This Is How I See It

Personally, I’ve figured that the statues honoring Confederates in public squares should be moved for some time now – can’t remember exactly when it occurred to me, but it was nigh to 20 years ago. Here’s why:

At the end of the day, the Confederate leadership decided to break up the nation because an election didn’t go their way – and it signaled that the long-held Southern dominance over the national Executive was coming to an end. Demographics decreed that: the population of the North was not only much larger, but was growing much faster. No matter how you sliced it, eventually the Southern leadership was going to be on the outside looking in. They didn’t want that – so they decided to set up shop for themselves. And that is what started the war – wars always being started by someone desiring something they don’t have title to. The reality is that if the South hadn’t gone out, Lincoln would have led a minority government in DC and probably would have failed for re-election. But the Southern leadership wanted their out so bad that they deliberately engineered the election of Lincoln by splitting the Democrat vote…and then used Lincoln’s election as their excuse for secession. Such people, quite simply, do not deserve places of honor in any American city.

Now, as for the soldiers – that is a bit of a different story. I always honor soldiers who do their duty – and can feel nothing but sympathy for those who stayed true even in a losing cause. But even then, people like Lee broke their sworn oath. You might have heard of the Oathkeepers groups out there…people who (correctly) hold that their oath to defend the Constitution doesn’t end the day they get out of the military. This is true – there was an expiration of my enlistment, but there was no expiration for my oath. I’m bound by it until the day I die. So was Lee – if he felt that he couldn’t fight against the South (as his duty commanded) then his only course of action was to refuse to fight, at all. He choose to break his oath and fight against that which he had sworn to defend. A statue honoring him is, in my view, just wrong.

To be sure, for the Left, this is all just Step One. Step Two is where they demand that statues and memorials to the Founders be torn down. The people causing the ruckus on the left don’t hate particular things about America, they hate the very idea of America. They view our history as nothing but a compendium of evil and they won’t be happy until all that is destroyed and some sort of Progressive Utopia (ie, a totalitarian dictatorship) is imposed on the United States. But just because the Left is lunatic, doesn’t mean we have to defend everything they attack. I think our best course of action, as Conservatives, is to urge that all Confederate memorials be moved to museum-like settings. Obviously, the national cemeteries must remain inviolate, but we also must not destroy the statues and memorials…but they can be moved and placed in a setting where they educate.

That said, I’m not about to be lectured on what is right and wrong by people who hold that abortion is a morally good thing. No Progressive who holds such views has any business telling me what I should or should not do. And I do not have to disavow racists because I am not a racist. I have nothing to do with them; they are not part of any political or social coalition I belong to. Just take a look at the emblems they carry and you know, instantly, that they are not part of any patriotic, Conservative, Christian, American grouping. They are largely pagans; they hate the United States as much as the Progressive lunatics do (you might see a couple American flags at their events, but pride of place is given to Confederate and Nazi symbols) – they, too, despise all that has come before (other than Confederate leaders, of course) and wish to impose upon the United States their own form of totalitarianism. Trump, as I noted before, was right to condemn “all sides”. Odd day in America when the only political leader who gets it right – who has the courage to speak what is obviously true – is President Trump. My estimation of him went up quite a lot with that comment.

I’m also not going to be lectured to by supposed Conservative “leaders” who say that I must do this or must do that or I’m betraying Conservatism. All I can say about modern American Conservatism is that it didn’t even manage to defund NPR – if this is “leadership” then I don’t want it. People who just lose gracefully to Progressives who shout “racist” at the drop of the hat hold none of my respect – I won’t follow them anywhere.

We are slouching towards Civil War, folks. People who know least – antifa and alt-right – are most sure about everything. They are setting up fights (helped by the left, mostly, because they feel it is tactically in their best interest) which, one day, might degenerate into mass violence. Junior-league Leninists (as I called them many years ago) are desperately calling forth a Franco to fight them.

