John C. Wright's Journal

The strange aura of speaking to a sleepwalker hangs around any attempt to discuss the various tragic mass shootings and terrorist attacks by faithful Mohammedans obeying the Koran and its traditions with any Leftists. Their voices are dull and their eyes are blank when speaking of precautions to be taken or wars to be wages to abate the threat, and they seem congenitally unable to name the enemy by name. It is as if there is no category ‘Jihadist’ anywhere in their thinking, so that when a Jihadist attack occurs, they must scurry to find another category in which to box it, perhaps ‘lone wolf with mental problems’ or ‘example of religious intolerance’ or ‘understandable reaction to Western oppression’ and on and on.

When the conversation turns to what is wrong with Christians, or Republicans, or Conservatives, or the Patriarchy, however, now their eyes light up, a battle fury fills them, and their voices take on power and become mellifluous, resonant, and charged with emotion.

You may have noticed it in President Obama’s speeches. His denunciations of Islamic Terrorists …. oh, wait. Has he ever denounced Islamic terrorists? Or does he just denounce ‘acts of terror’ which could mean any scary act, so that Candy Crowley can later, during presidential debates,  interrupt and coldcock the GOP candidate to prevent him from denouncing the administrations concert of lies surrounding the Benghazi massacre?

In what sick and surrealist view of the world is George W Bush considered a greater threat than Saddam, than Hamas, than ISIS ?

The answer is that to the Left, no external threat is pertinent. The only threat comes from the Establishment, whether that is called the Capitalist class, or the Patriarchy, or White Privilege, or the Jews. The Left are in a continual posture of rebellion, even when there is no one left to rebel against because the Left runs everything. And so make believe things allegedly somehow in charge of the universe have to be invented to justify the continued rebellion.

An ex-leftist once boiled down the Leftist world view to me. I asked her what, had she been asked back when she was Leftist, what constitutes a prudent and proper precaution to take against enemies? What would she have answered?

She said her answer would have been simple: A wide eyed stare of innocence and surprise, a look of confusion, and

“Enemy? What enemy?”

Read the remainder of this entry »

A comment from regular longtime reader Robert J. Wizard, which I thought worthy of a spotlight:

People are pretty sick mentally. Think of how affected a mind is under the modernist mentality. Not bragging, but I understood clearly what had happened in the first sentence of the first news source I heard about this. It was no advanced powers of deductive reasoning, nor a prejudice. Just the most rudimentary ability to recognize the starkly obvious. As obvious as ascertaining whether there is or is not someone in front of you speaking to you at a specific time or not.

Imagine a large living room full of screaming teenagers and Jason Voorhees is there butchering them with his machete. Every time he descends upon a victim, a progressive holds the poor victim still, proclaiming, “Jason is not your enemy! He’s a man of peace!” And when the freshly slain victim smacks against the floor the progressive points her finger at a cringing group of people against the back wall. They consist of a nun, a priest, the milkman, and a nondescript straight white male in his 30’s who goes to church. “They are your enemy!” shrieks the progressive. And every time one of the hapless victims says, “I’m pretty sure Jason is our enemy!” He is booed and cowed into submission which is all that is necessary for the modern to be blinded and join the zombie line.

Read the remainder of this entry »

Our prayers and good wishes go out to the victims and their family members.

Note to those accusing Christians and Whites for this savage mass shooting: this terrorist was a registered Democrat. He beat his wife. He shouted out praises of Allah before he pulled the trigger. He had been under investigation by the FBI for links to terrorism previously, but they saw no evidence to warrant a continued investigation at that time.

Note to those accusing our current lax immigration policy: Please note also that this man was born in the USA. The administration wants to bring in thousand and tens of thousands more members of this violent religion of death, because the administration is part and parcel with the culture of death, and they are aroused in a semisexual fashion by the thought of brutal shootings of innocent bystanders by brawny barbarians. But this particular case is not an example of that.

Note to those of you who say it was not his violent religion that caused this violence: shut up. Likewise to those who blame Christians, blame white men, and blame Donald Trump. You had the opportunity to speak, you wasted it. You chose to utter lies, and now your words are merely clamor that aids the enemy. No one believes you, not even your own side.

Gun-grabbers please note: the man was a security guard, and passed multiple background checks. Even in the most restrictive regimes of gun control you advocate, no one suggests disarming guards. No additional rules would have had any effect in this case.

Meanwhile, pro-gun activists please note: saying victims should arm themselves is counterproductive in this case. This shooting took place in a bar. Guns are usually not allowed in bars.

This is not a gun issue one way or the other. Nor is this the proper time to have this debate: a little respect for the dead, please.

Racists and various Junk Science addicts please note: shut up, you swine. Religion is not passed through the genes. Middle Eastern Christians, Greek Orthodox living in Turkey, and Coptic Christians have never suicide-bombed anyone. I am profoundly ashamed of the human race that I need to take the time to utter this comment. I had thought these ideas settled after the Second World War by the universal revulsion of the civilized portion of all mankind.

I am more profoundly ashamed that the politicians in the modern day cannot show any respect for the dead.

My shame is not equal, however. I regard one of these comments as far, far more shameful than the other:

Really, Mrs. Clinton? You are going to shield the Jihadists and their mass-murders in the same way you shield Mr. Clinton from his adulteries and rapes, You are going to attack those who speak the truth about the evils you are protecting. Spin, slander, lie, libel, distort, misdirect, manipulate words, edit, redact, fib, deflect, change the subject, and attack.

Meanwhile, Mr. Trump, who was mocked by Left and Right alike as an unfit candidate, had this to say:

That is why our new goal must be to defeat Islamic terrorism, not nation-building.

