Tag: SJW

Avoiding the Obvious

Peter King, like a good little SJW, avoids the obvious observation in contemplating the crash in attendance at home games for the former Washington Redskins:

I sincerely hope Daniel Snyder comes to his senses in 2022 and sells the franchise. It’s over, Dan. Or, rather, Mister Snyder. Beyond the over-protectionism of the NFL in the past year (the morally bankrupt over-protectionism, I might add), there is the simple fact that fans have long since surrendered their loyalty to the team, and won’t be back as long as Snyder is the owner.

Some grist for that mill: WFT won the NFC East last year (albeit with a 6-10 record), made the playoffs and played respectfully in an exciting wild-card home loss to eventual Super Bowl champ Tampa Bay last year, and entered this year picked by some to contend for the division title again. The Jacksonville Jaguars, on the other hand, have lost 75 percent of their games over the past decade, went 1-15 last year, hired a new coach and quarterback last offseason, and watched the promise of yet another expensive rebuild go down the toilet with the unceremonious firing of savior coach Urban Meyer. Entering Week 18, savior QB Trevor Lawrence was the lowest-rated passer, among qualifiers, in the league. The Jags are 4-29 in the last two years, 9 wins fewer than WFT. And yet:

Jacksonville drew 7,217 more fans to home games this season than Washington did.

Only one team in the NFL played to less than 75 percent capacity this year, Washington, which sold 64.3 percent of its seats for eight home games. Those at the last two games, versus Dallas and Philadelphia, are certain more than half the crowd at each game rooted for the visitors. This is the team, and the ownership, that the league office has spent so much time defending in the wake of the sex-harassment scandal that shook the franchise in 2021.

No one cares about the owner. They might hate him, they might think he’s an idiot, and they probably prefer to get rid of him because of the team’s underperformance during his tenure. But they don’t really care about him.

What they do care about is the Redskins. They were – they are – Redskins fans. And WFT is no longer the Redskins. That’s why they don’t buy tickets or attend the games anymore. While the Redskins were once among the top merchandise-selling teams in the league, I’ll bet they are at the very bottom of the 32 teams now.

Brands matter, and the NFL killed the Redskins brand.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Revolution Eats Its Own

Norman Mailer has been posthumously cancelled:

Norman Mailer’s long-time publisher has recently informed the Mailer family that it has canceled plans to publish a collection of his political writings to mark the centennial of his birth in 2023, confirms the film producer Michael Mailer, the author’s oldest son. The back-door apologies at Random House include as the proximate cause — you hardly have to look hard in Mailer’s work to find offenses against contemporary doctrine and respectability — a junior staffer’s objection to the title of Mailer’s 1957 essay, “The White Negro”, a psycho-sexual-druggie precursor and model for much of the psycho-sexual-druggie literature that became popular in the 1960s.

Mailer’s work will not be any great loss; he is part of the Boomer-era literary decline that saw the elevation of mediocre writers like Bellow, Kerouac, Roth, and Mailer himself at the expense of people who could a) actually write and b) had something to say about the human condition that didn’t revolve around narcissism and sex with mediocre women. But his cancellation is not without significance, as it demonstrates that evil will always cast even its most celebrated servants aside as soon as they cease to be useful.

DISCUSS ON SG

The New Extremists

It’s so cute when normies discover social media banning for the first time.

LinkedIn is the sole judge, jury, and executioner of what constitutes “misleading or inaccurate” information and whether you violate their user agreement. They can terminate you at any time, for any reason. You have no recourse.

Because I made 3 truthful, accurate statements that some people at LinkedIn considered to be misleading or inaccurate, my account (built up over nearly 20 years) is now permanently deleted.

They could have simply restricted my ability to post. Instead, they chose to expunge my entire identity so nobody will ever know I existed. Wow. Instead of simply restricting my ability to post, they basically wiped out my entire identity so nobody can even see who I am anymore or what I accomplished. My resume is gone. My awards are gone. Nobody can even find out I ever existed.

I didn’t even get a chance to copy my profile before they wiped me out. All my contacts are gone. The record of my 7 companies I started: gone.

No one will be able to lookup my history there anymore. It’s like burning books in the library.

Wikipedia did the same thing to me. They removed the mention that I received a National Caring Award as retribution for speaking out about vaccine safety.

This can happen to you if you too disagree with mainstream thought.

America today is about conformity with mainstream thought. If you disagree, you lose your job, lose your ability to communicate, and they remove any record of your existence.

I’m now lifetime banned on Medium, Twitter, LinkedIn, and sendgrid. The reason I am not yet banned on Facebook and YouTube is because I never post there anymore. That’s the trick. Just stop posting anything that goes against mainstream thinking and you won’t be banned.

