Tag: SJW

And exclude the temporizers and inclusionaries if you want to keep it. The Boy Scouts failed, perhaps Trail Life will do better.

A youth scouting group formed in response to the controversial changes within the Boy Scouts of America has reported an increase in the number of chapters during the pandemic.

Trail Life USA, launched in 2014 and headquartered in Greenville, South Carolina, is reporting dozens of new chapters and more than 30,000 members.

Trail Life USA CEO Mark Hancock told The Christian Post that 65 new troops have been created thus far in 2021, with over 100 in the process of being chartered.

“So far this year, we have seen a 70{cc08d85cfa54367952ab9c6bd910a003a6c2c0c101231e44cdffb103f39b73a6} increase in new members over this time last year and a 30{cc08d85cfa54367952ab9c6bd910a003a6c2c0c101231e44cdffb103f39b73a6} increase over the same period the prior year,” explained Hancock.

“Just this year, we have seen over 65 new troops started as men across the nation have stepped up to lead and make a difference in the lives of boys in their churches, their families, and their communities.”

The launching of Trail Life USA came partly in response to the Boy Scouts voting in 2013 to allow openly gay males to become scouts while maintaining the organization’s ban on openly gay scout leaders.

This change prompted many churches — a significant source of support for the Boy Scouts — to sever their ties with the prominent scouting organization.

Remember, the Boy Scouts once required a vow to be morally straight. Now they are infested by pedos. Forget who you are, permit outsiders to take positions of leadership, and your organizations will first be converged, then destroyed. 

And remember, the first stages of convergence always look innocuous, and are cloaked in the false virtues of equality, outreach, and inclusion.

 Back when #GamerGate started, I warned everyone that it wasn’t going to stop with video games. SJW cancel culture is going to invade every single aspect of your life. Don’t think it won’t:

Prolific children’s writer Enid Blyton’s work has been linked to ‘racism and xenophobia’ by English Heritage after a review of its blue plaques following last summer’s Black Lives Matter protests.

The celebrated English children’s author has enchanted millions of young readers for a century with tales of adventure, ginger beer and buns, selling 600milllion books in 90 languages.

But Ms Blyton, whose novels have been among the world’s best-sellers since the 1920s, has been linked to racism in updated blue plaque information produced by charity English Heritage on its website and app. 

It says: ‘Blyton’s work has been criticised during her lifetime and after for its racism, xenophobia and lack of literary merit. In 2016, Blyton was rejected by the Royal Mint for commemoration on a 50p coin because, the advisory committee minutes record, she was ‘a racist, sexist, homophobe and not a very well-regarded writer’.

This is what YOUR submission to “equality” and “diversity” and “tolerance” has wrought. Every single time you said “I’m not racist, but….” or “I believe in equality of opportunity, not equality of result” or  “I have lots of [fill-in-the-blank] friends” or “they just want the same chance for love and respect that everyone else does”, you helped make this possible.

Words matter. Ideas matter. Yes, insane “leftists” and “liberals” drove the process, but conservatives and Christians and nice people were required to accept the lies in order to make it work.

You cannot be what the world considers to be a “good person”, let alone a “nice person”, and stand against the swamp of lies with which evil engulfs the world. Every single little compromise you make, every single little dishonesty to which you submit, contributes to the sum total of evil in the world.

Remember, convergence requires the universal submission of every individual and organization.

Nickelodeon proudly leaned into the predatory market and managed to lose more than 70 percent of its audience:

A bigger hole is forming for Viacom, however. Whereas Paramount+ is growing slowly, their children’s programming platform, Nickelodeon, is imploding. That’s not an overstatement.

Since July of 2017, Nickelodeon’s viewership has dropped from 1.3 million average viewers per week to a June of 2021 average of only 372,000. In only four years, Nickelodeon has dropped more than two thirds of its audience. That is catastrophically bad for the cable channel, but with cable on the way out, maybe it’s not so bad? The catch here is that it is, in fact, that bad and perhaps worse, simply because Nickelodeon seems to be the primary driving force behind new subscribers to Paramount+.

It’s thus easy to see why Viacom is leaning so heavily into older Nickelodeon content. Perhaps hoping to capitalize on what once worked versus what is rapidly losing audience, the company has resurrected Rugrats and iCarly (among other shows) to try to drive nostalgic fans to the service. But there are signs that Viacom has not learned any lessons and is retrofitting these old shows with the same principles that have resulted in Nickelodeon’s huge loss in ratings…. 

