Journalism

Identity Politics rejected by those who would seemingly benefit

Quillette columnist Coleman Hughes testified in front of a House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties on the subject of a bill proposing to conduct a commission into slavery reparations. Hughes’ testimony was not what activists wanted to hear so he was heckled by them.

He argued that such a path would further divide the nation. Such is the scourge of identity politics and the victim mentality.

He was booed when he said, “Black people don’t need another apology. We need safer neighborhoods and better schools. We need a less punitive criminal justice system. We need affordable health care. And none of these things can be achieved through reparations for slavery.”

He went on to describe that reparations were not only divisive, but an “insult to many black Americans by putting a price on the suffering of their ancestors, and we would turn the relationship between black Americans and white Americans from a coalition into a transaction

Reparations by definition are only given to victims, so the moment you give me reparations, you’ve made me into a victim without my consent. Not just that, you’ve made 1/3 of black Americans who poll against reparations into victims without their consent, and black Americans have fought too long for the right to define themselves to be spoken for in such a condescending manner...

The question is not what America owes me by virtue of my ancestry, the question is what all Americans owe each other by virtue of being citizens of the same nation…And the obligation of citizenship is not transactional. It’s not contingent on ancestry. It never expires, and it can’t be paid off. For all these reasons, bill HR 40 is a moral and political mistake.”

Isn’t it ironic how out of touch the political class is when the very people they hope will give them the answer they want to hear do the exact opposite.

British Airways places order for 200 Boeing 737 MAX

Nothing like a confidence boosting 200 plane order for the highly criticized Boeing 737 MAX jet at the Paris Airshow. British Airways CEO Willie Walsh said,

We have every confidence in Boeing and expect that the aircraft will make a successful return to service in the coming months.

There is no doubt Boeing offered a competitive price to generate some positive news spin since the crisis erupted. As CM always contended,

Ultimately the market will decide on the 737MAX. The plane has a 4,000+ unit backlog. Even if airlines wanted to change to A320neos, the switching costs would be prohibitively expensive in terms of pilot certification, maintenance and joining the end of an equally long queue. The order book is unlikely to suffer widespread cancellations.”

The mainstream media proves again its proclivity for sensationalist journalism without understanding the industry dynamics or the facts.

Grievance Studies hoax

What a surprise in today’s academia. Three scholars—James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian—wrote 20 fake papers using fashionable politically correct jargon (wrt gender equality, white supremacy, LGBTQI) and developed ridiculous conclusions with the aim of placing these ‘peer-reviewed’ pieces in high-profile journals. At the time of exposing the hoax 7 journals succeeded in being published, 7 were in the approvals process and only 6 were rejected.

Just goes to show that some journalists are happy to publish anything provided it fits a narrative, no matter how ridiculous the content. For instance;

Some of the papers accepted included, Western astrology was viewed as imperialist and sexist. It argued female astrology be implemented by science faculties.

Another paper titled, Human Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon‘ which postured whether dogs suffered from oppression based upon perceived gender.

Yet another paper, ‘Rubbing One Out: Defining Metasexual Violence of Objectification Through Nonconsensual Masturbation‘ argued that men objectifying women during the act without her consent were perpetrators of sexual violence.

As Yascha Mounk correctly pointed out,

[this] doesn’t just expose the low standards of the journals that publish this kind of dreck, though. It also demonstrates the extent to which many of them are willing to license discrimination if it serves ostensibly progressive goals. This tendency becomes most evident in an article that advocates extreme measures to redress the “privilege” of white students.

Grievance is an industry underpinned by political correctness. Forget rational thought and debate. Just publish whatever fuels the grievance that rationalizes the irrational. Some of these hoax pieces (unsurprisingly) have been taken down. Just proves activism for what it is – as long as they don’t find out we can keep banging the drum of perpetual victimhood.

NY Times’ TDS in 2 pages

The New York Times is so triggered almost 2.5 years after the 2016 election that it printed 2 pages worth of Trump’s insults since he ran for the Republican primaries. Why does it bother? By the time November 2020 arrives there will be another 2 pages of insults to add to it. Maybe more. Does the editorial board somehow think its readers aren’t aware of the paper’s dislike of Trump?

The NYT should be seriously concerned if he stops the slander because it will run out of things to write about.

So much for “all the news that’s fit to print

Nazi scum?

Just a day before the 75th anniversary of D-Day, where 156,000 allied troops stormed the beaches of Normandy to defeat the Nazis, unhinged protestors in London can scream at a person with different views as  “Nazi scum”. We can always count on the tolerant left to engage in thoughtful, respectful and open debate. Their generosity has now spread to offering unsolicited milkshakes to those they disagree with.

What is striking within all of this, is 1) the police did absolutely nothing (no surprise in Mayor Khan’s London and to be honest the constable looked riddled with fear);  2) every other grievance of the left seems present at the march from the Extinction Rebellion, Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism (ironically practiced by numerous members of the Labour Party which aligns with many of their protests), a call for a general election (which would likely see even bigger swings against this lot) etc; and 3) so many protesters hiding behind masks. What is it with these people who can’t own their protest?  Maybe the Univesity of Mons can hand her an honorary doctorate for standing up to Trump?

Welcome to 2019. To think of the 4,500 poor young allied soldiers who lost their lives on that fateful day 75 years ago trying to defend against the very tyranny these people wish to reintroduce. Those calling others Nazis should take a long stone cold look in the mirror to see what true fascism looks like.