Now, just why is this happening? Because they don’t know – and they don’t know because they weren’t taught anything relevant or true. I pointed out on Twitter today that both the antifa and alt-right people are products of the public schools and pop culture that the left has created and owns outright. We Conservatives had nothing to do with this – other than the negative effect of not really doing anything to stop it (largely because our so-called leaders were afraid of the fight). If kids aren’t taught the glory of America, then they will go for some other form of glory…people want a cause; take away the cause of making a more perfect Union, and some other cause will arise. Did you see the picture of those alt-right nimrods? They were clearly middle class white kids – children who have had it soft their whole lives. They’ve got nothing to really complain about…but, there they are, hating their own nation and their own people…and getting into battle with other middle class kids (who are also, in their large majority, white) who have had it soft, but also hate their own nation and their own people. Into the vacuum of not telling kids about Valley Forge, Shilo and Guadalcanal rushes the twin lunacies of Communism and Nazism. I read that one of the leaders of the white racist groups was, a few years back, a Occupy Wall Street activist…don’t know for sure if it is true, but it doesn’t surprise me in the least. These kids have nothing in their brains of merit, and so they are easy prey for anyone with a con to sell…and I can see them falling for different cons in succession.

As I see it, now, our job as Conservatives is to just push back with all our might against this – and against both sides. Don’t get drawn into the Progressive game of “condemn the racist” because no matter what we say on it, the left will still call us racists. Also don’t fall for twaddle about “don’t punch right” which the alt-right is trying to sell. Punch back (rhetorically, of course) against everyone who hates this nation, the reason for their hatred be damned. This is the greatest nation in human history – we are the good guys. We’ve fought Nazis and Communists before and we must keep doing so. The survival of our nation as a Republic is at stake over these next few years – we either push these fools back into the ash heap of history, or our nation is gone.

A Much Better Open Thread

Legal Insurrection has a run-down on the Alabama special election to replace Jeff Sessions in the Senate. The Outsider Trump-like candidate Roy Moore is polling in the lead while the Establishment guy, Luther Strange, is coming up second. Winning the GOP primary is to win the Seat – but to win it outright, one of the candidates has to get 50%…if no one does, the top two go to a runoff. Oddly, Trump endorsed McConnell’s guy, Strange (who was appointed by the governor to fill Sessions’ seat) – and that endorsement was right before Trump started ripping into McConnell a bit over the Obamacare failure. Very odd – some are holding this as a mere Trump mistake in endorsing the Establishment guy and that we True Conservatives should push back and help the Outsider win…which would help Trump in the long run. I’m not so sure – mostly because I’m not so sure that Trump has it in for McConnell while I’m getting more and more convinced that Trump’s best friend on Capitol Hill might be McConnell.

McConnell is a realist – he knows that for better or worse, the fortunes of the GOP go with Trump. Trump wins, GOP wins – Trump loses, GOP loses. For someone like McConnell, it doesn’t matter what you think about Trump: all that matters is how to work Trump for the benefit of the GOP. And, of course, someone like McConnell has an extremely thick skin – he’s not about to go into a fuss about some bull-in-the-china-shop stuff from Trump. Furthermore, the “battle” between McConnell and Trump might be rather contrived – designed to allow Trump to continue to burnish his anti-Establishment street cred at no real cost while Trump and McConnell quietly lay the groundwork for legislative victory in the future…and in that, both McConnell and Trump won’t need ideologically committed warriors, but “party men” who will do what the leadership wants…and, so, Strange would be their guy. We’ll see how it comes out.

Serena Williams opined that she was excited about the prospect of being a mother as it would make her feel like “a real woman”. The left reacted to this as you would expect. I’ll have to defer to mothers out there about just how being a mother makes one feel – but I suspect that a gigantic amount of biology hangs upon the fact of being a mother. The basic characteristic of feminism is to deny what is distinctly feminine – as I noted in a very long quote from Chesterton the other day. There is a gigantic level of absurdity out there in feminism which holds that women can only be happy if they do things that men do…as if being a wife, mother and homemaker is somehow less than being a rent-seeking politician, or some such. Hate to break it to everyone, but being a mother is the absolute most important thing anyone can be – because if we don’t have mothers, we don’t have people.

Hillary was recently videotaped being normal- V the K comments:

…I get that except for a few embarrassingly deranged and obsessed dead-enders like Peter Daou and Lena Dunham, most people recognize that Hillary is over. It’s not about sticking another fork in the old bag, it’s… what … psychologically speaking… is her deal? First it was the ‘spontaneous meeting’ in the woods with a ‘neighbor’ who turned out to be a Hillary 2016 campaign worker. And now, it’s this ‘casual stroll’ in New York City carefully documented by a professional videographer.

