Steve Sailer on “Identity Stalinism”

Excerpts from Steve Sailer’s latest op-ed in Taki’s Magazine:

Because the Democrats’ fundamental problem is all the hate roiling their own constituents, they project onto Republicans their own tendency toward hatred. Freud came up with a lot of bad ideas, but one of his better ones is “projection”: Human beings defend themselves by attributing their own bad traits to others.

Dennis Dale observes:

These hoaxes pull the veil back, by releasing the demonic resentments of those who think they’ve suddenly been given free reign to express them. There’s a reason the left projects the charge of the “dog whistle”…. It’s precisely where they’re at, itching to give their animus and hatred free reign.

Thus, the Democrats constantly claim that the reason they hate their enemies is not because they are inconveniently in their way, but because they are hateful. And the reason they are hateful is because they are hate-filled. Thus, a high school junior waiting for his bus becomes a Symbol of Hate.

A basic concept that explains much fashionable moral reasoning in the current year is “Who? Whom?” While promoting the collectivization of agriculture in 1929, which led to the Ukrainian Holomodor, Stalin announced:

The fact is, we live according to Lenin’s formula: Kto–Kovo? [Who-Whom?]: will we knock them, the capitalists, flat and give them (as Lenin expresses it) the final, decisive battle, or will they knock us flat?

Other principles of morality believe in objective standards of behavior, but Stalinism assumed that something was good if the good people (e.g., Stalinists) did it, but bad if the bad people (i.e., those hated by Stalinists) did the same thing.

Similarly, under today’s rules of Identity Stalinism, while the aggressor, objectively, was obviously the man banging his drum in the boy’s face, that adult was nonwhite and leftist, while the child was white and a Trump supporter. So, by the rules of Who? Whom?, the assailant had to be the victim and the victim the attacker.

As they say, read the whole thing here.

The anti-Christianity of globalist progressives

It’s beginning to become obvious, even to those like David French who aren’t nationalists, that the anti-Christian sentiments of the progressive left are dangerous and destructive:

The combination of ignorance, fear, and hatred wielded against conservative Christians in progressive quarters is disturbing. Just in this new year, we’ve seen two progressive senators aggressively question a Christian judicial nominee because of his membership in a mainstream Catholic service organization, we’ve seen a days-long attack on Karen Pence for teaching part-time at a Christian ministry, and we watched a stunning online feeding frenzy against students at a Catholic boys’ school based on a misleadingly clipped video segment of a much longer confrontation.

Moreover, we just concluded a Supreme Court term in which progressive governments attempted to erode the constitutional firewall against compelled speech by attempting to compel Christians to advance messages they found immoral. California attempted to compel pro-life pregnancy centers to advertise free or low-cost abortions. Colorado attempted to compel a man to custom-design a cake for a gay wedding.

And along with each of these events we’ve seen tens of thousands of words of commentary declaring Christians bigoted and hateful — often based on condescending claims of hypocrisy premised on sheer ignorance of Christian theology and tradition. For example, how many times must Christians hear from know-it-all commentators that they can’t possibly be credited for their sincere religious beliefs unless they fully apply all elements of Jewish Levitical law?

Hostility to traditional, orthodox Christianity is no longer confined to the white progressive elite. It’s now popular in the white Left. Liberal elites who attack traditional Christian beliefs and express contempt for traditional Christians aren’t demonstrating their disconnect from America, they’re giving their constituents exactly what they want.

That drum-beating Nathan Phillips guy even tried to disrupt Mass at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception with his group of activists the day after the confrontation with the Covington Catholic boys. Not only has he been proven to be a total liar, but now he’s a confirmed disrespecter of Roman Catholicism and Christianity in general.

It’s increasingly clear that hostility towards the Christian faith and Western Civilization is now fashionable. And the proper response on our end is to actively defend them from this hostility.

My recent reads

The Catholic Study Bible, 2nd Edition, edited by Donald Senior and John J. Collins. There is a third edition, but I’ve had this second edition for a while and just picked it back up a few days ago. I’m trying to do a better job of reading Scripture each day.