This underlines the total futility of telling people about anything. They either don’t believe you, or they simply don’t care, until it actually happens to them. They figure you must have deserved it somehow, for being an extremist, right up until the moment they discover that they, too, have been deemed extremists unworthy of participation in corporate society.

But it’s the reason that it’s so important to participate in, and prioritize, the parallel economy. Because if you think it’s bad now, just wait until they start imposing these restrictions directly through government agencies rather than just the most converged corporations.

DISCUSS ON SG

No Racism in RPGs

All races and alignments are now equally good and capable. After all, we wouldn’t want anyone playing an orc to think that he is any less beautiful or intelligent or magical than an elf.

A plethora of descriptions regarding various races in the Dungeons & Dragons universe have been scrapped from the guidebooks in an effort to make the tabletop RPG more “welcoming and inclusive.” The push for representation and inclusivity in Western culture has not ignored the tabletop gaming scene, where publishers of some of the most-played games have been updating their releases to appeal to progressive social justice activists.

In a recent blog post, Jeremy Crawford, the principal rule designer for the legendary RPG Dungeons & Dragons, revealed that there had been a mass removal of “problematic lore” from several D&D books throughout the year, and these changes will be reflected in both the newly printed editions and the online PDF versions.

This is what has been removed from the D&D orc lore. It appears I’m going to need to completely rewrite the Lugbol chapters in A Sea of Skulls.

With their culturally ingrained tendency to bow before superior strength, orcs can be subjugated by a powerful and charismatic individual. Evil human spellcasters and rulers in particular have a penchant for enslaving or deceiving orcs into service. A leader backed by a great military force could swoop down upon a tribe, kill its leaders, and cow the rest of the orcs into submission. A spellcaster typically takes a more devious approach, using magic to conjure up false omens that strike fear into the tribe and make it obedient. A wizard might manipulate a few of the orcs that rank just below the war chief, using them as pawns to help overthrow the leader. The wizard validates the change in command with signs supposedly delivered by the gods (which are in truth nothing but a few well-cast illusions), and turns the tribe into a strike force eager to do the bidding of its new chief. The survivors of a tribe scattered by defeat sometimes fall back on their fighting skills to find employment, individually or in small groups, with whoever is willing to hire them. These mercenaries, while they might pride themselves on their seeming independence, nevertheless strive to follow through on their end of a bargain, because being paid by one’s employer is better than being hunted down for breaking a deal.

Most orcs have been indoctrinated into a life of destruction and slaughter. But unlike creatures who by their very nature are evil, such as gnolls, it’s possible that an orc, if raised outside its culture, could develop a limited capacity for empathy, love, and compassion. No matter how domesticated an orc might seem, its blood lust flows just beneath the surface. With its instinctive love of battle and its desire to prove its strength, an orc trying to live within the confines of civilization is faced with a difficult task.

The lore of humans depicts orcs as rapacious fiends, intent on coupling with other humanoids to spread their seed far and wide. In truth, orcs mate with non-orcs only when they think such a match will strengthen the tribe. When orcs encounter human who match them in prowess and ferocity, they sometimes strike an alliance that is sealed by mingling the bloodlines of the two groups. A half-orc in an orc tribe is often just as strong as a full-blooded orc and also displays superior cunning. Thus, half-orcs are capable of gaining status in the tribe more quickly than their fellows, and it isn’t unusual for a half-orc to rise to leadership of a tribe.

Sadly, all this inclusivity and equality isn’t going to make high school girls any more interested in tubby RPG nerds than they were before. But hey, the mere possibility makes it worth destroying 40 years of gaming lore, right?

DISCUSS ON SG

The Convergence of Medicine

The vaccine nonsense is not a one-off, as SJWs have infiltrated the medical schools, and, as with other Western institutions, are in the process of destroying the medical industry’s ability to perform its primary function:

The two accrediting bodies for American medical schools now say that meritocracy is “malignant” and that race has “no genetic or scientific basis,” positions that many doctors worry will lower standards of care and endanger lives by discouraging vital genetic testing.

The Liaison Committee on Medical Education, which accredits all medical schools in North America, is cosponsored by the American Medical Association (AMA) and the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)—the same groups that on Oct. 30 released a controversial guide to “advancing health equity” through “language, narrative, and concepts.”

Those concepts include the ideas that “individualism and meritocracy” are “malignant narratives” that “create harm,” that using race as a proxy for genetics “leads directly to racial health inequities,” and that medical vulnerability is the “result of socially created processes” rather than biology.