First of all, what is the source of this psychological need to present herself as a normal person? Real, normal people don’t obsess over being perceived as real normal people. Second, why is the vehicle for her portraying herself as a normal person… carefully choreographed and stage-managed ‘spontaneous events?’ that are professionally documented and provided to the press…

My guess: she’s laying the groundwork for another run in 2020…yet another re-invention of her persona: in this case, the wise Elder Stateswoman who took her loss with grace and will now bless us with the opportunity of correcting our deplorable error in 2016.

The Nation says that the DNC hack was actually an inside job. One crucial bit of information – which does need to be checked, I don’t have anything like the knowledge to opine on it’s validity – is that the amount of data taken was too much to be done via a remote hack: that it would have to have been done by plugging into the computer in question. Anyone savvy on tech issues is free to advise. But I’ve long suspected it was an inside job – perhaps by some disgruntled Bernie supporters. What I’m really looking for is a way to tie all this together – the hack, the absurd Russia collusion story, that bogus dossier used to smear Trump (and perhaps as justification for a FISA warrant on his team), and Debbie Wasserman Schultz’ bizarre IT guy. We could be sitting on a scandal the likes of which DC has never seen – seriously: make Watergate pale in comparison.

Don Surber notes that last year’s election was the 9/11 of our Progressives – they’ll never get over it. And probably never cease to be rather insane about it.

Just a Quick Open Thread

Had the grand-kids over for the week – so, too busy to post. Completely exhausted, now. Lots of fun!

Anyways…

Google is providing more proof that large corporations are inimical to everything the United States is supposed to stand for. If we Conservatives really want a Conservative America, we’re going to have to wrap our heads around the fact that large corporations are just as baleful (at least) as large government bureaucracies. Of course, large corporations are merely large bureaucracies. You think anyone is really in charge? That there is a fixed plan? No – its all ad hoc. Just a bunch of people rent-seeking and time-serving. The path of least resistance in a large corporate body (government or private) is to just go along with whomever is whining the loudest. As Progressives are professional whiners, all large bureaucracies will eventually become home and haven to Progressives. The worst of it is that, once captured, said bureaucracy becomes a means of enforcing Progressive ideas – regardless of how insane they are in terms of government policy or corporate profitability. All large corporations have to be broken up: make them smaller and make them compete to stay alive: that, right there, will lower the ability of Progressives to rule the roost. I’m not mad at Google – I’m mad there aren’t several other “Googles” out there to take immediate advantage of folly.

The crisis in North Korea is just endless proof of MacArthur’s statement – in war, there is no substitute for victory. This mess isn’t Trump’s – it is a mess 60 years in the making and entirely produced by the political cowardice of American leadership. I don’t know how this comes out, save that absurd fears of a nuclear exchange are just stupid. North Korea’s regime doesn’t want to commit suicide. They just want to saber rattle so they can get some bribes. We’ll see what comes out – but if Trump holds firm, you will see North Korea backing down at some point.

The official word is that Trump is losing his base. If so, then Trump is done for. I don’t see it – haven’t seen Trumpsters jumping ship, that is. We’ll see how things come out in the coming elections – that will be the only way we’ll know. But Trump is, by and large, doing what he said he’d do, or at least trying to…and the fact that the GOPe and the overall Establishment are trying to stop it is far more likely to cement Trump’s base of support than dissipate it.

That’s all for now – how you guys been doing?

Senator Flake’s Defense of the Establishment

I want to dig rather deep into Senator Flake’s anti-Trump op-ed, because it perfectly encapsulates what I think is wrong with a certain species of Conservatism. His bits are in block quotes:

Who could blame the people who felt abandoned and ignored by the major parties for reaching in despair for a candidate who offered oversimplified answers to infinitely complex questions and managed to entertain them in the process? With hindsight, it is clear that we all but ensured the rise of Donald Trump.

