She dreamed of being a diplomat

May 21st, 2018 5:30 pm | By

Sabika Sheikh’s funeral was yesterday.

Sabika, 17, dreamed of being a diplomat, of working to empower women. A Muslim exchange student from Karachi, Pakistan, she had come to the United States through a State Department-funded study program, excited to leave behind the dangers posed by extremists at home to experience a country that represented all that was possible.

Outside the mosque here, long before hundreds of people gathered to mourn, two men wondered what had become of America, their adopted homeland.

“I’m aghast,” said Abdul Khatri, 60. “People come here because they are told there is peace here. You have the right to be protected here. It’s why I came. But to have this happen not in India or Pakistan, but here? We have gotten off track. And it’s been going on too long.”

“Too long,” the other man lamented. “I agree. Too long. But what will we do?”

There it’s suicide bombers, here it’s suicide and non-suicide shooters. Neither one is a very appealing choice. Both are shameful.

The mourners poured into the Masjid Sabireen mosque in this small town about 35 miles from Santa Fe, removing their shoes before stepping inside. Several students from Santa Fe High made the trip. So did Houston’s mayor and two members of Congress. The mayor of tiny Stafford sat down and hurriedly pulled out his phone.

“Can you please make sure all flags in town are flown at [half-staff],” Mayor Leonard Scarcella said into his phone. “Tell him it’s urgent.”

Sabika’s host family from Santa Fe arrived, six children in tow, the mother covering her blond hair with the red prayer shawl she’d received as a Mother’s Day gift from Sabika.

Excuse me a minute. Dusty in here.

Earlier at Arcadia First Baptist Church of Santa Fe, with Abbott in attendance, pastor Jerl Watkins tried to comfort the members of his congregation by telling them that prayer and acceptance of Christian values are the things that will heal this community.

But they aren’t. Plenty of Christians are fanatically pro-gun. Now if by “Christian values” you mean what Bishop Michael Curry talked about on Saturday then – after I point out they’re secular values too – I can agree, but unfortunately not all Christians do see love as the all-important thing.

Then he went on to rant about abortion, so forget it.

Several parishioners told Abbott they were glad he’s not rushing to implement new laws or restrictions on firearms after the shooting, during which a 17-year-old student allegedly gunned down eight students and two teachers with a shotgun and a pistol that police said belonged to his father.

Yes, that’s the important thing, not restricting guns.

I wish Sabika Sheikh were alive and well and looking forward to going home in a few weeks.



Guest post: Women, Floods, Bodies

May 21st, 2018 4:25 pm | By

Guest post by Lady Mondegreen.

A little while ago, thinking of Jordan Peterson, I flashed on a book I read thirty years ago or so: Klaus Theweleit’s Male Fantasies.

Theweleit, a German sociologist with a Freudian bent, wrote about the men of the Freikorps, paramilitary bands of anti-Communists active in Germany between the World Wars. Many of them went on to be committed Nazis.

The Freikorps had their own subculture, including pulp fiction. Theweleit examined their novels, along with their letters and other documents, and found–brace yourselves for a surprise here–a profound fear of women and sexuality. The subtitle of the first volume of Mannerphantasien is “Women, Floods, Bodies.”

The Freikorps associated women with sex and sex with water and dirt. Rather, “bad” women, sexually liberated women, Red women, were associated with these things–the good German girl, the White Woman, was pure and sexless, Madonna to the Red Woman’s whore.

Theweleit saw in these men’s fantasies a desperate need to keep themselves under control, to fend off the personal dissolution they feared should they succumb to sexual ecstasy. (Via their diaries he found that many of them were sexually anhedonic.)

Jordan Peterson’s proto-fascism has striking similarities to that of the Freikorps men:

Obsession with Communism (Peterson’s house is decorated with Soviet propaganda) – Check

Association of women with chaos – Check

Fear of unregulated, nonmonogamous sex – Check

Preoccupation with Order: Clean your room. Get your life in order. Be CIVILIZED. – Check

And keep in mind these important facts kids:

Hierarchies are basic.

Ultimately, force is how MEN settle things.



It may become the template for dehumanization

May 21st, 2018 3:42 pm | By

This is blood-chilling.

On Monday morning, the White House press office released a remarkable statement detailing violent crimes allegedly committed by members of the criminal gang MS-13. That alone isn’t remarkable; President Trump has been railing against MS-13 for months, using it as a foil to bolster his rhetoric about the risk posed by immigrants to the United States.