Biografia non autorizzata della seconda guerra mondiale by Marco Pizzuti. I haven’t been doing enough intensive reading lately, hence I’m going through this book slowly and learning any unfamiliar words and phrases. The more you study a language, the more you realize you don’t know. Odd but true.

Ideas for a Pure Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology by Edmund Husserl, translated by Daniel O. Dahlstrom. The latest heavyweight philosophical tome I’ve delved into. Definitely taking notes on this one.

St. Athanasius: The Father of Orthodoxy by F.A. Forbes. Read this one pretty quickly. Will be buying more of this author’s hagiographies in the future.

Arguing Religion: A Bishop Speaks at Facebook and Google by Bishop Robert Barron. This book is based on the lectures Barron gave at Facebook and Google. Only 100 pages long but has plenty of good stuff. Barron is a treasure because he’s great at evangelization, philosophical argumentation, and scholarship. YouTube video of his Facebook talk is here, and video of his Google talk here.

I also picked up from the library F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Curious Case of Benjamin Button and This Side of Paradise. I also want to reread his classic The Great Gatsby again.

From Book One, Chapter Five of George Orwell’s “1984”

Note the last two sentences I’ve bolded:

“It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself – anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.”

Sound relevant?

Clown World Link Dump

1. Notre Dame used MLK Day to justify covering up a mural of Christopher Columbus

2. Wait, another hate crime hoax? Color me surprised!

3. Alexandria Occasional-Cortex: Climate change is “our World War II” and the world could end in 12 years if we don’t address it

4. More Occasional-Cortex: “A system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health is wrong.”

5. German MP returns to parliament as a transgender

6. Covington Catholic High School had to cancel classes today over “safety concerns”

Supreme Court permits temporary restrictions on transgender soldiers

5 to 4 decision, as you might expect:

The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will allow President Donald Trump to temporarily enforce restrictions on transgender individuals serving in the military.

As is typical of orders of this nature, the Court gave no reason for its decision, though Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan noted their dissent.

The Trump administration first petitioned the Supreme Court to decide directly on the legality of the trans-soldiers ban, after federal trial judges in California, Washington, D.C., and Washington state issued orders prohibiting its enforcement. The plaintiffs in those lawsuits argue the policy violates a range of constitutional rights including the First Amendment, equal protection, and due process.

The case will now return to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for further proceedings. Should the administration lose before the 9th Circuit, they can return to the Supreme Court for a definitive ruling on the legality of its restrictions on transgender soldiers.

That memo provides that individuals with a history of gender dysphoria — a clinical term referring to anxiety triggered by the conflict between one’s biological sex and the gender with which they identify — may enlist provided they are willing to serve in their biological sex and have not suffered gender dysphoria for a continuous three-year period prior to recruitment. Active personnel who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria may continue to serve provided they do so in their biological sex.

It’s not the final word, as the second to last paragraph that I quoted above indicates, but it gives us an idea on what the final word might be.

Mark Antony and Cleopatra’s tomb to be uncovered

History buffs everywhere will find this news fascinating:

The long-lost tomb of Mark Antony and Cleopatra will be “uncovered soon,” historians in Egypt say.

Archaeologists believe they have identified the hidden location of the crypt in which they say the leaders are buried together.

“The long-lost tomb of Antony and Cleopatra will be eventually uncovered.

“The burial site has been finally estimated to be in the region of Taposiris Magna, 30km (18 miles) away from Alexandria,” Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass said.

The 71-year-old, who has vast experience in archaeology, added: “I hope to find the tomb of Antony and Cleopatra soon. I do believe that they are buried in the same tomb.

“We are so close to discover the accurate location of the tomb; we are on the right way.

“We know where exactly we have to dig.”

