation to the balance that would be fair to the diversified mosaic of modern culture. Our college professors and the MSM are hard at work to imbue the virtue of white humility in the next generation of Americans, if not eradicate whiteness altogether.

Sunday, September 02, 2018

The “Sin” of Whiteness

The white is oppressing the brown cone

Let’s start at the beginning about “whiteness” and “white privilege.” Wikipedia seems to be one of the rare venues that discusses the concept with any (relative) intelligibility. As can be seen in the Wikipedia text, the idea of “whiteness” is rooted in Marxist ideology (shall we call it theology?) or “critical race theory,” whiteness is becoming a substitute for “class.”  Race theory was imported from Germany via the Frankfurt School and quickly infested our school system from K1 to academia.

White privilege (or white skin privilege) is the societal privilege that benefits people whom society identifies as white in some countries, beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances. Academic perspectives such as critical race theory and whiteness studies use the concept to analyze how racism and racialized societies affect the lives of white or white-skinned people….

In sociology and political philosophy, the term critical theory describes the neo-Marxist philosophy of the Frankfurt School, which was developed in Germany in the 1930s. This use of the term requires proper noun capitalization, whereas "a critical theory" or "a critical social theory" may have similar elements of thought, but not stress its intellectual lineage specifically to the Frankfurt School. Frankfurt School theorists drew on the critical methods of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. Critical theory maintains that ideology is the principal obstacle to human liberation. Critical theory was established as a school of thought primarily by the Frankfurt School theoreticians Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Walter Benjamin, and Erich Fromm. Modern critical theory has additionally been influenced by György Lukács and Antonio Gramsci, as well as the second generation Frankfurt School scholars, notably Jürgen Habermas. In Habermas's work, critical theory transcended its theoretical roots in German idealism and progressed closer to American pragmatism. Concern for social "base and superstructure" is one of the remaining Marxist philosophical concepts in much of contemporary critical theory.           

“Critical theory maintains that ideology is the principal obstacle to human liberation.” “Liberation” from what? The ideology of freedom is not an “obstacle” to human liberation. The ideology of Marxism, on the other hand, has been responsible for all of the mass murders and slavery implemented  by Marxist or Fascist governments.

This version of "critical" theory derives from Kant's (18th-century) and Marx's (19th-century) uses of the term "critique", as in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and Marx's concept that his work Das Kapital (Capital) forms a "critique of political economy". For Kant's transcendental idealism, "critique" means examining and establishing the limits of the validity of a faculty, type, or body of knowledge, especially through accounting for the limitations imposed by the fundamental, irreducible concepts in use in that knowledge system.

Wouldn’t you know it? Immanuel Kant inspired Karl Marx. Kant, too, promulgated the philosophy that everything is a matter of interpretation, because our senses – because they are senses and naturally misleading or fraught with deception – give us arbitrary knowledge of what a thing is and what it isn’t (although according to Kant – and to the postmodernists, who’ll  tell you that you can’t say with any certainty what a thing or idea is isn’t; a car key may actually be a kernel of popcorn; but if it works in your ignition and turns over your engine, pragmatists will then say it seems to be a car key).

Critical theory addresses race and one’s race, and has dubbed “whiteness” as an inconvertible and innate cause of “unearned” unfairness,” injustice, and privilege. You have no control over your race or skin color; but you’re still guilty of being “privileged” and will benefit from living in a culture that rewards “whiteness.” The idea harks to the idea of one’s “original position of John Rawls,” an idea that caught on decades ago and which later helped to advance the idea of race theory (A Theory of Justice, 1971).

If you are white, and have had a benign upbringing, and the advantage of a better education than has a black man or a Hispanic, then you have an “original position” that is automatically better than that of a black man or a Hispanic and virtually guarantees success. This is “unfair” and not just. Rawls’s “theory of justice” in the pursuit of “fairness” would punish the most able and intelligent and reward the less competent.