What was remarkable about the statement was the White House’s enthusiastic embrace of the term “animals” to describe those alleged gang members. Over the course of 480 words, the subjects of the statement were described as gang members nine times and as “animals” 10 times. The statement was direct about its aim, titled, “What You Need To Know About The Violent Animals Of MS-13.”

In an official statement from the executive branch. What next? Calling them vermin?

This is not trivial stuff. This is what the Nazis did, what the Serbian nationalists did, what the Tutsis did, what the Khmer Rouge did. Words matter.

https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/998659512851722240

The opening paragraphs of the official White House statement:

WHAT: The violent animals of MS-13 have committed heinous, violent attacks in communities across America.

Too many innocent Americans have fallen victim to the unthinkable violence of MS-13’s animals.

At the State of the Union in January 2018, President Trump brought as his guests Elizabeth Alvarado, Robert Mickens, Evelyn Rodriguez, and Freddy Cuevas, the parents of Nisa Mickens and Kayla Cuevas. Police believe these young girls were chased down and brutally murdered by MS-13 gang members on Long Island, New York, in 2016. Suffolk County Police Commissioner stated that the “murders show a level of brutality that is close to unmatched.”

In Maryland, MS-13’s animals are accused of stabbing a man more than 100 times and then decapitating him, dismembering him, and ripping his heart out of his body. Police believe MS-13 members in Maryland also savagely beat a 15-year-old human trafficking victim. The MS-13 animals used a bat and took turns beating her nearly 30 times in total.

“Oh, you object to Trump’s calling them animals? We’ll give you animals. Suck it up, pansy liberals!”

Image result for nazi roundup



We can all raise our voices to echo her “no”

May 21st, 2018 11:42 am | By

Glosswitch in the Independent:

If only Shana Fisher had said yes. This is the implication of countless headlines following Dimitrios Pagourtzis’ decision to slaughter her along with nine of her teachers and classmates.

According to a Facebook post by Fisher’s mother, Fisher “had four months of problems from this boy” where “he kept making advances on her and she repeatedly told him no. He continued to get more aggressive”. So a girl endures several months of harassment, until her harasser kills her. How are we supposed to see this?

Spurned advances spark Texas shooting.” “Texas school shooter ‘killed girl who turned down his advances’.” “Spurned advances provoked incident at Santa Fe high school.

What I’m saying. The Danish cartoonists who drew Mohammed didn’t “provoke” riots; the cartoonists and writers at Charlie Hebdo didn’t “provoke” their own murders; Salman Rushdie didn’t “provoke” the fatwa on him; my dear friend Taslima Nasreen didn’t “provoke” the riots and treats that target her; the atheist bloggers murdered in Bangladesh didn’t “provoke” their own murders; Shana Fisher didn’t “provoke” that murderous boy.

The message, in case you’ve missed it, is that Fisher’s rejection – her “spurning” – of Pagourtzis is what caused his murderous rampage…

There’s something truly depressing about finding the world view of a killer reflected in the reporting of his crimes. Then again, belief that women and girls exist to tend to the sexual and emotional needs of men and boys is everywhere. It does not confine itself to those murky message boards where incels, MRAs, PUAs or whatever the latest misogyny hate tribe call themselves have decided to congregate.

If it did it wouldn’t keep turning up in headlines.

Male pride rests on the delusion that females can always be dominated (or “persuaded”, as it is so often recast). It is a delusion that is poisoning the minds of boys, creating a sense of grievance – and actual pain – where there should be none. For all the bullshit we hear from the Jordan Petersons of this world, there is no possible social arrangement in which men and boys can be guaranteed the willing, uncontested sexual and emotional labour of women and girls. You can brainwash, harass and threaten girls all you want, but even in the most extreme of circumstances they will carry on having minds of their own. It’s far easier and kinder to change the expectations of boys.

I believe this can be done, but not in a world which seeks to guilt-trip dead girls for their failure to pander to the male ego. And what, one wonders, would have happened had Shana Fisher said yes? How long can a woman serve as a buffer to absorb male disappointment with the world? And when she starts to flag, isn’t she always the first to go?

There is nothing Shana Fisher could have given that would have been enough. We can, however, challenge the rage and entitlement she faced. We can all raise our voices to echo her “no”.

NO.



A sinister tchotchke

May 21st, 2018 11:26 am | By

Really?

Really??