If you’re not familiar with this part of history, Cleopatra VII was the last ruler of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt before the Romans conquered them. Mark Antony was a Roman politician and general who supported Julius Caesar and helped avenge his murder. He was then part of the Second Triumvirate, a divided government between Antony, Octavian, and Marcus Aemilius Lepidus. Antony was assigned to the eastern provinces and began an affair with Cleopatra VII.

But the Second Triumvirate fell apart as the triumvirs jockeyed for greater political power. Long story short, civil war broke out and Octavian defeated Mark Antony, who committed suicide along with Cleopatra VII. The Roman Republic was no more, Octavian became Caesar Augustus, and the Roman Empire was born.

Nick Sandmann’s statement

Nick Sandmann was the guy front and center smiling at Nathan Phillips while Phillips was beating his drum and chanting in Sandmann’s face. Here’s Sandmann’s official statement on what happened:

I am providing this factual account of what happened on Friday afternoon at the Lincoln Memorial to correct misinformation and outright lies being spread about my family and me.

I am the student in the video who was confronted by the Native American protestor. I arrived at the Lincoln Memorial at 4:30 p.m. I was told to be there by 5:30 p.m., when our busses were due to leave Washington for the trip back to Kentucky. We had been attending the March for Life rally, and then had split up into small groups to do sightseeing.

When we arrived, we noticed four African American protestors who were also on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. I am not sure what they were protesting, and I did not interact with them. I did hear them direct derogatory insults at our school group.

The protestors said hateful things. They called us “racists,” “bigots,” “white crackers,” “faggots,” and “incest kids.” They also taunted an African American student from my school by telling him that we would “harvest his organs.” I have no idea what that insult means, but it was startling to hear.

Because we were being loudly attacked and taunted in public, a student in our group asked one of our teacher chaperones for permission to begin our school spirit chants to counter the hateful things that were being shouted at our group. The chants are commonly used at sporting events. They are all positive in nature and sound like what you would hear at any high school. Our chaperone gave us permission to use our school chants. We would not have done that without obtaining permission from the adults in charge of our group.

At no time did I hear any student chant anything other than the school spirit chants. I did not witness or hear any students chant “build that wall” or anything hateful or racist at any time. Assertions to the contrary are simply false. Our chants were loud because we wanted to drown out the hateful comments that were being shouted at us by the protestors.

After a few minutes of chanting, the Native American protestors, who I hadn’t previously noticed, approached our group. The Native American protestors had drums and were accompanied by at least one person with a camera.

The protestor everyone has seen in the video began playing his drum as he waded into the crowd, which parted for him. I did not see anyone try to block his path. He locked eyes with me and approached me, coming within inches of my face. He played his drum the entire time he was in my face.

I never interacted with this protestor. I did not speak to him. I did not make any hand gestures or other aggressive moves. To be honest, I was startled and confused as to why he had approached me. We had already been yelled at by another group of protestors, and when the second group approached I was worried that a situation was getting out of control where adults were attempting to provoke teenagers.

I believed that by remaining motionless and calm, I was helping to diffuse the situation. I realized everyone had cameras and that perhaps a group of adults was trying to provoke a group of teenagers into a larger conflict. I said a silent prayer that the situation would not get out of hand.

During the period of the drumming, a member of the protestor’s entourage began yelling at a fellow student that we “stole our land” and that we should “go back to Europe.” I heard one of my fellow students begin to respond. I motioned to my classmate and tried to get him to stop engaging with the protestor, as I was still in the mindset that we needed to calm down tensions.

I never felt like I was blocking the Native American protestor. He did not make any attempt to go around me. It was clear to me that he had singled me out for a confrontation, although I am not sure why.

The engagement ended when one of our teachers told me the busses had arrived and it was time to go. I obeyed my teacher and simply walked to the busses. At that moment, I thought I had diffused the situation by remaining calm, and I was thankful nothing physical had occurred.

I never understood why either of the two groups of protestors were engaging with us, or exactly what they were protesting at the Lincoln Memorial. We were simply there to meet a bus, not become central players in a media spectacle. This is the first time in my life I’ve ever encountered any sort of public protest, let alone this kind of confrontation or demonstration.