Nickelodeon’s latest fiasco was a Pride Month video that you can see above. Featuring a drag queen singing to prepubescents, the YouTube version was downvoted to such a degree that they’ve now hidden the ratio.

That’s an impressive collapse. Keep in mind the massive dropoff was before the ongoing Pride Month fiasco; it may be more than 80 percent by July 2021. But the sooner these awful organizations die off, the better. Don’t watch them. Don’t support them. And don’t let your children’s minds be polluted by them.

However, note that once more, conservatives would rather complain about the wicked than celebrate – or even mention – that which is good. How many “conservative” individuals and outlets that have complained about the entertainment industry have so much as mentioned Arktoons?

But instead of taking action to excise it, they’re looking for a “third-way” that only guarantees failure.

In Silicon Valley, 17 years later, another kind of revolution is taking shape. A handful of founders and CEOs—Brian Armstrong of Coinbase, Jason Fried of Basecamp, Shopify’s Tobias Lütke, Medium’s Ev Williams—have said the unsayable. In the face of shop-floor social-justice activism, they’ve decided, business owners should resolve to stick to business.

No hashtag coders. No message-board threads about anti-racism or neo-pronouns. No open letters meant to get someone fired for a decade-old tweet. No politics. As Armstrong put it in his famous (or infamous) September 27th, 2020 blog post, business should be “mission focused.” A software developer explained that the conciliatory approach has become too costly: “The Slack shit, the company-wide emails, it definitely spills out into real life, and it’s a huge productivity drag.”

In October, a pseudonymous group inspired by Coinbase’s Brian Armstrong came together under the banner “Mission Protocol,” with the aim of getting other companies to start “putting aside activities and conversations” outside the scope of their professional missions. (“Mission focus doesn’t mean being apolitical,” they note. “It means being political about the mission. This mission is what you came together to accomplish, and this mission is what you’re fighting for in your work on the project.”) Paul Graham, a famed venture capitalist and “hacker philosopher,” tweeted his support to 1.3 million followers. Melia Russell, who covers the startup beat for Business Insider, noted that startups were jumping into the Mission Protocol threads “with a hell yes.”

Some founders, venture capitalists, and angel investors are now refusing to speak with legacy-media journalists who infuse their reporting with a social-justice slant. “What’s the point [of talking to reporters]?” a developer said. “They hate us, and we think they know nothing about the way the world works outside their woke, east-coast bubble.” Instead, mission-focused players are embracing alternatives such as Clubhouse and Substack. A software developer, Slava Akhmechet, is building a social-media platform (now in its beta phase) that grants influencers anonymity, with an eye toward encouraging the kind of candid conversation that is mostly verboten on, say, Twitter or Instagram. And then there’s the promise of blockchain—still in its infancy—and “decentralized media,” as Balaji Srinivasan, Coinbase’s former chief technology officer, calls it.

This Silicon Valley movement overlaps with a growing cadre of politically diverse writers and podcasters—such as Glenn Greenwald, James Poulos, Alex Kaschuta, and Aimee Terese—collectively creating an opening for a more incisive, wider-ranging conversation about technology, politics, and America itself. Default Friend, an After the Orgy podcast co-host and pseudonymous Substacker whose newsletter focuses on the Bay Area, says “this new group is like, ‘Okay, the wokeness thing definitely isn’t right. There must be some third way.’ They’re agreed on what they oppose.”

Between President Trump’s failure to successfully defeat the Deep State and Silicon Valley’s unwillingness to cut out the corporate cancer, it should be obvious to the intelligent observer that half-measures are not enough. You can’t negotiate with SJWs. You can’t lecture them. You can’t wag your finger and issue dire warnings.

If you’re not going to act, and act decisively, you’re simply reducing the rate at which you lose.

Ignore the red screens that are popping up for some of you. The site is entirely clean and Google knows it. This is more grist for the defamation mill. It’s just an SJW at Google up to their usual shenanigans.

Richard Dawkins certainly never saw this coming. I warned him, and everyone, that post-Christianity is not compatible with science, indeed, that Christianity was not only necessary for scientody, but is arguably necessary for a functional scientistry as well. Now we’re learning that even the history of science is being canceled:

A university has been slammed by academics for putting Charles Darwin on a list of ‘racist’ scientists as part of a guide to ‘decolonise’ its biology curriculum. 