Words matter

May 21st, 2018 10:24 am | By

Me, yesterday morning, in the post titled It’s all because she said no:

The people in charge of news headlines and first paragraphs and the like really need to stop doing this:

Spurned advances provoked Texas school shooting, victim’s mother says

“She provoked me so I killed her and nine other people.”

Also? Simply saying no to a guy’s invitation or request is not “spurning” anything. It’s just not accepting an offer you don’t want. Women are allowed to do that. Women are allowed to say no. Women are allowed to say no without being killed or raped or beaten up or blamed for it. Women are not walking talking merchandise that is there for the use of other, more important people called “men” – women are themselves people, and they are allowed to determine for themselves whether they want to be friends or lovers with Mr X.

Occasional drive-by commenter Skeletor commenting on the post:

Ophelia, I’m not actually sure what your objection to the specific word “spurned” is. I thought maybe my understanding of the word was incorrect, so I looked it up, and the first definition (“to reject with disdain”) seems to fit the mother’s description of what happened.

In general, spurning is definitely a thing. I’d guess most people know someone who asked someone out and got laughed at or ridiculed.

To be absolutely clear, even the worst spurning does not justify a mass shooting. And this guy sounds like he had a spurning coming if he couldn’t take a polite no for an answer.

And I certainly agree with your sentiment that writers should be careful not to blame others for inciting the killer.

Phil Plait on Twitter yesterday afternoon:

This headline/tweet is literally blaming women for men killing them. Words matter. Phrasing matters. This headline twists agency into a topological nightmare of social injustice.

It’s not just me, ok? It’s not some funny eccentric womany quirk of mine to have seen that headline as obnoxiously blaming the murdered high school girl for having turned down a boy’s advances. Even manly science men can see it. And they’re right. Thank you Phil Plait.



Gorsuch declares one for the ruling class

May 21st, 2018 9:59 am | By

Sometimes the rage and disgust is overwhelming.

In a case involving the rights of tens of millions of private-sector employees, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, delivered a major blow to workers, ruling for the first time that workers may not band together to challenge violations of federal labor laws.

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch said that the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act trumps the National Labor Relations Act and that employees who sign employment agreements to arbitrate claims must do so on an individual basis — and may not band together to enforce claims of wage and hour violations.

5 to 4. Guess which 5 and which 4. Mitch McConnell should burn in hell.

“The policy may be debatable but the law is clear: Congress has instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must be enforced as written,” Gorsuch writes. “While Congress is of course always free to amend this judgment, we see nothing suggesting it did so in the NLRA — much less that it manifested a clear intention to displace the Arbitration Act. Because we can easily read Congress’s statutes to work in harmony, that is where our duty lies.”

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the four dissenters, called the majority opinion “egregiously wrong.” She said the 1925 arbitration law came well before federal labor laws and should not cover these arm-twisted, “take-it-or-leave it” provisions that employers are now insisting on.

The inevitable result, she warned, is that there will be huge underenforcement of federal and state statutes designed to advance the well-being of workers.

“[T]he edict that employees with wage and hours claims may seek relief only one-by-one does not come from Congress,” Ginsburg writes. “It is the result of take-it-or-leave-it labor contracts harking back to the type called ‘yellow dog,’ and of the readiness of this Court to enforce those unbargained-for agreements. The FAA demands no such suppression of the right of workers to take concerted action for their ‘mutual aid or protection.'”

She urged Congress to correct the court’s elevation of the arbitration act over workers’ rights.

Please tell us more about why the white working class is so in love with Trump.

The ruling came in three cases — potentially involving tens of thousands of nonunion employees — brought against Ernst & Young LLP, Epic Systems Corp. and Murphy Oil USA Inc.

Each required its individual employees, as a condition of employment, to waive their rights to join a class-action suit. In all three cases, employees tried to sue together, maintaining that the amounts they could obtain in individual lawsuits were dwarfed by the legal fees they would have to pay as individuals to bring their cases under the private arbitration procedures required by the company.

The employees contended that their right to collective action is guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act. The employers countered that they are entitled to ban collective legal action under the Federal Arbitration Act, which was enacted in 1925 to reverse the judicial hostility to arbitration at the time.

The NLRA was a hugely important piece of the New Deal, and a piece that enraged the employer class. It was after the act was passed that the CIO was formed and then the auto industry was unionized (over resistance, often of the violent kind). It’s disgusting to see us take another huge step backwards.