Heritage wrote about Rawls:

Upon awarding him the National Humanities Medal in 1999, President Bill Clinton praised John Rawls as “perhaps the greatest political philosopher of the twentieth century” who “helped a whole generation of learned Americans revive their faith in democracy.”[1] Since the publication of his first book, A Theory of Justice, in 1971, Rawls has indeed been the fashion of the academy, and his influence has increasingly spread beyond the ivory towers of American universities.
Today, Rawls’s theory—which defends the principles of egalitarianism, toleration, consensus politics, and societal fairness—informs much of contemporary liberalism’s aspirations,

These basic institutions include the political constitution, which specifies procedures for legislating and enforcing laws and the system of trials for adjudicating disputes; the bases of the economic system, including the norms of property, its transfer and distribution, contractual relations, etc. which are all necessary for economic production, exchange, and consumption; and finally norms that define and regulate permissible forms of the family, which is needed to perpetuate society….

Today, Rawls’s theory—which defends the principles of egalitarianism, toleration, consensus politics, and societal fairness—informs much of contemporary liberalism’s aspirations, constitutional interpretations, domestic policies, and public rhetoric. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the principles behind such laws as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, are most thoroughly argued by John Rawls. Much the same can be said of the Supreme Court’s reference to the “evolving understanding of the meaning of equality” in the 2013 same-sex marriage case, U.S. v. Windsor. Rawls’s silent influence has been immense…..

Rawls-inspired policies (Obamacare) and Supreme Court decisions (U.S. v. Windsor) are met with passionate responses on both sides of the political aisle. His project takes American constitutionalism as a given, but it is ultimately in opposition to the political thought of the American Founders.

Nell Painter in the New York Times, in November 2016 noted:

Conveniently, for most white Americans, being white has meant not having a racial identity. It means being and living and experiencing the world as an individual and not having to think about your race.

To the left wing, the progressives,  and to the liberals, that is a bad and undesirable thing.

You needn’t  even be conscious of being white and privileged. Until now. Now white people are expected to be painfully aware of their “whiteness,” and to accept guilt for a variety of things.

Just as one does not need to think about how Western civilization was created by white men – with rare, with very rare exceptions – as Painter does not point out, advances in technology and science did not spring from the Congo or even from China (except perhaps for fireworks and explosives, or from India, the source of our number system).

Schools and colleges are moving to remove pictures from their campuses of white men who innovated and advanced the medical profession. The pictures were of white men. They will be relocated from the main auditorium to less auspicious venues.

Some columnists are referring to white privilege as an “original sin.”

Margaret Wente in the Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail on May 27 2017, wrote, on the occasion of a CBC program on the subject of white privilege:

White privilege is now a part of the Ontario school curriculum. It is taught in teacher training, and is a routine part of anti-bias education. The idea is that white people benefit from unearned advantages based on race. Canada is depicted as a deeply racialized society where people are automatically advantaged, or disadvantaged, by their skin tone, race and (by extension) gender….

 "If you took out the word 'white' and used any other race, it would be perceived as racist," said one of the participants of a CBC program on the subject. "It's stereotyping in reverse."

The doctrine of white privilege entered the Ontario school system around 2013,…It is a modern version of original sin, which demands confession and atonement – even from people who are deeply anti-racist. "The term implies that whiteness itself is a problem," Ms. Walker says. "That's profoundly hurtful."

The murder of Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts, although it had sporadic coverage for over a month before her body was found in a cornfield, was largely ignored or down-played by the MSM because she was white; so it didn’t matter to the MSM and wasn’t considered “news worthy.”  The discovery of the body seemed to make the MSM yawn. That she was allegedly murdered by an illegal immigrant, however, was cause for many newscasters to worry that this would fuel the anti-immigrant position. Tibbetts was just another white who was a victim of an “illegal” immigrant, or was shot by a Somali cop – as Justine Damond was – or , or assaulted by an illegal immigrant. Tibbetts was stabbed to death.

In a speech he gave in South Carolina, Daniel Greenfield said:

On January 26, 2018 Daniel Greenfield gave a brilliant speech in South Carolina in which he argued that politics make civil wars – not guns. “Guns are how a civil war ends. Politics is how it begins.” What does that mean?

“Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge. That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.”

ESPN says he’s not black
To indirectly second that, Tiger Woods said something that got him a lot of abuse:

As Tiger Woods so concisely pointed out, “He’s the president of the United States and you have to respect the office,” Tiger said. “No matter who’s in the office, you may like, dislike the personality or the politics, but we all must respect the office.”

For making that cogent observation, Woods earned the smear that he wasn’t really black. ESPN in effect, called Tiger Woods, an “Oreo cookie”: “white” on the inside, and black on the outside.

The talking heads on ESPN went on the attack against Tiger, instead, for the crime of not being sufficiently full of hate for the president. ESPN in effect, called Tiger Woods, an “Oreo cookie”: “white” on the inside, black on the outside.

“Well, first of all, we don’t know what Tiger Woods believes. He’s Cablinasian. He’s not black,” Smith said. “When he got arrested, he was black. He was listed black on the report.”

So, you aren’t allowed to be black if you don’t hate Trump?

And if you’re white, you aren’t allowed to speak at all.

ESPN’S full-handed insult of Woods could qualify as “hate speech.” But I don’t believe in “hate speech.” Basically it is hot air expelled by a fool and you can take it or leave it, shaking your head. I don’t think Woods was harmed much by ESPN’S remark. Hate speech never hurt anything but the feelings of someone with “self-esteem” teetering on a precipice, the “hurt” person being held up by the hands of a collective.  Had Woods been white and made the observation, about twenty dozen hateful remarks would have been tossed at him.  Anyone uttering a rational statement about Trump becomes the MSM’s dart board.

On the surface, the whole issue of “whiteness” is absurd. You may as well accuse snow for being white. Only lefties and liberals, with their brains stuck in a tire-spinning rut, take it seriously.  

S.A.’s Julius Malema: There’s a new Stalin in town
But let us not forget about South Africa. Its Parliament, president (Cyril Ramaphosa), and chief thug (Julius Malema) have announced that the government will confiscate the private property of white farmers without compensation after the country’s Parliament has amended the Constitution to allow it. Malema has also advocated that the whites be eradicated. British Prime Minister Theresa May shook hand with president Ramaphosa and said that the confiscation of white property would be okay provided it was “legal.” She had nothing to say about Malema’s proposed, Stalinesque genocide of whites (the current attacks on white farmers by government sanctioned marauders is in the neighborhood of 600 a year). The Times of London reported in April  2018 that:

While the West turns a blind eye, South Africa is embarking on the same path that led to Zimbabwe’s economic and humanitarian catastrophe. On February 27, the South African parliament overwhelmingly voted in favour of a motion that will begin the process of amending the country's Constitution to allow for the confiscation of white-owned land without compensation.

The motion was introduced by Julius Malema, leader of the radical Marxist party Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), who in 2016 stated that he was "not calling for the slaughter of white people — at least for now."

Economic Freedom Fighters? Which in Marxist terms means that the EFF is committed to fighting against freedom, not for it.  The term “freedom fighters” has always made me laugh because of its contradictory meaning, particularly when it refers to Islamic and ISIS killers.

The confiscation resolution has accelerated attacks on white owned farms throughout South Africa. Over the past 12 months, more than 90 white farmers were killed in 340 attacks, making farming more dangerous than being a police officer. Immediately after the parliamentary vote, EFF thugs occupied white-owned farms across the country, murdering, raping, and beating the occupants (including black workers to "teach them a lesson about cooperating with the criminals who stole our land").

Stole “our” land? A South African, Bradwyn Sean Petersen, has another explanation of the “theft”:

The Khoi (my ancestors) had a different land policy. What the settlers did was more like claim property that was always something afforded by Mother Nature to a community, and turning it into private property….

Sounds much like the enclosure of “common” land in pre-industrial England.

So the individual farmers who feed South Africa and employ blacks will be dispossessed, if not murdered. They don’t have to be “white”; successful black farmers and farm workers are also victimized. Marxism and collectivization of any kind will guarantee mass starvation and death for those being corralled into collectivization, just as they did in Soviet Russia