It’s only a matter of time before the official position is that sex has no genetic or scientific basis, and that specializing in gynecology or prostate cancer is cancelled for sexism. Once you accept the principle that the lie is beneficial – which you’ll note again begins here with the false statement that “race has no genetic or scientific basis”, you open the gates to other, even more risible absurdities.

DISCUSS ON SG

Not Whether but Which

Doug Wilson points out that discipline has never been a problem in the churches, it has merely been converged, twisted, and redirected:

This niceness vibe has been advanced in such a way as to make conservative believers think that they have been attending churches that have real trouble disciplining for error. But . . . not whether but which. In this world, it is absolutely necessary for every group that has defined boundaries to discipline for error, or for what they consider to be error.

Do you remember those times when conservative believers were chafing over the fact that no discipline ever seemed to be applied when young people drifted into sexual immorality, or into drugs? Or when middle aged businessmen abandoned their families and nothing happened? Or when someone announced that they were gay, and everyone thought it was a shame, but nobody did anything? It was easy back then to assume that this was because such churches didn’t know how to discipline.

But they did know how to discipline. Not whether but which. If you ever had pressed your concerns about the ongoing grab-assing in the youth group,, you would find out that they did know how to crack down on sin. They would crack down on you for your use of the word grab-assing in your letter to the session, which was totally unnecessary, and not becoming to one who names the name of Christ. In addition, they would discipline you for the legalistic spirit you were unfortunately starting to display. The discipline was there, just not aimed in the direction it ought to have been.

And how many churches over the last couple years have vigorously policed their congregations when it came to the wearing of masks? And they did this when to your knowledge they had never vigorously policed anything before. The one thing this should have told you is that they do know how to do it. They do know how to withstand pressure and blow back—but just from certain quarters. Not whether but which.

They had earlier refused to apply discipline in certain directions because they were concerned about the reaction they would get (from certain quarters). But on a different issue they applied discipline unambiguously and they were entirely unconcerned about the reaction they would get (from other quarters). When it came to you and your concerns about your aunt, who didn’t want to get the jab or wear a mask, but who had the antibodies, they were a rock wall. When it came to the concerns of those whose feelings were hurt by a visiting speaker who spoke insensitively about sex roles in marriage, they were a mound of marshmallows. Not whether but which.

This was because they feared the CDC (and the people who feared the CDC), and they did not fear God (or the people who fear God). Some went this way because health is their god, and they feared the virus. Others did it because the state is their god, and they feared the voice of officialdom.

At this point, the average church – be it Catholic or Protestant – is more likely to expel you from the congregation for quoting a Biblical passage deemed excessively racist or judgemental than for having a gay affair with the pastor’s son-in-law.

DISCUSS ON SG

Verdict: Not Unfair

I’ll admit to occasionally getting frustrated with Larry Correia’s insistence on abiding with the mainstream platforms that hate him rather than throwing in with the alternative economy and friendly platforms, but I also have to admit that there is no one like him for pure literary vituperation and excoriation, be it personal or political.

Anytime there is a breaking news story, there will be legions of howling leftists, and blue check mark idiots, lying their asses off and saying the most horrific things imaginable. And since they literally own social media, they get an official pass while the uppity on the right get officially squashed. We’ve all seen it. From trending hash tags that mysterious vanish, shadow bans, to ultra-biased fact checkers, to Youtube demonetizing wrong thinkers or even getting rid of the thumbs down button.

Yet as your fellow travelers are saying all this horrid shit, where are you? You’re supposedly sane. You claim to have a voice of moderation, but it must be a whisper because we certainly can’t hear it.

Social media is a constant barrage of Common Internet Shit Gibbons popping in and screaming at everybody who diverges from the accepted leftist narrative. They work off a standardized playbook and repetitive talking points, sneering derision, and passive aggressive insults designed to get around algorithms, and it is all designed to shame people into silence.

Yet many people on the right are slowly waking up to this game, and they’re beginning to fight back, skipping the false civility, and getting right to the meat of things, and returning insult for insult… Oh THEN I can count on the Caring Liberals to show up! Inevitably, every fucking time. Whenever someone on the right fights back, that’s when the real-life liberals you know magically appear to cry about “civility” and “tone” and such rudeness!

Gee whiz, Aunt Margaret/coworker #7/guy from the gym. Where the fuck were you when the leftist assholes were screeching at me and wiping their diseased anus on my carpet? Nowhere. Oh yeah, that’s right. It’s because you voices of reason don’t actually care about civility, you just care about shaming your wrong thinking friends and family into compliance. You emotionally manipulative motherfuckers.

Why do I have such scorn and derision for the so-called reasonable voices on the left? A. I don’t believe most of you. B. If you do exist, you’re cowards, who do nothing, say nothing, and then maybe show up after the dust settles to chide the rest of us about our tone.