A study by the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute shows that 56 percent of nonunion private-sector employees are currently subject to mandatory individual arbitration procedures under the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act, which allows employers to bar collective legal actions by employees.

The court’s decision means that tens of millions of private nonunion employees will be barred from suing collectively over the terms of their employment.

Please tell us more about liberal “elites” and how it’s all their fault.



Whether there was any impropriety or political motivation

May 20th, 2018 4:17 pm | By

The DoJ is jumping because Donald said “jump.”

In a statement, the Department of Justice said it would ask the Inspector General “to expand the ongoing review of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] application process to include determining whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation of persons suspected of involvement with the Russian agents who interfered in the 2016 presidential election.”

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein added that “if anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take appropriate action.”

Or maybe it’s not so much jumping as allowing Trump to make a fool of himself, because there is no infiltration or surveillance to find.



Where past presidents have rarely tread

May 20th, 2018 1:11 pm | By

The Times tries to talk it down:

President Trump on Sunday demanded that the Justice Department open an investigation into whether the department or the F.B.I. “infiltrated or surveilled” his campaign at the behest of the Obama administration, following through on his frequent threats to use his own government to target his political opponents.

Mr. Trump made the order on Twitter during a day of public venting about the special counsel investigation, which he charged had turned up no evidence of collusion with Russia and was now casting a worldwide net so that it could harm Republicans’ chances in midterm congressional elections this fall.

But in ordering up a new inquiry, Mr. Trump went beyond his usual tactics of suggesting wrongdoing and political bias by those investigating him, and crossed over into applying overt presidential pressure on the Justice Department to do his bidding, an extraordinary realm where past presidents have rarely tread.

Rarely? Isn’t it more like never? Or never apart from Nixon? It’s kind of a third rail.

The president’s call came two weeks after he publicly expressed frustration with the Justice Department for failing to give Republican lawmakers documents they are seeking about the basis and findings of the special counsel investigation into whether the Trump campaign worked with the Russians to sway the 2016 election. The president said then that “at some point, I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the Presidency and get involved!”

But those powers aren’t granted to the presidency.

Legal experts said Mr. Trump’s promise of intervention had little precedent, and could force a clash between the sitting president and his Justice Department that is reminiscent of the one surrounding Richard M. Nixon during Watergate, when a string of top officials there resigned rather than carry out Nixon’s order to fire a special prosecutor investigating him.

“I can’t think of a prior example of a sitting president ordering the Justice Department to conduct an investigation like this one,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law. “That’s little more than a transparent effort to undermine an ongoing investigation.”

Into himself.

If Mr. Trump were to follow through with the demand, Mr. Vladek added, “it seems to me that the recipients of such an order should resign — and that we’re heading for another Saturday Night Massacre.”

But a confrontation between Mr. Trump and his Justice Department over the order was not a certainty. It was not clear whether Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, or Mr. Rosenstein could refer the president’s demand to the department’s inspector general, who is already investigating surveillance of a Trump campaign aide, Carter Page. Such a step could defuse the current crisis and perhaps satisfy Mr. Trump.

We look forward to finding out.



Step one of the coup

May 20th, 2018 12:56 pm | By

Ok this is scary now.



The lunatic man du jour

May 20th, 2018 12:48 pm | By

More thoughts on Kermit Peterson and the Times article about him:

Gail Dines:

So decided Jordan Peterson is really a comedian. Subtitle of his latest book is: “An Antidote to Chaos.” The chaos. according to this joker is the feminine and order is the masculine. Question, What would the home look like without women cooking, cleaning, tidying and ordering the home? Question: What would the world look like without women tirelessly working to clean up the messes men make wherever they go? How much worse would poverty, violence, war, global destruction be if women were not at the forefront of bringing some order to the chaos men leave in their path of destruction?

Mad dog Peterson is of no interest to me as an individual. It is the way he has captured the imagination of millions of men that scares the hell out of me. Every so often, a lunatic man comes around that somehow perfectly captures the mood and turns the “chaos” of other lunatic men into a semi-coherent theory that legitimizes their madness, hate and violence.

Soraya Chemaly:

If the boys and men in your life are drinking this rapey koolaid please don’t look away. Jordan Peterson, Custodian of the Patriarchy He says there’s a crisis in masculinity. Why won’t women — all these wives and witches — just behave? Barely laundered misogyny. He packs rooms with disaffected boys and men clinging to toxic norms of masculinity.

