#GOP

The growing dangers of the Sanctimonious Society

IMG_0820.JPG

Welcome to the sanctimonious society. Social media has taken this to new levels. Given the superficiality of much of today’s internet posts, memes and rants, what it has done is destroy the need for serious debate over contentious issues. Before discussing the likes of Twitter or Facebook censoring certain bloggers, the discourse is self-evident. How often do you read a credible rebuttal to a topical post? Hardly ever is the answer. Usually the criticism is laced with sanctimony, expletives and ridicule. The aim of trolling is none other than to shut down debate and make fun of the person who makes the statement. The intensity of cyber-bullying is chronic. In some respects it is none too surprising we are dealing with words like snowflake, trigger warnings and safe spaces these days.

Take cyber bullying stats from the Association of Psychological Science in the US. In 2015 more than 16,000 young people were absent from school daily because of bullying. 83% of young people say cyber bullying has a negative impact on their self-esteem. 30% of young people have gone on to self-harm as a result of cyberbullying. 10% of young people have attempted to commit suicide as a result of cyberbullying. People who have been bullied are at greatest risk for health problems in adulthood, over six times more likely to be diagnosed with a serious illness, smoke regularly, or develop a psychiatric disorder compared to those not involved in bullying. In the US alone, suicides per 100,000 head of population since 2000 are up 38% according to WHO.

However the WiFi world is quickly escalating unreasoned stupidity in the real world. The internet is awash with so much ill-considered social media activity that if one chooses to breathe for 10 minutes the story will likely have changed 180 degrees from the initial knee jerk. Take the terrible events of Charlottesville this week. The driver that plowed into the crowd was initially reported as a white supremacist before other media reported he was Antifa. Regardless of his affiliation his actions were repugnant. Anyone with common decency can see that. Trying to justify the legitimacy of masked Antifa (many who were carrying baseball bats) staging a ‘peaceful’ protest was somehow morally superior to alt-right torch bearers or vice versa is almost like trying to say watering your lawn with gasoline is less harmful than diesel to kill off weeds.

While the tragedies of the lost lives and depraved acts of violence from both sides is impossible to ignore, the (social and mainstream) media was awash with one sided views. There was no debate and balanced reasoning was next to non existent. One could argue the media has always been biased and to some extent that is true however in the social media world clickbait means revenue and the more sensational and less accurate the reporting the higher the likely ‘hits’ which only exacerbates the problem. We only need to look at CNN’s admission that the ‘Russiagate’ story has been a fabrication for ratings. Integrity be damned. Sadly that is becoming almost an all too common thread of today’s society. Selfish, narcissistic and insensitive bullying.

The other problem nowadays is that almost everyone carries a video camera. It is as if many think they are behind the safety of their own computer screens, oblivious to what is going on. Only a few months ago, an armed SWAT team boarded a Malaysian Airlines flight to suppress a crazed passenger. Despite the screams to get down, multiple people could be seen standing as tall as possible trying to improve the angle of the altercation on their iPhones. There is a sick surrealism to it. Yet if we take this clickbait of someone’s footage at Charlottesville, disseminated to an audience already prejudiced, it only adds to the hysteria. The instant it hits the mobs’ feed it can lead to incorrect assumptions to what is actually going on, even worse hampering emergency services efficacy in controlling the situation. Yet, 10 minutes later, the unedited version of the same scene or one shot from a different angle can completely undermine that biased view. It might show how the violence really escalated rather than the deliberately cut version showing the evil of the unhinged. If we managed to get all of the collective footage from 1,000s of smartphones and objectively analyzed it all it wouldn’t be surprising to see both sides fueling the violence in different areas. Yet because it fits the picture of the ‘divided’ country narrative no attempts are made to seek balance which only fires up the misinformation.

Did Trump take too long to condemn the KKK, Neo-Nazi and White Supremacists? Perhaps. Was he waiting for a full debrief on what went on? Perhaps. Are all 63 million odd Trump voters that don’t openly condemn these acts of violence guilty of being white-supremacists by association? No. Are all Democrats responsible for what Antifa does? No. Internet trolls seem less intent on getting tacit admissions of guilt from their enemy. Think of the campaign which has identified some of the torch bearers leading several to get fired by their employers. Where was the campaign to identify the baseball bat wielding Antifa thugs? Was it because they were masked? Some might cynically claim they don’t have jobs to be fired from. However this idea that only one side is guilty serves no purpose and risks further division.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Both extremes are so caught up in their own views there is little scope for reasoning much less any desire to consider the alternative argument. This idea that Trump is all of a sudden responsible for unleashing this division is preposterous. Hate doesn’t surface in 6 months. It brews over longer periods of time. If anything Trump is a catalyst to it. His caustic manner is tipping an apple cart of decades of political correctness and walking on eggshells legislation that has sought in many cases to promote victimhood. The President’s actions now threaten many of these altruistic views and socialist ideals. They are upset. This isn’t to debate the rights and wrongs of policy set by previous administrations, rather seek to identify why this scourge is happening. It doesn’t justify any forms of violence but it highlights how tightly sprung things are. Just think of why a p*$$y grabbing vulgarian was able to defy all the odds in the election? Could it be that the underbelly of division has existed in America for so long? It finally reached breaking point and delivered him to the White House? The idea he has created this division is a complete falsehood. One might argue his tweets are stirring this hornet’s nest but the sad fact of the matter is that the problems have been brewing way before his inauguration. Ask yourself why hasn’t the mainstream media worked out the best way to cripple Trump is to ignore him? 18 months on since he won the GOP ticket they have not stopped hyperventilating which gives him more airtime than he deserves and ultimately makes them look foolish.