Sheffield University has created a handbook for students and lecturers in its science department to help ‘tackle racial injustice’ by ‘reflecting on the whiteness and Eurocentrism of our science’.

As part of the guide, the department created a list of 11 ‘problematic’ scientific figures – including Darwin – whose views ‘influenced the type of research they carried out and how they interpreted their data’. 

An explanation next to the 19th century naturalist’s name says that Darwin ‘believed that his theory of natural selection justified the view that the white race was superior to others’.

With the exception of James Watson, the list of problematic scientific figures reads like a who’s who of atheist heroes. Atheists have falsely claimed that science and Christianity are incompatible for decades, but what they’ve learned in just three short years is that it is science and social justice which are totally incapable of coexisting.

Ronald Fisher

Known for: Pioneered the application of statistical procedures to the design of scientific experiments. He was a Professor in the Eugenics department at University College London.

Sheffield’s view: He believed that races differed ‘in their innate capacity for intellectual and emotional development’.

One of his works, The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, ‘endorses colonialism, white supremacy, and eugenics and discusses his belief in the higher and lower genetic value of people according to their race’.

Carl Linnaeus

Known for: Formalising the modern system of naming organisms

Sheffield’s view: He applied his system of classification to position human races, with white Europeans at the top, and black, indigenous, and other people of colour groups gradually descending his hierarchy.

James Watson 

Known for: Proposing the double helix structure of the DNA molecule with Francis Crick

Sheffield’s view: The 93-year-old has previously made outwardly racist public comments about the innate inequality of people from different races, particularly with regards to intelligence.

Thomas Henry Huxley 

Known for: Supporting Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, and proposing connections between development of organisms and their evolutionary histories.

Sheffield’s view: Huxley’s belief that ‘no rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes, that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average white man’ was used as justification for segregation. 

Francis Galton

Known for: Coining the term ‘eugenics’, he was the first to apply statistical methods to the study of human differences.

Sheffield’s view: He was obsessed with a eugenic ‘utopia’ in which the genetic elite were encouraged to breed, segregated from the sterilised underclass. It has been said that his work ‘invented racism’.

Karl Pearson

Known for: Pioneering work in mathematical statistics and creating a methodology to identify correlations.

Sheffield’s view: He believed strongly in racial segregation and that races other than his own were inferior. 

Alfred Russell Wallace

Known for: Co-developing the theory of natural selection and evolution with Charles Darwin, something Darwin is most often credited for.

Sheffield’s view: He carried out all of his field observations in a colonial environment. In a similar concept to the ‘Wallace line’ separating biological realms, he drew a boundary line between what he classified as different ethnic groups in the colonial Dutch East Indies.

Henry Walter Bates

Known for: Expeditions of the Amazon rainforests where his studies led him to propose the idea of mimicry in unrelated animal species. 

Sheffield’s view: Like Darwin and other explorers, he travelled and collected specimens from colonial South America and was a proponent of colonialism in the Amazon.

Julian Huxley

Known for: Supporting the theory of natural selection, he also worked for the Zoological Society of London and was the first director of UNESCO. His brother was the writer Aldous Huxley.

Sheffield’s view: He was a prominent figure in British Eugenics Society and believed that the lower classes were genetically inferior and should be prevented from reproducing and even sterilised.

JBS Haldane

Known for: Introducing the ‘primordial soup theory’, which became the foundation for the concept of the chemical origin of life.

Sheffield’s view: He published a book in 1924 describing the use of in vitro fertilisation for eugenics purposes. 

Starbucks is threatening to flounce away from Facebook because communication runs both ways:

‘Starbucks is in the process of evaluating their organic presence on FB, and whether they should continue to have a presence on the platform at all,’ a Facebook employee wrote to their colleagues earlier this week. ‘Anytime they post (organically) in regards to social issues or their mission & values work (e.g. BLM, LGBTQ, sustainability/climate change, etc.) they are overwhelmed by negative/insensitive, hate speech related comments on their posts.’ 

The Facebook employee said that Starbucks was having problems moderating the avalanche of hate speech, and was unable to disable comments on their page. 

It’s great that people refuse to let a wicked coffee company lecture them about how good is evil and evil is good. But it would be even better if people would stop buying coffee from them.

Titania McGrath distills it down to a 180-proof level as she takes on the evils of institutional racism in Britain:

The government’s new “Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities” has issued a report intended to gaslight us into believing that we are not living in a fascist state. My lived experience tells me otherwise, and that is surely far more reliable than “facts” or “evidence”.