Meghan Murphy:

This is one of the most effective take downs of this man’s nonsense. He makes statements he claims are obvious truths that are demonstrably untrue, is inconsistent and unclear in his analysis, but offers angry men self-helpy solutions to their anger, so becomes famous. He tells them what they want to hear: all women will be happy if they simply stop fighting back, and become the mothers and wives they are destined to be. He conveniently ignores the fact that patriarchy has not always existed everywhere, in every culture, and that simply because something currently exists, does not mean it is the most natural or best system. Men who say things that are either vague or simplistic are revered as genius philosophers time and time again.

Clean up your room.



It’s all because she said no

May 20th, 2018 9:34 am | By

The people in charge of news headlines and first paragraphs and the like really need to stop doing this:

Spurned advances provoked Texas school shooting, victim’s mother says

“She provoked me so I killed her and nine other people.”

Also? Simply saying no to a guy’s invitation or request is not “spurning” anything. It’s just not accepting an offer you don’t want. Women are allowed to do that. Women are allowed to say no. Women are allowed to say no without being killed or raped or beaten up or blamed for it. Women are not walking talking merchandise that is there for the use of other, more important people called “men” – women are themselves people, and they are allowed to determine for themselves whether they want to be friends or lovers with Mr X.

A teenaged boy who shot and killed eight students and two teachers in Texas had been spurned by one of his victims after making aggressive advances, her mother told the Los Angeles Times.

That’s not a thing. Being “spurned” is not a thing. Making it a thing just buys into the “incel” logic that women have no right to say no.

Sadie Rodriguez, the mother of Shana Fisher, 16, told the newspaper that her daughter rejected four months of aggressive advances from accused shooter Dimitrios Pagourtzis, 17, at the Santa Fe high school.

Fisher finally stood up to him and embarrassed him in class, the newspaper quoted her mother as writing in a private message to the Times.

Reuters could have headlined and written this story as being about Pagourtzis’ four months of harassing Fisher, culminating in his murder of her and nine others after she (clearly in desperation) publicly told him to stop.

He’s a guy who shot up a school, yet Reuters presents it as culpable that Fisher said no to his aggressive demands. Isn’t it just barely possible that he has an unpleasantly belligerent and demanding personality? And that she had glaringly obvious reasons to say no to him? Quite apart from the fact that she gets to say no for any reason or none, because she is a person and not public property.



He learned it from Solzhenitsyn

May 19th, 2018 5:07 pm | By

Kermit says don’t be like some damn two-bit do-gooder.

H/t Leonie Hilliard



How can we move forward?

May 19th, 2018 3:02 pm | By

Oh good, now Playboy is telling us how to feminism. Thank god; we’ve been wondering all along how we could do it more Playboyishly.



These harpy women

May 19th, 2018 11:52 am | By

Jordan Peterson explains the tragedy of why men can’t control women: it’s because they’re not allowed to hit us so it’s all just hopeless, hopeless. It’s fatal for the culture, is what it is.



Power to change the world

May 19th, 2018 10:48 am | By

No I didn’t watch the RoYal WedDing, and I was pretty staggered last night to see CNN “covering” it (to the exclusion of anything else) at 5 a.m. London time when all there was to say was “Well the sun is coming up and the crowds aren’t here yet but THEY WILL BE by god”…but all the same I’m getting a kick out of the sermon the royal stiffs got to listen to.

The sermon-giver was Michael Curry, the presiding bishop of the US version of the Anglican church, aka the Episcopalian. (I was dragged to Episcopalian church a few times as a kid. It didn’t take.) He’s the first African-American head of the church. His sermon was a stem-winder. Even a non-believer can appreciate it.

Jesus of Nazareth on one occasion was asked by a lawyer to sum up the essence of the teachings of Moses. He went back and reached back into the Hebrew scriptures, to Deuteronomy and Leviticus, and Jesus said you shall love the lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind and all your strength.

This is the first and great commandment and the second is like it: love your neighbor as yourself. And then in Matthew’s version, he added, he said, on these two Love of God and Love of Neighbor, hang all the law, all the prophets, everything that Moses wrote, everything in the holy prophets, everything in the scriptures, everything that God has been trying to tell the world. Love God, love your neighbors, and while you’re at it, love yourself.

Now someone once said that Jesus began the most revolutionary movement in all of human history, a movement grounded in the unconditional love of God for the world. A movement mandating people to live that love. And in so doing, to change not only their lives but the very life of the world itself.