This bullying behaviour is only likely to get worse. The ever worsening cesspit of social media will only exacerbate the problem. Behind a keyboard, people feel they can afford to be 10 feet tall but seldom do they realize their actions could carry (un)intended negative reactions.

More laws are being created to clamp down on what is called ‘hate speech’ or discriminatory language. However we are witnessing more countries shut down free speech and innocent people are having their lives destroyed for expressing points of view that are completely acceptable and not even the slightest bit racist or bigoted (Australians will know the secret trial held by the AHRC of several QUT students expressing a fact). Seeking prescriptive measures to shut people up will invite exactly the sort of behaviour it seeks to prevent. One can call former EDL leader Tommy Robinson a bigot but he has two best selling books in the UK. Could it be there are more people in the UK that share his views than politicians are willing to admit because political correctness is easier for them to dodge discussing pertinent issues? Whether Tommy is right or wrong in his analysis is beside the point. He obviously represents a larger mindshare of the community. Shutting them up forces the movement underground. Do we ban his book? It doesn’t seek to address the problem which in his case is Islam. In some cases he has a point. The exposure of predominantly Bangladeshi/Pakistani rape gangs who have groomed 100s of innocent women across 18 British cities is an issue. Listening to Newcastle City Mayor Nick Forbes, one of the places impacted by this depravity, spent an entire interview dodging the question of these grooming gangs not wanting to discuss the M word. All it does is alienate more people against an optically biased system.

One can debate till the cows come home about whether the M word is the main factor but if it is not openly debated, it is not hard to see why some will grow prejudiced. It is hardly desirable. It doesn’t mean the thinking is right rather a growing number of people feel ignored. It doesn’t automatically make them racists or bigots. Some feel politicians are hiding from speaking openly of jihadi attacks on home soil, dismissing them as lone wolf attacks or the community’s fault for forcing them to commit such atrocious acts. If indeed the left leaning media is so assured of bigotry by Anglo Saxon Brits why not show the other side of the debate and broadcast hours of footage showing Muslim clerics speaking out against these attacks, everyday Muslims integrating with their non-Muslim communities and how they are actively working with authorities to weed the radicals that are demonizing their faith? No, it’s easier to point fingers at bigoted Brits who see no comfort offered by their elected leaders in what they see happening to their community. Once again bullying people for expressing what they perceive as legitimate concerns doesn’t solve the problem.

To put the shoe on the other foot, Robinson posted a video link of the start of an Oldham (a borough of Manchester) Council meeting. It showed the majority of Anglo-Saxon councillors with their heads bowed as the elected Muslim Mayor requested his imam to say prayers. Of course it easy to see why some might draw conclusions to the decline of centuries of British culture however looking deeper into the matter yielded interesting findings. Voter turnout at the last election in the 25% Muslim borough was around 30%. It was a fairly held election. Democracy. Whether local politics is too petty for some, if the residents of Oldham are so incensed by the idea of an imam saying prayers in Arabic and English after following the Serjeant at Arms carrying a mace bearing a Christian cross it is hard to have sympathy. If one is truly in fear of the cultural upheaval, why not use their democracy to change it? Expressing outrage at something that is controllable seems ridiculous.

Australia is in the midst of bullying as well. Same sex marriage (SSM) is on the table. A postal plebiscite is set to occur. Many argue that parliamentarians should vote on it and get it over with. Indeed there are far more pressing economic issues to deal with. Yet the Turnbull government lacks any moral authority and is beholden to so many internal factions to be able to pass so called marriage equality.

Still regardless of one’s views on SSM, the bullying is in full effect. Musician Nick Minchin created one of his hallmark curse-ladened parodies of a Peter Allen song called, “I still call Australia homophobic”. Sadly he is part of the problem, not the solution. One doesn’t have to be homophobic to be against SSM. Yet Minchin thinks it is ok to call these people ‘bigoted c*nts’. Such words have all the same traits of ridiculing Trump or Brexit voters in the lead up to the vote. It has the opposite impact at the polling booth.