Your first clue is “oversimplified”. You see, you might think that the problem of lax enforcement of our laws is, well, lax enforcement of our laws – but you’re wrong! It’s complex. Sure, all complexities tend to work in favor of letting Progressives get their way and/or get away with it, but it’s complex! Trust us!

I will let the liberals answer for their own sins in this regard. (There are many.) But we conservatives mocked Barack Obama’s failure to deliver on his pledge to change the tone in Washington even as we worked to assist with that failure. It was we conservatives who, upon Obama’s election, stated that our No. 1 priority was not advancing a conservative policy agenda but making Obama a one-term president—the corollary to this binary thinking being that his failure would be our success and the fortunes of the citizenry would presumably be sorted out in the meantime.

How dare we Republicans make it a goal that Obama be a one-term President! Oh, what’s that you say? The Democrats have pledged to try and make Trump a less-than-one-term-President? And have dreamed of doing a “Watergate” on every GOP President since Nixon? Who cares about that! That is one of their own sins in this regard! We GOPers are better than that – so, let’s not have any of this nonsense about trying to make a Democrat a one-term President.

It was we conservatives who were largely silent when the most egregious and sustained attacks on Obama’s legitimacy were leveled by marginal figures who would later be embraced and legitimized by far too many of us. It was we conservatives who rightly and robustly asserted our constitutional prerogatives as a co-equal branch of government when a Democrat was in the White House but who, despite solemn vows to do the same in the event of a Trump presidency, have maintained an unnerving silence as instability has ensued. To carry on in the spring of 2017 as if what was happening was anything approaching normalcy required a determined suspension of critical faculties. And tremendous powers of denial.

I’ve been sympathetic to this impulse to denial, as one doesn’t ever want to believe that the government of the United States has been made dysfunctional at the highest levels, especially by the actions of one’s own party. Michael Gerson, a con­servative columnist and former senior adviser to President George W. Bush, wrote, four months into the new presidency, “The conservative mind, in some very visible cases, has become diseased,” and conservative institutions “with the blessings of a president … have abandoned the normal constraints of reason and compassion.”

Just ignore all that bit about W being “selected, not elected”. Also, for goodness sake, please don’t remember all that “Chimpy McSmirk BusHitler” stuff. Pretty sure we need you to forget all that violent fantasies that Progressives entertained about President Bush, as well. And, if you really want to be cool, forget all those times you’ve been called a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot.

More important that we fear that “instability” – you see, when things aren’t going along just as they have, it is bad. Don’t ask why it’s bad: it just is. You are supposed to be shaking in your boots that Trump isn’t doing things like everyone else! Please be frighted. Pretty please? With sugar on top? If you won’t be frightened, then how am I to convince you to give power back to those you rejected last year?

For a conservative, that’s an awfully bitter pill to swallow. So as I layered in my defense mechanisms, I even found myself saying things like, “If I took the time to respond to every presiden­tial tweet, there would be little time for anything else.” Given the volume and velocity of tweets from both the Trump campaign and then the White House, this was certainly true. But it was also a monumental dodge. It would be like Noah saying, “If I spent all my time obsessing about the coming flood, there would be little time for anything else.” At a certain point, if one is being honest, the flood becomes the thing that is most worthy of attention. At a certain point, it might be time to build an ark.

This is far more revealing than Flake meant, I’m sure. They hate that Trump tweets. They say they hate it because it is vulgar and chaotic – but what they really hate is that Trump is able to speak directly to the people. This bothers them because they know it signals and end on the Establishment monopoly on forming the American mind. It doubly bothers them that they know their Progressive buddies who run Twitter can’t afford to shut Trump down.

Under our Constitution, there simply are not that many people who are in a position to do something about an executive branch in chaos. As the first branch of government (Article I), the Congress was designed expressly to assert itself at just such moments. It is what we talk about when we talk about “checks and balances.” Too often, we observe the unfolding drama along with the rest of the country, passively, all but saying, “Someone should do something!” without seeming to realize that that someone is us. And so, that unnerving silence in the face of an erratic executive branch is an abdication, and those in positions of leadership bear particular responsibility.