I’m talking about some power, real power. Power to change the world. If you don’t believe me, well, there were some old slaves in America’s antebellum south who explained the dynamic power of love and why it has the power to transform. They explained it this way. They sang a spiritual, even in the midst of their captivity, it’s one that says there’s a balm in Gilead. A healing balm, something that can makes things right.

There is a balm in Gilead to make the wounded whole. There is a balm in Gilead to heal the sin-sick soul. One of the stanzas actually explains why: they said, If you cannot preach like Peter and you cannot pray like Paul, you just tell the love of Jesus how he died to save us all. Oh that’s the balm in Gilead. This way of love is the way of life. They got it, he died to save us all. He didn’t die for anything he could get out of it. Jesus did not get an honorary doctorate for dying. He wasn’t getting anything out of it. He gave up his life, he sacrificed his life for the good of the others, for the good of the other, for the well-being of the world. For us, that’s what love is.

Yep, I’m still not going to watch so much as a second of the wedding or the supra-wedding carry-on, but I do like that sermon and who gave it and who heard it.



Cultural exchange

May 19th, 2018 10:13 am | By

An exchange student from Pakistan was killed in the Santa Fe school shooting.

Sabika Sheikh, aged 18, had been on the Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange & Study Abroad programme (YES). The programme is run by the US state department, and was set up in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 attacks to bring students from Muslim-majority nations to the US on a cultural exchange.

That’s something the US and Pakistan have in common: plenty of lethal violence.

Sabika Sheikh

Sabika Sheikh family

Her parents, Abdul Aziz and Farah Sheikh, told the BBC they heard about the shooting through television news.

They said they confirmed their daughter’s death within an hour by speaking to school administrators. Ms Sheikh’s body would be returned to her home in Karachi early next week, they said.

That’s an extra hardship for them if they’re observant Muslims, because burial is supposed to be the next day. Also, it’s Ramadan.

President Donald Trump, speaking at a prison reform event at the White House, described the attack as “absolutely horrific”.

“My administration is determined to do everything in our power to protect our students, secure our schools, and to keep weapons out of the hands of those who pose a threat to themselves, and to others,” he said.

That’s a shocking, offensive lie.



Handcuffed and shaking in the cold wind

May 18th, 2018 4:14 pm | By

Via G Felis, Sam Levin at the Guardian tells the appalling story of a guy brutally arrested and held for months as a suspected “Black Identity Extremist”:

Rakem Balogun thought he was dreaming when armed agents in tactical gear stormed his apartment. Startled awake by a large crash and officers screaming commands, he soon realized his nightmare was real, and he and his 15-year-old son were forced outside of their Dallas home, wearing only underwear.

Handcuffed and shaking in the cold wind, Balogun thought a misunderstanding must have led the FBI to his door on 12 December 2017. The father of three said he was shocked to later learn that agents investigating “domestic terrorism” had been monitoring him for years and were arresting him that day in part because of his Facebook posts criticizing police.

Arresting him with maximum fuss and terrorization, apparently in the middle of the night – and making him go outside in the cold in his underwear.

Balogun spoke to the Guardian this week in his first interview since he was released from prison after five months locked up and denied bail while US attorneys tried and failed to prosecute him, accusing him of being a threat to law enforcement and an illegal gun owner.

Balogun, who lost his home and more while incarcerated, is believed to be the first person targeted and prosecuted under a secretive US surveillance effort to track so-called “black identity extremists”. In a leaked August 2017 report from the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Analysis Unit, officials claimed that there had been a “resurgence in ideologically motivated, violent criminal activity” stemming from African Americans’ “perceptions of police brutality”.

The counter-terrorism assessment provided minimal data or evidence of threats against police, but discussed a few isolated incidents, notably the case of Micah Johnson who killed five officers in Texas. The report sparked backlash from civil rights groups and some Democrats, who feared the government would use the broad designation to prosecute activists and groups like Black Lives Matter.

A few isolated incidents don’t sound like enough reason to claim there is such a thing as “black identity extremism” let alone that it needs to be investigated let alone that it justifies sending people to jail for months while the FBI tries to come up with some shred of evidence.

Investigators began monitoring Balogun, whose legal name is Christopher Daniels, after he participated in an Austin, Texas, rally in March 2015 protesting against law enforcement, special agent Aaron Keighley testified in court.

The FBI, Keighley said, learned of the protest from a video on Infowars, a far-right site run by the commentator Alex Jones, known for spreading false news and conspiracy theories.