A Tasmanian archbishop is being hauled before a tribunal for expressing his anti-SSM views on the grounds of spreading hate. Are his views old fashioned or just part of millennia of religion? A hotel was forced to cancel a lawful gathering of anti-SSM campaigners through intimidation. Is this the sort of behaviour (albeit at the fringe) that unites a nation on a subject?

Some argue it is a waste of $122mn to hold a SSM plebiscite for a government in a $750bn hole. Maybe it is but to many out there, they want a democratic vote to take place. Some feel lobby groups that ignore their concerns (however backward, ancient or stiff) on issues they hold dearly are the exact reason why a vote should be held. It doesn’t matter to them whether a Catholic country like Ireland passed gay marriage, these people don’t want to be brow beaten, attacked or pilloried for expressing an alternative view. I am quite certain that should ‘Yes’ get up in the plebiscite people will have had their say. Shouting down the views of others is wrong. Let their voices be heard and allow the marketplace for free speech settle the differences. Sadly this is not the case. Any polling done by Get Up which shows an emphatic victory should be discounted. Indeed if they are so sure of a ‘Yes’ outcome then they should be over the moon to let democracy back its findings. Secretly they think otherwise. What they view as a waste of money won’t be to others.

Some people fear (again we’re not debating the rights and wrongs of it) that should lobby group bullying win the fight for SSM by an act of parliament then what comes next? We only need to look at the Safe Schools Programme in Victoria which is nothing more than a way to enforce gender indoctrination under the guise of anti-bullying. Cross dressing/role playing, whichever bathrooms and other ‘progressive’ programs are not necessary for 6 year olds. Boys playing with Tonka trucks and Matchbox cars or girls playing with Barbie dolls is not something that requires the school system to enforce boys and girls to reverse toy box selections. When I was a baby my mother recalled I had a love for cars. Even from my pram I knew more car names than English words. I’m sure she wasn’t wheeling me around the Warringah Mall car park trying to force me to do male things. By the same token my daughters weren’t chained to the Bratz corner of Toys’R’us in order to force them to be girls. Seeing her mother apply makeup was something she wanted to do.

What this all boils down to is society’s growing intolerance for free and open debate. We do not lack the ability to talk but we’re incapable of listening. That alternative views must be mocked or banned. There are some with such inability to accept alternative views who suggest prison sentences for climate skepticism. Are the arguments for climate change so weak that alarmists believe the only way to force the end game is to legally ban freedom of opinion?

One imagines that if we put an Antifa and a KKK supporter in the same room unbeknownst to them both and asked a standard questions on a variety of topics they probably would agree on more than they would if within their representative groups. These experiments have been conducted before where complete strangers meet and by the end when identities are revealed there is an awakening. It isn’t forced but occurs naturally through cordial conversation.

I make no apology for my conservative views. One friend is an unabashed socialist. We debate intensely on a variety of issues we have polar views on. I recently wrote to him privately to thank him for broadening my understanding of his views. While I might disagree with him I certainly respect his right to debate his points, which he often does insightfully. Some points are indeed valid and on certain issues we see eye to eye. Others less so. However we listen.

Sadly sanctimony is becoming ever more firmly entrenched into our culture and it can have nothing but bad outcomes. Perhaps to end with a Jewish proverb – “slander slays three people: the spoken by, the spoken to and the spoken of”

 

Poverty Rates & the 2008/2016 Election Outcomes

2008-election

Here is a chart which tabulates the poverty levels by state and the 2008 election result. Undoubtedly the GFC had brought calamity to many and Obama romped home. This is what it looked like in 2016.

2016 election.png

When put side by side the evidence is clearer. The rise in inequality switched states won by the Dems in 2008 back to Republican in 2016. While much noise is made about the ‘economic legacy’ of the past 8 years marking a sub 5% unemployment rate the sad reality is that only three states saw a decline in poverty as a % of population since 2009 – Colorado, South Dakota and North Dakota.

20162008-election

Rising inequality is an inescapable feature. All the states that swung from Democrat in 2008 to Republican in 2016 experienced increased poverty, both in percentage of population terms and absolute numbers. As we can clearly see, the Republican states have been some of the worst in terms of poverty levels. In asbsolute numbers we see the state of impoverishment as follows in 2014 (note these stats were published by the Census Bureau in late 2016.

poverty by number.png

Whitelash? While Democrat heartlands California & NY have higher populations, we note the growth rate in poverty between 2000 and 2014 weighs in Republican heartlands.

poverty by 14.png

Looking at the % growth since Obama took office and the rates kept climbing in absolute numbers. although ironically at higher rates in Democrat states such as Nevada, Delaware, Rhode Island, California, New Jersey and Hawaii.

poverty-by-1409

Is it any wonder Americans want their country back before it is too late. Sure Trump has a lot of undesirable traits but these results show how 16 years of establishment rule failed the people and something that is out of the box is welcomed much more than many in the mainstream media are prepared to admit.