Apparently, being erratic is a crisis? You see how he’s doing this? He’s piggy-backing the idea of impeachment on to the notion that, somehow, Trump is just bad. He hasn’t broken any laws; he hasn’t done any un-Constitutional acts (you know, like using the IRS to attack his opponents – say, Senator Flake, did you urge the impeachment of President Obama over that “erratic” action?); but he’s got to go! Once again: please be afraid!

There was a time when the leadership of the Congress from both parties felt an institutional loyalty that would frequently create bonds across party lines in defense of congressional prerogatives in a unified front against the White House, regardless of the president’s party. We do not have to go very far back to identify these exemplars—the Bob Doles and Howard Bakers and Richard Lugars of the Senate. Vigorous partisans, yes, but even more important, principled constitutional conservatives whose primary interest was in governing and making America truly great.

Funny how that time of institutional loyalty always worked out to a Republican President being done in or at least harmed by his fellow Republicans. Where were the Democrats who went out to advise President Clinton that his perjury had forfeited his ability to be President? A Democrat who even made a peep about Obama’s pen-and-phone actions? The whole concept of institutional loyalty is bull – and Senator Flake knows it. There should be institutional loyalty, but there isn’t; and never really has been. We have partisan elections to determine which partisan policies we’ll pursue – and if the Congress and the White House are of the same party, they are just going to go on with it. The only difference is that there are always Republicans who are willing to undermine the evident will of the American people in creating either a Republican Congress and/or a Republican White House. Thanks, Senator! We definitely gave you our votes and campaign cash so that you could cut us off at the knees!

But then the period of collapse and dysfunction set in, amplified by the internet and our growing sense of alienation from each other, and we lost our way and began to rationalize away our principles in the process. But where does such capitulation take us? If by 2017 the conservative bargain was to go along for the very bumpy ride because with congressional hegemony and the White House we had the numbers to achieve some long-held policy goals—even as we put at risk our institutions and our values—then it was a very real question whether any such policy victories wouldn’t be Pyrrhic ones. If this was our Faustian bargain, then it was not worth it. If ultimately our principles were so malleable as to no longer be principles, then what was the point of political victories in the first place?

The “period of collapse” started on January 20th – that is when some of us on the right decided, “you know, if the Democrats are going to play by certain rules which unfairly advantage Democrats, so will we”. We hear much of Conservative “principles”, but I’d like to know what set of Conservative principles has kept Planned Parenthood at the public trough for decades, even though we’ve often had the power to de-fund it? What got our higher education system to become a bastion of leftist tyranny against Conservatism without Senator Flake doing anything about it? You know, a Congressional majority has many way of applying pressure, Senator – why is no pressure ever put against Progressives advancing their cause? Why do your vaunted Conservative principles always work towards hamstringing our side, not theirs?

Meanwhile, the strange specter of an American president’s seeming affection for strongmen and authoritarians created such a cognitive dissonance among my generation of conservatives—who had come of age under existential threat from the Soviet Union—that it was almost impossible to believe. Even as our own government was documenting a con­certed attack against our democratic processes by an enemy foreign power, our own White House was rejecting the authority of its own intelligence agencies, disclaiming their findings as a Democratic ruse and a hoax. Conduct that would have had conservatives up in arms had it been exhibited by our political opponents now had us dumbstruck.

It was then that I was compelled back to Senator Goldwater’s book, to a chapter entitled “The Soviet Menace.” Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, this part of Goldwater’s critique had seemed particularly anachronistic. The lesson here is that nothing is gone forever, especially when it comes to the devouring ambition of despotic men. As Goldwater wrote in that chapter:

Our forebears knew that “keeping a Republic” meant, above all, keeping it safe from foreign transgressors; they knew that a people cannot live and work freely, and develop national institutions conducive to freedom, except in peace and with independence.

The election was hacked! I had no idea that any Republican Senator was subscribing to the Russia Collusion twaddle, but here it is. I don’t know if Flake believed this and thus became anti-Trump or if he was anti-Trump and thus believed it out of a general desire that Trump be terrible. It doesn’t matter. It’s a hoax; a myth; something that doesn’t exist. But the anti-Trump people are, seemingly, going to run with it. As for having affection for strongmen…an argument can be made to not have relations with dictatorial regimes. That does include Russia – but it also includes China. Funny how I never seem to hear one of these “principled” Conservatives demanding we break it off with China…even though China is vastly more powerful than Russia and is clearly preparing a military force designed to fight us. And you know why they won’t go after China: Corporate America is making too much money in China.