Dictator with term limits

While no one can doubt that Trump polarizes opinion, do his detractors honestly think they will win the debate by mowing a giant phallus into a lawn? Will this attempt to (literally) take the moral low ground somehow swing those who hold different opinions?

If the dictator moniker were true he would be the world’s most incompetent executor of such an office. Sadly Trump has between 1.5 and 5.5 years (likely the latter) to remain as DOTUS. Instead of 99% of the population voting for him like a Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un or Hitler, Trump will likely garner around half. If Americans truly wanted a real dictator they would be better off voting for someone who could get 99%. Sadly democracies don’t operate like that.

The Queen, who long remembers the 80 year relationship which preserved her monarchy, knows that after Trump leaves office, the UK will still continue to have a strong bond with America. Her Majesty won’t resort to petty snubs of its head of state because she feels the need to kowtow to the intolerant mindsets of a few.

Will Americans want to see politicians like Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry show such conditional support for American democracy? Did she call for protests when the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia visited? A man with pretty questionable actions regarding journalists in embassies. No she did not.

There are far more effective ways to show courtesy to visiting dignitaries. As CM mentioned yesterday, Trump’s tweets are unstatesmanlike. It doesn’t make Thornberry or Khan’s any better.

Perhaps the Queen is sending the world a message about “the long game.” She probably knows a thing or two about diplomacy as the world’s longest serving monarch. Her state dinner invitation list is the perfect representation of who she feels needs prioritization. What an embarrassment that the UK government did not extend the invite in the first place.

God save our Queen!

NZ Wellbeing Budget? Kiwis still better off in Australia

Image result for wellbeing budget nz

NZ PM Jacinda Ardern’s Wellness Budget is receiving lots of accolades. A true leader! Champagne socialist Sir Richard Branson also praised her saying other countries should take note. The idea that a budget should be solely based on economics is not progressive and more should be directed at “well-being”. That is not to say this budget is not “well-intentioned”. However, the statistics compared to across the ditch do not fare well on relative terms.

Comparing her newest policies versus Australia reveals the kangaroos get better access to social services than the kiwis. How surprising that none of the mainstream media bothered to look at the budget numbers on a like for like basis? Just praise her because she represents their ideal version of a socialist leader.  CM has looked through both budgets and adjusted for currency to make for easier like-for-like comparisons.

When it comes to health spending per capita (currency adjusted), Australia is expected to climb from A$3,324 in 2019 to A$3,568 in 2022. NZ is expected to go up slightly from A$3,516 to A$3,561 respectively.

On social security and welfare, Australia is expected to pay out A$7,322 per capita in 2019, growing to A$7,977. NZ, on the other hand, is forecast to go from A$5,573 per head to A$6,489.

On mental health, Australia forked out around A$9.1bn exclusively on these services reaching 4.2m citizens last year. NZ is planning on spending A$45.1m in 2019 with a total of A$428m by 2023/24 to hit 325,000 people on frontline services for mental health. While the move is a positive one, NZ will allocate A$1.78bn to mental health as a whole over 5 years. On an annualised basis, Australia will still allocate 5x the NZ amount to mental health per capita. So much for wellbeing.

On education, NZ plans to increase per capita spending 7.9% between 2019 and 2022 whereas Australia will lift it 12.5% over the same period. NZ spends around 2x Australia per capita on education although PISA scores between 2006 and 2015 are virtually identical (and both heading south)

On public housing, Ardern can claim a victory. Australia is expected to cut spending per capita from A$240 in 2019 to A$194 in 2022 when NZ will go from A$137 to A$282. Although let’s hope Ardern has more success than her KiwiBuild policy. The Australian’s Judith Sloan rightly pointed out,

“Ardern also has stumbled with other policies, most notably KiwiBuild. The pledge was to build 100,000 additional affordable homes by 2028.

It has since been modified to facili­tation by the government to help build new homes. Moreover, the definition of afford­ability has been altered from between $NZ350,000 ($340,000) and $NZ450,000 to $NZ650,000.

What started off as an ill-considered public housing project has turned out to be an extremely unsuccessful private real estate scam. The government estimated that there would be 1000 homes built last year under KiwiBuild; it turned out to be 47.”

In the process, NZ’s national debt per capita will grow from A$21,550 in 2019 to A$25,206 by 2022. Australia will climb from A$22,764 to A$23,293.

Look at page 119 of the NZ Wellbeing Budget, we can see the government is forecasting the economy to slow and unemployment to rise.

As we wrote several weeks ago, the statistics that Aussies are about to pack their bags and head of to NZ are not supported. CM wrote,

“According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there are 568,000 New Zealanders in Australia, or more than double the total 3-decades ago. Therefore more than 11% of the Kiwi population lives in Australia. At last census count, 35,000 New Zealanders migrated to Australia in 2018.

According to the New Zealand Statistics Bureau, 38,700 Aussies live in New Zealand. In the January 2018 year, 24,900 migrants arrived from Australia and a similar number departed for Australia.

Stats NZ stated, “Over half of migrants arriving from Australia are actually returning Kiwis who have been living across the Tasman for more than a year…The number of migrants going back and forth to Australia in the past year almost balanced each other out – the net gain was just 40 people in the last 12 months.”

As socialists love to point out, “feelings matter far more than facts“. Just goes to show how easily people will fall for a catchy headline, rather than judge it on its merits. Time the “woke” wake up from this slumber. By all means, celebrate more recognition of higher mental health spending but best put it in perspective. Jacinda Ardern is ordinary.