For instance, the last major NATO mission was Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya. That mission helped unleash ISIS on a new continent.

I’ve said NATO needs to change its focus to stopping terrorism. Since I’ve raised that criticism, NATO has since announced a new initiative focused on just that.

America must unite the whole civilized world in the fight against Islamic terrorism, just like we did against communism in the Cold War.

Hear, hear. Some conservatives said Mr. Trump was insufficiently conservative to win their vote. Your vote is more chaste than Diana. Was there anything in those thoughts either unconservative, irresponsible, tricky, or not in keeping with his many other public statements on the matter?

Or do you believe he is as the news paints him? If so, why do you think the news, in this one case, is not attempting to deceive you?

Some liberals said he was the Antichrist. Of course, they also said Obama was Christ, so the logical conclusion is that we can rely on their moral compass: whoever they hate, like Mr Trump or Mr Cruz, deserves love, and whoever they trust, like the faithful partisans of Islam, deserves mistrust. Going the opposite way along the road from a man who always goes wrong may lead you astray, but not often. And at least you will avoid bad company.

Note to newsmen: I am listening to the news. This is news given on conservative talk radio, not MSNBC, but the news is shameless. The anchor is discussing in a solemn baritone that no one knows why the gunman did it, or what his motive was. This is after the story broke where the FBI admitted the shooter’s ties to Islam, and after the shooter’s call to 911, where he swore allegiance to the Islamic State, was told to the public.

There is no question about his motive of any kind, in any way, shape, or form.

Dear newsmen: Shut your lying, two-tongued, oily, deception-dripping serpentine maws, you soulless candidates for the position of the Mouth of Sauron.

We are sick of you. Honest men hate lies, and dishonest men hate pointless lies, lies that fail to convince. You lie for pay, you news media men, and have no shame, no ethics, no humanity, no honesty and no manhood. Hell yearns for you.

Some of observers of the modern scene, despairing of conservatism as an idol that failed, likewise despair of democracy and its ideal of equality of rights.

In particular, they hold the races to be unequal, mutually incompatible, and therefore must be separate and at odds. The Black Lives Matter is one manifestation of this: La Raza among the Mexicans is another. Both are notoriously anti-American, anti-White, and would void our nation, laws, and customs, most particularly the law treating all men as equal before the law. Any Black who cheered when OJ Simpson was acquitted, for example, rejects equality.

Because of the insanity of the modern day, I find I must defensively define terms that schoolchildren once learned in civics class. Equality here means that a man’s wealth, birth, or bloodline, race or denomination, is not taken into account when determining his guilt or innocence in criminal or civil law, nor imposing on him extra burdens of civic duties, such as jury duty or tendering taxes, nor singled out for special privileges. Equality is the opposite of group punishment, ancestral guilt, corruption of the blood, and affirmative action. It does not mean everyone gets a trophy for participating.

Now, of late, I have heard of the desire of some on the Right to form a White Race party, on the grounds that, first, Whites are the only group routinely and openly discriminated against under our laws concerning admissions and hiring practices, and, second, that Western Civilization is and should be White, an unique cultural artifact of the White Race, on the grounds that among non-Whites no such laws and institutions as ours are found.

As to the first argument, I yield with no further complaint. If the only way to rid an otherwise civilized nation of race-based hate groups like La Raza and Black Lives Matter is to overawe them with a race-based majority group seeking a destruction of minority privilege and affirmative action, the minority has none to blame but themselves.

The Left promised the unhappy minorities better lives in return for giving Caesar the power to lift the blindfold of Justice, and grant rewards and favors based on race, not merit. The Left promised minorities money if they had bastards out of wedlock, and urged them to kill any unwanted unborn babies in numbers to make the Aztec blench. The Left promises you Utopia and gave you Detroit.

If the White Lives Matter party forms, it is the inevitable reaction to the folly of minorities seeking legal privileges denied to Whites. If a sailor heeds the siren song, she will lure his boat to the reef, and drown him.

As for the second, I would propose that if we find a factor that correlates with respect for the individual and other indicia of civilization, it is a possible cause, whereas a factor present both when individualism is present and when it is absent is not a possible cause.

Was it the bloodline of the White Race that caused the predominance of Europe in the last millennium, and America in this?

Read the remainder of this entry »

The Massachusetts House passed a bill legally abolishing sex.

https://stream.org/massachusetts-house-passes-bill-legally-abolishing-biological-sex/

The Massachusetts House of Representatives voted 116-36 Wednesday to legally demolish the notion of biological sex in favor of “gender identity.” A similar bill passed the Massachusetts Senate last month. Gov. Charlie Baker has already said he’ll sign the bill.

“The Gender Identity Public Accommodations Bill” (H.4343) provides a three-front advance of transgender “anti-discrimination” laws, reports Conservative Review:

1. It replaces the word “sex” with “gender identity” in multiple areas of Massachusetts law.
2. The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination must amend rules and policies to comply with this shift from biological sex to “gender identity.”
3. It allows people to use the restroom or locker room that matches their gender identity.

Victory brought eye-popping hyperbole from the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Byron Rushing. “We are doing the work the founders of our nation intended for us to do,” said Rushing, “This is a great day for us and we should be very proud.”

My comment: Go to confession, get shrived, set your worldly affairs in order, buy firearms, stock the basement with foodstuffs and fuel.

It is that bad. The keel beam of the ship just broke, we are taking water fore and aft, and the crew are busily pumping water aboard as quickly as can be, the pilot steers toward the reef, the engines are roaring full speed ahead.