They have got to be kidding. INFOWARS?? They consider that a reliable source??!

Keighley made no mention of Balogun’s specific actions at the rally, but noted the marchers’ anti-police statements, such as “oink oink bang bang” and “the only good pig is a pig that’s dead”. The agent also mentioned Balogun’s Facebook posts calling a murder suspect in a police officer’s death a “hero” and expressing “solidarity” with the man who killed officers in Texas when he posted: “They deserve what they got.”

That’s interesting because when women report getting very explicit threats on social media – “I will rape you to death, I will cut your tits off, I will knock your teeth out with a brick” – the police say it’s just trolling and they can do nothing. Yet a guy says of the police, “They deserve what they got,” and wham he’s jailed for months and loses his job and his house.

Keighley, however, later admitted the FBI had no evidence of Balogun making any specific threats about harming police.

At the time of his Facebook posts, Balogun said he was angry and “venting” about the high-profile cases of police killing innocent black men and women in America, including Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. He was particularly disgusted with the way the media and law enforcement officials portrayed the killings as justified and said that when he wrote those posts “I just mimicked their reactions to our killings.”

Read the whole thing. It’s horrifying.



Cargo cult intellectualism

May 18th, 2018 11:14 am | By

A representative of that strange creature, Woman, does a profile of Jordan Peterson in the Times.

Mr. Peterson, 55, a University of Toronto psychology professor turned YouTube philosopher turned mystical father figure, has emerged as an influential thought leader.

Not to be confused with an intellectual or scholar or thinker. He’s more like Jim Jones.

The messages he delivers range from hoary self-help empowerment talk (clean your room, stand up straight) to the more retrograde and political (a society run as a patriarchy makes sense and stems mostly from men’s competence; the notion of white privilege is a farce). He is the stately looking, pedigreed voice for a group of culture warriors who are working diligently to undermine mainstream and liberal efforts to promote equality.

Along with Sam Harris and Dave Rubin and so on – the brightly lit “Intellectual Dark Web.”

He lets the writer, Nellie Bowles, hang out with him for two days.

He does not smile. He has a weathered, gaunt face and big furrowed eyebrows. He has written about dogs being closest in behavior to humans, but there is something extremely feline about him. He always wears a suit. “I am a very serious person,” he often says.

He sounds unbearable already.

Wherever he goes, he speaks in sermons about the inevitability of who we must be. “You know you can say, ‘Well isn’t it unfortunate that chaos is represented by the feminine’ — well, it might be unfortunate, but it doesn’t matter because that is how it’s represented. It’s been represented like that forever. And there are reasons for it. You can’t change it. It’s not possible. This is underneath everything. If you change those basic categories, people wouldn’t be human anymore. They’d be something else. They’d be transhuman or something. We wouldn’t be able to talk to these new creatures.”

Says the guy from the sex that is not represented as being chaos. It’s always fascinating to see people breezily explain why other people are consigned to inferior categories while they float above in the gilded empyrean.

[H]e was radicalized, he says, because the “radical left” wants to eliminate hierarchies, which he says are the natural order of the world. In his book he illustrates this idea with the social behavior of lobsters. He chose lobsters because they have hierarchies and are a very ancient species, and are also invertebrates with serotonin. This lobster hierarchy has become a rallying cry for his fans; they put images of the crustacean on T-shirts and mugs.

The left, he believes, refuses to admit that men might be in charge because they are better at it. “The people who hold that our culture is an oppressive patriarchy, they don’t want to admit that the current hierarchy might be predicated on competence,” he said.

In other words that men, all men, men as such, are better than women, all women, women as such. Yes, he’s right, we don’t want to “admit” that, partly because it’s obviously not true.

Rather than making an argument he babbles about myths.

“It makes sense that a witch lives in a swamp. Yeah,” he says. “Why?”

It’s a hard one.

“Right. That’s right. You don’t know. It’s because those things hang together at a very deep level. Right. Yeah. And it makes sense that an old king lives in a desiccated tower.”

But witches don’t exist, and they don’t live in swamps, I say.

“Yeah, they do. They do exist. They just don’t exist the way you think they exist. They certainly exist. You may say well dragons don’t exist. It’s, like, yes they do — the category predator and the category dragon are the same category. It absolutely exists. It’s a superordinate category. It exists absolutely more than anything else. In fact, it really exists. What exists is not obvious. You say, ‘Well, there’s no such thing as witches.’ Yeah, I know what you mean, but that isn’t what you think when you go see a movie about them. You can’t help but fall into these categories. There’s no escape from them.”