So, where should Republicans go from here? First, we shouldn’t hesitate to speak out if the president “plays to the base” in ways that damage the Republican Party’s ability to grow and speak to a larger audience. Second, Republicans need to take the long view when it comes to issues like free trade: Populist and protectionist policies might play well in the short term, but they handicap the country in the long term. Third, Republicans need to stand up for institutions and prerogatives, like the Senate filibuster, that have served us well for more than two centuries.

We have taken our “institutions conducive to freedom,” as Goldwater put it, for granted as we have engaged in one of the more reckless periods of politics in our history. In 2017, we seem to have lost our appreciation for just how hard won and vulnerable those institutions are.

“Plays to the base” is Establishment-speak for “talks about issues the yokels care about”. “Grow and speak to a larger audience” means, “make pathetic gestures in favor of Progressive policies in the hope that it’ll get me a good mention in the MSM”.

And, of course, he’s in favor of retaining the filibuster – because it helps Democrats to hamstring the GOP. That he knows full well Democrats will dispense with it at the first opportunity is just of no matter to people like Senator Flake. He doesn’t care about things like that – far more important to a “Conservative” like Flake is that things remain as they are…with Progressive policies ruling the roost; with corporate taxes kept low; with plenty of cheap labor for the Chamber of Commerce donors…and with a docile GOP base worked up to vote GOP every couple years, but never angry that the GOP fails to deliver.

I really have done with all that. Trump isn’t a threat to the United States – Senator Flake is. Flake is far more polite than Trump, but Flake’s politeness is masking the utter destruction of the United States of America. If we Conservatives/Republicans abandon Trump and go along with the likes of Senator Flake, all we’ll see is the slow imposition of a totally Progressive ideology – in other words, the end of our Republic because Progressives aren’t actually in favor of freedom (they have a different concept of freedom from us – to them, freedom is about not having want; for us, it is about not having masters).

I’ve got no hostility towards Flake. He is who he is – he is a product of the Establishment, defending the Establishment. The fact that he’s Republican rather than Democrat is really no more than a reflection of the GOP’s electoral advantage in Arizona. Had Flake been from, say, Oregon then he’d pretty much be the same…but he’d be a Democrat Senator from Oregon and in spite of this or that particular view, would mostly be wedded to the idea of keeping things as they are. We voted for Trump to end that – whether the prime motivation was outright support or just a desire to keep Hillary out, the thing about it all was a rejection of things as they are. We still don’t know if Trump can deliver, but rely on it that if he fails, we’re still not going back to Senator Flake, hat in hand, to ask him to return us to business as usual. For fifty years we waited for Senator Flake’s sort to take the power we gave them and do something we wanted – they couldn’t even de-fund NPR. Forget it, Senator: we’re done with you. Your op-ed will impress your fellow Never Trump people and get you a pat on the head from the MSM. Congratulations. Hope you like it.

This Caught My Eye

A feminist ponders:

It makes me wonder what happened to the Brave New World we’d envisaged for our daughters and granddaughters. A world of unlimited possibilities, choices and equality for girls to become or do anything?

A world I — like many women — fought for in the Sixties.

Has feminism made life worse, not better, for today’s generation of girls?

Certainly, women have never existed in such a bleak emotional landscape.