Anybody with the courage to speak up on the left is swiftly set upon by the rest and devoured. They’re the cow and social justice warriors are the piranhas.

Sad part is I know many liberals in real life who will admit that they helped create a monster, and its now gone out of control, and the beast will eat them if they draw its ire. Oh, they’ll tell me this in person, but they won’t say shit in public. Because they know they’ll get cancelled, boycotted, fired, mocked, threatened, and kicked out of the Goodthinkers Club.

There is more. There is a LOT more where that came from. And it’s all true. The key line: “Liberal “friends” will sell you out in a heartbeat.”

DISCUSS ON SG

The Salvation Army Converges

Racism is not, and has never been, a sin. You can always tell the Churchians from genuine Christians because former flat-out lie and insist that it is. And the Churchians have infiltrated, and now run, the Salvation Army:

Some donors have been withdrawing their support for the Salvation Army over its switch to woke ideology, saying that a Christian charity shouldn’t promote what they see as “the most serious threat” to their faith. A number of its supporters are apparently increasingly unhappy with an initiative called “Let’s Talk About Racism,” which Salvation Army CEO General Brian Peddle announced in February. It’s a discussion guide aimed at promoting “courageous conversations about racism” within the organization of 1.7 million. Its authors, heavily influenced by critical race theory (CTR), speak of “detrimental divisions” that they believe were created by racism in all fields of life, including in the Christian Church, and offer members advice on how to tackle inequality through an “anti-racist” perspective.

When asked about the rift over the woke curriculum by Newsweek, the Salvation Army’s spokesman, Joseph Cohen, insisted the organization hadn’t changed its ideology in any way.

“Our beliefs have always been rooted in scripture, and they still are. That includes our complete rejection of racism, which is in stark contrast to the biblical principle that we’re all created in the image of God,” he pointed out.

As for “Let’s Talk About Racism,” he said such “voluntary discussion guides certainly are not required, and they never take the place of our Positional Statements. For us, the Truth in scripture is always supreme.”

The main reason racism cannot be a sin is because in the Bible, both God and Jesus Christ speak in a manner that is clearly and observably racist by every modern usage of the term. So, either God and Jesus Christ are capable of sin and have sin in them, or racism cannot be a sin.

Which is it, Churchians?

Furthermore, we are told that we shall judge things “by their fruit”. And what have the consequences of multiple generations of a fixation on racism and the attempts to eliminate it been, for both the world and for the Church?

DISCUSS ON SG

Monty Python is Cancelled

The Old Vic shuts down a Terry Gilliam production because the Python has finally been deemed an official badthinker:

A London theatre has been criticised for “pandering” to mob rule after cancelling a production by Monty Python star Terry Gilliam – reportedly due to staff unrest about his views on trans rights and the #MeToo movement.
80-year-old Gilliam was set to co-direct the musical ‘Into the Woods’ at the Old Vic next year, but the show was abruptly cancelled last week. While no reason was given, entertainment news outlet The Stage reported that there had been dissatisfaction among staff since May, when the production was originally announced.

Staff concerns apparently revolved around Gilliam’s previous comments in the press relating to transgender issues, race, and the #MeToo movement, which some felt were at odds with the theatre’s “culture and values.”

In 2018, Gilliam said during a BBC diversity debate that he tells “the world now I’m a black lesbian.” He repeated those remarks during an interview last year, telling The Independent that he should be able to identify as a “black lesbian in transition.” He also described the #MeToo movement as a “witch hunt” that allowed “decent people” to get “hammered” by “mob mentality,” and called some rape accusers “ambitious adults.”

Describing Chappelle as the “greatest standup comedian alive today,” Gilliam noted in a Facebook post on October 14 that there was a “storm brewing” over the streaming service’s support for the show. The comedy special has been in the news after backlash over allegedly transphobic content – including Chappelle describing gender as a “fact” – with Netflix staff staging walkouts and facing off against the comedian’s supporters.

Two weeks later, the theatre announced on its website that it had “mutually agreed” with co-producers Scenario Two that the “production of ‘Into the Woods’ will not take place at the Old Vic.” The Central London theatre had apparently sold £300,000 worth of tickets for the production of Stephen Sondheim’s 1987 musical.

Despite my own experience, I don’t have any sympathy for Gilliam, Chappelle, or any other Hellmouth celebrity that finds themselves cancelled for trivial social blasphemies. Some of them, like Gilliam, spent their entire careers gleefully sawing away at the civilizational branches upon which they were sitting. Their fall was always inevitable.

DISCUSS ON SG