As critics have noted, the report makes the astonishing claim that racism no longer exists in the UK. I mean, it doesn’t technically say that (it actually says that “racism still exists in the UK” and “has no place in any civilised society”) but we all know what the report’s writers were secretly thinking.

Anyway, the substance of the report is beside the point. Unless it confirms everything that I have already decided is true, it has absolutely no value whatsoever and all copies should be destroyed.

So brave. So stunning. So necessary. 

The Dark Herald answers the question that literally no one in the sane universe is asking at Arkhaven: Who Will Be the First Openly Gay Star Wars Character?

A stupid question to be certain but one that SJWs are demanding an answer to. And Disney will absolutely provide that answer.  There is zero doubt in my mind that past a certain point, one of the senior executives at Fort Mickey will start demanding it.

During the run-up to the Rise of Skywalker, there was a big Stan campaign, #SWRepMatters on Twitter to try and get Finn and Poe out of the closet and into each other’s arms.  Sadly, for the deranged malignantly repulsive fifteen-year-old girls on Twitter, Rose had stolen a kiss from Finn, and since she is underrepresented, this forever cucked poor Poe.  

I don’t make up these rules, I just shake my head in horror at them….

Who will it be?

Think about it. The SJWs at the LucasFilm Story Group may indeed be on borrowed time.  If their Slay Queen Kathleen has fallen then they are on their way out.  Leftie or not, no one in Hollywood with half a brain will keep that clown circus on the payroll.  Consequently, they will try to do as much damage to the brand and set it in stone before they are shown the door.

What character would most damage Star Wars by making him Gay? It’s obvious when you think about it.

He’s almost certainly right. And if he’s correct, this would accomplish the ultimate goal of the Devil Mouse, which is to absolutely corrupt all things utterly.

Americans and Brits living in their respective surveillance societies would do well to learn from the East Germans, whose Stasi were a precursor to today’s social media thought police:

1) They Were Gaslighting before It Was a Thing

The Stasi were prolific gaslighters. In the 1950s, repression was brutal, physical torture. Early in the 1970s, eager to be accepted on the international stage, the East German Secret Police had to get more subtle. The aim of Zersetzung (a repurposed military term meaning disintegration or corrosion) was to “switch off” any activist individuals and groups who might threaten the Party. Police collected medical, school, and police records, interviews with neighbors and relatives, and any other evidence they could get and would then customize a direct hit on an individual’s mental health.

If someone looked like he might challenge the Communist Party’s legitimacy or control, the Stasi systematically destroyed his life. They used blackmail, social shame, threats, and torture. Careers, reputations, relationships, and lives were exploded to destabilize and delegitimize a critic. Some forms of harassment were almost comical: agents spread rumors about their targets, flooded their mailboxes with pornography, moved things around in their apartments, or deflated their bicycle tires day after day. Others were life-altering: Individuals labeled as subversives were banned from higher education, forced into unemployment, and forcibly committed to asylums. Many suffered long-term psychological trauma, loss of earnings, and intense social shame as a result of Stasi lies.

2) They Were (Almost) Everywhere

The Stasi had 91,000 employees at its peak—roughly one in every 30 residents was a Stasi agent. More than one in three East Germans (5.6 million) was under suspicion or surveillance, with an open Stasi file. Another half million were feeding the Stasi information. This level of surveillance and infiltration caused East Germans to live in terror—you really never knew if you could trust anyone—though most had no idea of the scope of these activities until after the Berlin Wall fell.

3) They Kept a Crazy Amount of (Meticulous) Records

Stasi files laid out together would cover about 69 sq. miles. Recording detailed personal information on a third of the populace required a tremendous amount of paper. More pages of printed text were generated by the Stasi than by all German authors from the Middle Ages to WWII. Thousands of citizens were targeted as anti-government “trouble makers,” their homes were searched, phones and cars—if they were lucky enough to have either—were bugged, their letters opened and copied, and their movements secretly filmed or photographed. Every document went into a personal Stasi file. So far, hundreds of millions of files, 39 million index cards, 1.75 million photographs, 2,800 reels of film and 28,400 audio recordings have been recovered from Stasi archives. Millions more were shredded before they could be made public.

The deplatformings and ritual denouncings of today are the modern equivalent of the Zersetzung. Remember, everything you do is now recorded and will be used against you, so don’t fool yourself into thinking otherwise.