G. K. Chesterton answered the question long before the feminist was born:

Now I have only taken the test case of Female Suffrage because it is topical and concrete; it is not of great moment for me as a political proposal. I can quite imagine anyone substantially agreeing with my view of woman as universalist and autocrat in a limited area; and still thinking that she would be none the worse for a ballot paper. The real question is whether this old ideal of woman as the great amateur is admitted or not. There are many modern things which threaten it much more than suffragism; notably the increase of self-supporting women, even in the most severe or the most squalid employments. If there be something against nature in the idea of a horde of wild women governing, there is something truly intolerable in the idea of a herd of tame women being governed. And there are elements in human psychology that make this situation particularly poignant or ignominous. The ugly exactitudes of business, the bells and clocks the fixed hours and rigid departments, were all meant for the male: who, as a rule, can only do one thing and can only with the greatest difficulty be induced to do that. If clerks do not try to shirk their work, our whole great commercial system breaks down. It is breaking down, under the inroad of women who are adopting the unprecedented and impossible course of taking the system seriously and doing it well. Their very efficiency is the definition of their slavery. It is generally a very bad sign when one is trusted very much by one’s employers. And if the evasive clerks have a look of being blackguards, the earnest ladies are often something very like blacklegs. But the more immediate point is that the modern working woman bears a double burden, for she endures both the grinding officialism of the new office and the distracting scrupulosity of the old home. Few men understand what conscientiousness is. They understand duty, which generally means one duty; but conscientiousness is the duty of the universalist. It is limited by no work days or holidays; it is a lawless, limitless, devouring decorum. If women are to be subjected to the dull rule of commerce, we must find some way of emancipating them from the wild rule of conscience. But I rather fancy you will find it easier to leave the conscience and knock off the commerce. As it is, the modern clerk or secretary exhausts herself to put one thing straight in the ledger and then goes home to put everything straight in the house.

This condition (described by some as emancipated) is at least the reverse of my ideal. I would give woman, not more rights, but more privileges. Instead of sending her to seek such freedom as notoriously prevails in banks and factories, I would design specially a house in which she can be free. And with that we come to the last point of all; the point at which we can perceive the needs of women, like the rights of men, stopped and falsified by something which it is the object of this book to expose.

The Feminist (which means, I think, one who dislikes the chief feminine characteristics) has heard my loose monologue, bursting all the time with one pent-up protest. At this point he will break out and say, “But what are we to do? There is modern commerce and its clerks; there is the modern family with its unmarried daughters; specialism is expected everywhere; female thrift and conscientiousness are demanded and supplied. What does it matter whether we should in the abstract prefer the old human and housekeeping woman; we might prefer the Garden of Eden. But since women have trades they ought to have trades unions. Since women work in factories, they ought to vote on factory-acts. If they are unmarried they must be commercial; if they are commercial they must be political. We must have new rules for a new world—even if it be not a better one.” I said to a Feminist once: “The question is not whether women are good enough for votes: it is whether votes are good enough for women.” He only answered: “Ah, you go and say that to the women chain-makers on Cradley Heath.”

Now this is the attitude which I attack. It is the huge heresy of Precedent. It is the view that because we have got into a mess we must grow messier to suit it; that because we have taken a wrong turn some time ago we must go forward and not backwards; that because we have lost our way we must lose our map also; and because we have missed our ideal, we must forget it. “There are numbers of excellent people who do not think votes unfeminine; and there may be enthusiasts for our beautiful modern industry who do not think factories unfeminine.” But if these things are unfeminine it is no answer to say that they fit into each other. I am not satisfied with the statement that my daughter must have unwomanly powers because she has unwomanly wrongs. Industrial soot and political printer’s ink are two blacks which do not make a white. Most of the Feminists would probably agree with me that womanhood is under shameful tyranny in the shops and mills. But I want to destroy the tyranny. They want to destroy womanhood. That is the only difference.

Whether we can recover the clear vision of woman as a tower with many windows, the fixed eternal feminine from which her sons, the specialists, go forth; whether we can preserve the tradition of a central thing which is even more human than democracy and even more practical than politics; whether, in word, it is possible to re-establish the family, freed from the filthy cynicism and cruelty of the commercial epoch, I shall discuss in the last section of this book. But meanwhile do not talk to me about the poor chain-makers on Cradley Heath. I know all about them and what they are doing. They are engaged in a very wide-spread and flourishing industry of the present age. They are making chains.

Some Thoughts

Boy Scouts are now Brownshirts and Senator Collins says that she voted against proceeding on the health care bill because, I quote, “we must proceed carefully”. Anyone get the feeling we’re through the looking glass here?