I was not intentionally making faces at the protestor. I did smile at one point because I wanted him to know that I was not going to become angry, intimidated or be provoked into a larger confrontation. I am a faithful Christians and practicing Catholic, and I always try to live up to the ideals my faith teaches me—to remain respectful of others, and to take no action that would lead to conflict or violence.

I harbor no ill will for this person. I respect this person’s right to protest and engage in free speech activities, and I support his chanting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial any day of the week. I believe he should re-think his tactics of invading the personal space of others, but that is his choice to make.

I am being called every name in the book, including a racist, and I will not stand for this mob-like character assassination of my family’s name. My parents were not on this trip, and I strive to represent my family in a respectful way in all public settings.

I have received physical and death threats via social media, as well as hateful insults. One person threatened to harm me at school, and one person claims to live in my neighborhood. My parents are receiving death and professional threats because of the social media mob that has formed over this issue.

I love my school, my teachers and my classmates. I work hard to achieve good grades and to participate in several extracurricular activities. I am mortified that so many people have come to believe something that did not happen—that students from my school were chanting or acting in a racist fashion toward African Americans or Native Americans. I did not do that, do not have hateful feelings in my heart, and did not witness any of my classmates doing that.

I cannot speak for everyone, only for myself. But I can tell you my experience with Covington Catholic is that students are respectful of all races and cultures. We also support everyone’s right to free speech. I am not going to comment on the words or account of Mr. Phillips, as I don’t know him and would not presume to know what is in his heart or mind. Nor am I going to comment further on the other protestors, as I don’t know their hearts or minds, either.

I have read that Mr. Phillips is a veteran of the United States Marines. I thank him for his service and am grateful to anyone who puts on the uniform to defend our nation. If anyone has earned the right to speak freely, it is a U.S. Marine veteran.

I can only speak for myself and what I observed and felt at the time. But I would caution everyone passing judgement based on a few seconds of video to watch the longer video clips that are on the internet, as they show a much different story than is being portrayed by people with agendas.

I provided this account of events to the Diocese of Covington so they may know exactly what happened, and I stand ready and willing to cooperate with any investigation they are conducting.

###

This is the only statement that has been made by the Sandmann family. Any comments attributed to any member of the family that is not contained in this document are fabricated. The family will not be answering individual media inquiries.

Clown World Link Dump

1. Kathy Griffin unhinged over the Covington Catholic students

2. Although parodying Trump’s “total and complete shutdown” line, senior Democrat calls for banning kids from wearing MAGA hats

3. From over six years ago, but still clownish: Jewish rabbi says Islamization of Europe is a “good thing” that will remove all “remnants” of the “impurity of Christianity.”

4. The vulgarity of the Women’s March

5. Gynarcho-tyranny, to use Roissy’s language: UK bans cross-examination of domestic abuse victims

If the roles were reversed…

Nancy Pelosi is “winning in her battle with Trump,” argues Los Angeles Times columnist Doyle McManus. Teaser:

Nancy Pelosi is winning her showdown with President Trump for one simple reason: She knows how to do her job better than he knows how to do his.

The House speaker is fond of three precepts; spend time with her and you’ll hear them all. One is from Abraham Lincoln: “Public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail; against it, nothing can succeed.”

The second is from her father, an old-school Democratic mayor of Baltimore: “Votes are the coin of the realm.” The third is her own: Never underestimate Nancy Pelosi.

In this battle, she’s winning — and Trump’s losing — on all three counts.

Read the whole thing here. If the U.S. had a Democratic president, a GOP House, and a month-long partial government shutdown over some divisive issue, the GOP Speaker of the House would be an “obstructionist” and “playing petty politics.” But since we have a GOP president and a Democratic House, the Democratic Speaker is “empowering,” a “fighter,” and a “winner.” Not just because she’s a Democrat, but also because she’s a woman, I should add.