The DNC is all about Victimology & Hypocrisy

image

It seems everyone is a victim at the DNC. Whether the farcical promotion of illegal immigrants on day one. Or feminists with a “chronic reproductive illness (presumably code for lesbian)” on Day 2. Victimology is a DNC trump (no pun intended) card. Even Michelle Obama talked of her kids playing in the White House gardens which was built by slaves. Victimology at every turn. To turn the argument on its head hasn’t America ticked the diversity box by democratically electing a black President twice? I’m not saying America doesn’t have race issues in certain quarters but isn’t that proof of the pudding? Hillary as a white woman should by rights have a less challenging climb to the top job over a rival Obama called “orange”given their proposition.

I increasingly worry as a heterosexual white male that I fail the Democratic identity kit therefore making me a victim. Perhaps I should become a confused bisexual Muslim and colour my skin like Rachel Dolezal to get multiple free kicks from the diversity brigade. It’s pathetic. Even former Aussie PM Julia Gillard has weighed in to support Hillary Clinton with the gender bias garbage. Julia Gillard was criticized harshly during her term because she was plain hopeless. She was the first female Prime Minister never to be elected twice. But oh how she played the gender card. Her party promoted her beyond her abilities. A fact and ZERO to do with gender. Quite frankly if a female leader must resort to using the gender card she’s not fit for office. One of my favorite speeches was the no confidence motion passed against Thatcher in 1990. She single handedly smashed every Labour MP’s questions in such a demolition job that she joked their weakness made them “ladies”. She used her gender as a weapon showing it was irrelevant. I encourage everyone to listen. The most impressive PMQ I’ve ever ever heard. Link here. It was such a drubbing she even remarked “I’m enjoying this!” That is GIRL POWER! It makes Micelle Obama’s speech look amateur by comparison. The eloquence, intelligence and wit.

This constant pandering to minorities is such rubbish. Why aren’t these politicians talking about real issues? The world economy is set to plunge off a cliff and the DNC is roping in celebrities, arguably the most out of touch people on the planet, to tell us why voting for Hillary Clinton is the right thing to do. How could the growing financially oppressed take an in and out of rehab multi millionaire celebrity’s endorsement? These idiots are babbling over their crises and taking every opportunity to raise their own dwindling profiles through the media circus surrounding the DNC. People aren’t atupid.

No, the Dems have to champion Victimology! One could hardly call Hillary Clinton a victim given she got let off by the FBI in such a brazen rigged  fashion. That her own party’s chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was behind the deliberate shafting of an old man of her faith even using their religion to undermine him. The height of hypocrisy yet Clinton hired her to join her campaign. Double down on the hypocrisy yet claim victimology at all the Sanders supporters that booed her.

So the DNC also bangs on about  sexual orientation which is frankly irrelevant. I and I’m sure many others don’t need to know what people wish to do in the bedroom. Obama has spent so much time ramming transgender bathrooms in schools and removing gender titles in the military which is overwhelmingly male. As a citizen I want my military to have fangs not hold special LGBTQIA pride days. If I asked for a white heterosexual pride day I’d be instantly branded a bigot. The diversity crew need to wake up to the fact that the more Victimology goes on the more minorities are created who end up wanting to maintain that status given all the preferential treatment it accrues.

Diversity creates the exact opposite of what it intends. It divides and categorizes. If I want to fill in a job application now I wonder if electing LGBT on my form will bump me up the priority list so companies can hit diversity quotas. The diversity garbage I read regularly on LinkedIn by Unilever CEO Polman would turn me instantly off as a shareholder. By the very championing of his diversity bias I am confident they aren’t hiring the best but the most diverse. All I want as a shareholder is my board maximizing returns. If the best results are brought through 100% women based on meritocracy I’m all for it.

We’ve strayed a tad off topic but the point to be made to to the DNC is that ‘diversity’ is not what the growing number of destitute and battlers want. They want security, stability and prosperity not fluffy ideals that prevent it.

So keep wheeling in the celebrities, minoroties, feminists, LGBT activists at the DNC and drive the disaffected further into Trump’s grasp. Yes, you’re really that out of touch with your constituents. They may be uneducated but they can see straight through the diversity and victimology because they are the ones most in need of support not platitudes! If you get rapturous applause within a DNC don’t think they speak for the whole.

The irony is Trump has the highest support of blacks, Hispanics and gays of any Republican candidate in history. Makes you think why would the people most stereotypically likely to want diversity choose to back a racist, bigoted misogynist? I can’t work it out either! Maybe because they see his authenticity behind the brashness.