Or from animated mice and rabbits and whatever Goofy is, too. Those stories and animations really exist. Therefore, patriarchy is best.

Bowles mentions Alek Minassian and the ten people he killed.

Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married.

“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”

Mr. Peterson does not pause when he says this. Enforced monogamy is, to him, simply a rational solution. Otherwise women will all only go for the most high-status men, he explains, and that couldn’t make either gender happy in the end.

But being forcibly married will make them all ecstatic, for sure.

“Half the men fail,” he says, meaning that they don’t procreate. “And no one cares about the men who fail.”

I laugh, because it is absurd.

“You’re laughing about them,” he says, giving me a disappointed look. “That’s because you’re female.”

Because he’s a Thought Leader, he didn’t call her a bitch. You know he was thinking it though.

But aside from interventions that would redistribute sex, Mr. Peterson is staunchly against what he calls “equality of outcomes,” or efforts to equalize society. He usually calls them pathological or evil.

He’s like the new Ayn Rand, but hotter.

Bowles sits in on a paid-for Skype conversation with one of Peterson’s acolytes.

At one point in the discussion, Mr. Peterson, who had been relatively quiet, becomes heated on the topic of women who find marriage oppressive.

“So I don’t know who these people think marriages are oppressing,” he says. “I read Betty Friedan’s book because I was very curious about it, and it’s so whiny, it’s just enough to drive a modern person mad to listen to these suburban housewives from the late ’50s ensconced in their comfortable secure lives complaining about the fact that they’re bored because they don’t have enough opportunity. It’s like, Jesus get a hobby. For Christ’s sake, you — you — ”

Worth every penny of the $200 for 45 minutes.

“Jordan’s exposed something that’s been festering for a long time,” says Justin Trottier, 35, the co-founder of the men’s rights organizations Equality Canada and Canadian Centre for Men and Families. “Jordan’s forced people to pay attention.”

Mr. Trottier made headlines when his group called the anti-manspreading subway initiatives sexist. Their musty space hosts events in which men discuss the prejudices they perceive against them. One of their group’s main goals is “waking the police up” to female-perpetrated domestic violence, Mr. Trottier says.

Now, “there’s more acceptance of what we’re trying to do,” he says.

Oh lord. I know him slightly. He used to be the Executive Director of CFI Canada, and he was at the Ottawa conference in 2012. Peterson is an older Justin Trottier.

There are now regular Jordan Peterson discussion groups. The one in Toronto meets once a week at a restaurant called Hemingway’s and is run by Chris Shepherd, who used to be a professional pickup artist who coached men on how to get laid fast at a club but is now a dating coach.

Mr. Shepherd first encountered Mr. Peterson in a viral video of the professor getting yelled at by campus activists. Watching the stoic professor take on righteous liberal anger touched Mr. Shepherd.

Of course it did. Rape-advisors (aka pickup artists) are such an embattled population these days.

A few comments on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/997489897777827842

https://twitter.com/helenlewis/status/997517533056991232



C’est normal

May 18th, 2018 9:46 am | By

More people killed in a school shooting in Texas.

Between eight and 10 people have been killed in a shooting at a Texas high school, say police.

Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez told reporters the majority of the dead at Santa Fe High School were students.

A student is in custody after the attack at the school, which is about 40 miles (65km) south of Houston.

The death toll makes this the deadliest school shooting since the one in February at Parkland, Florida.

We rank them now. They’re so regular and frequent and routine that we rank them by body count and don’t bother with the ones that kill only two or three. Shootings in schools are just a US thing now, like hot dogs and racism and corruption.

President Donald Trump, speaking at a prison reform event at the White House, described the attack as “absolutely horrific”.

“My administration is determined to do everything in our power to protect our students, secure our schools, and to keep weapons out of the hands of those who pose a threat to themselves, and to others,” he added.

But of course it’s not. He’s not. He just gave a speech at the NRA convention two weeks ago.

Your Second Amendment rights are under siege, but they will never, ever be under siege as long as I’m your president.

“Your Second Amendment rights”=absolutely no gun control of any kind…except of course inside the White House and anywhere else Trump is. He’s protected but the rest of us just have to take our chances.

Democrats and liberals in Congress want to disarm law-abiding Americans at the same time they’re releasing dangerous criminal aliens and savage gang members onto our streets.

It’s not guns, it’s those dangerous foreign brown people.