I can see what Trump is doing in regards to Sessions and Tillerson – and, yes, I get it that both men would be wounded and offended by it all. But, still, we’re now six months into the Trump Administration and State is still blaming the Israelis for the terrorist attacks they suffer (as well excising the word “genocide” to describe what ISIS did) while over at Justice we’ve yet to see any move against the rank corruption of DC. I understand, further, that Obama staffers are still in policy-making positions…I know we can’t just fire them because they are protected by civil service laws: but why can’t they be given offices in the basement of the Old Executive Office building with a rotary-dial phone and a computer loaded up with Windows 95? To keep anyone hired or promoted by Obama in a policy-making position merely means we keep someone who will do their level best to protect Obama’s legacy; protect Democrats in general, and undermine Trump’s policies at every opportunity. We have buckets of well-qualified people out there – hire them and put them into the positions of influence. Personnel is policy – as soon as Trump has his personnel, his policies will prevail in the Executive branch.

I see some Never Trump screeches about Trump’s apparent desire that his troops be loyal to him and his program. I simply don’t get this, at all. Of course Trump’s people must be loyal to Trump. What is the point of having people who aren’t loyal to you? DC politics is a nasty, knee-to-groin business. Do you think Obama was ever about having people around who wouldn’t get with the program? I didn’t blame him in the least for having loyal troops: he was elected to enact a certain set of policies and everyone who worked for him simply had to be ok with that. If they weren’t, they should go – and be forced out, if the didn’t quit. So, too, with Trump. He’s got a specific set of plans to get done and he needs people who will do them…who will set aside personal ambition in favor of helping President Trump enact his agenda. If the people don’t like this agenda, then they can toss him out in 2020 (and curb him in 2018). That is the way this works – it is the way it must work. We have partisan elections to determine which set of partisan policies we’ll go with. Duh!

The bottom line is that Tillerson and Sessions (and all Secretaries) have to get on board – and get rid of the Obama-bots. They can’t be trusted. I tend to like Tillerson and Sessions…but if at the end of the day they are going to be of the opinion that an Obama hold-over can be trusted, then they have to go.

Meanwhile, DWS’s IT guy was picked up at the airport, apparently planning on fleeing the country (one rumor I’ve seen is that he wired $300,000.00 to Pakistan before trying to leave). This could be huge – but here’s the bizarre thing: the other rumor today is that he was only fired after he was arrested. Remember: it has been months since it came out that DWS’s IT guys were doing some possibly criminal activities and this means he was kept on the payroll even after this stuff came out. I’m greatly interested in what information can be retrieved from those hard drives. Here we are, still yammering on about Trump-Russia when a gigantic, bring-down-the-whole-swamp scandal might be unfolding before our eyes. Stay tuned.

Open Thread

I’m seriously thinking that President Trump should clear out every single staffer he inherited from previous Administrations and replace them with people who have either never worked in government, or at least haven’t worked in it for some time. Trump has made some great picks for the commanding heights of the Administration, but down lower we’ve still got a bunch of Obama-bots undermining his policy choices. The President can’t just fire people thanks to various civil service laws, but we can transfer them to the sticks and bring in a whole raft of new people. I offer my services as a foreign and military policy staffer. Sure, I don’t have any credentials…but I’ve read and studied a lot and I certainly couldn’t do any worse than the clowns we’ve got in there. Might do better – and, most importantly, a new set of staffers brought in from outside wouldn’t be leaking and undermining. Additionally, a completely fresh look at the situation from people not wedded to conventional wisdom would likely come up with some good solutions.

If you do a good job as a Venezuelan soldier, you get your reward: toilet paper.

Trump gave a speech to the Boy Scouts and now the Progressives and Never Trump are attacking the Scouts. Trump will be re-elected in a landslide.

Rumors abound of an impending change in the Attorney General’s slot…I doubt it. I think Trump is putting pressure on Sessions, but it is all part of a program to eventually shut this whole Russia nonsense down. We’ll see, of course.

That Minnesota police officer who shot the Australian woman was fast-tracked on to the police force. Official word is he went through the normal hiring process…but if you fast track someone, you are by definition not doing through the normal hiring process. I’d be entirely unsurprised to learn that in an eagerness to obtain “diversity”, corners were cut.

Smug, condescending Progressive advises Progressives to not be so smug and condescending as they lead us benighted bigots into GoodThink.

Feds have seized DWS’s smashed hard drives. A bit of real news which might have some astonishing consequences.