In the West, there is a new wave of political correctness at work: it is all about one’s sexual orientation; who has sex with whom, and how. Suddenly, the mass media in London, Paris and New York is greatly concerned about who has the right to change his or her sex, and who does not want to belong to any ‘traditional’ gender bracket.
Thinking about ‘it’, writing about it, doing it, is considered “progressive”; cutting edge. Entire novels are being commissioned and then subsidized, as far away as in the Asia Pacific. Western organizations and NGOs (so-called “non-government organizations”, but financed by Western régimes), are thriving on the matter.
These days it is not just LGBT that are in the spotlight, glorified and propagandized; there are all sorts of new types of combinations that many people never even heard about, or imagined could exist.
Even some Western airlines do not call their passengers “ladies, gentlemen and children”, anymore, in order “not to offend” those who do not want to be any of the above.
Accept any sexual habit, repeat loudly, many times, that you have done it; then preferably write about it, and you will be lauded as progressive, tolerant, and even “left-wing’.
This is a discussion which is clearly encouraged, even invented by the Western regime: a safe discussion which is aimed at diverting dialogue from topics such as the fact that even in the West, a great number of people are living in fear and misery, and that the majority of neo-colonies of North America and Europe are once again being totally, shamelessly exploited.
Talking about poverty and exploitation, about military coups triggered by Washington are rarely spoken about. Such discussions are even being portrayed as old-fashioned, if not regressive.
Hype is, these days, all about the interaction of penises, of vaginas, or about the lack of such interactions. It is about one’s “identity” and about the right to change one’s gender. What you do with your private parts is much more important than billions of people who are forced to live in filthy slums. Surgery that is aimed at changing one’s gender is more newsworthy than the “regime changes” and consequent destruction of millions of human lives.
Such focus is totally fragmenting Western societies. It leads to extreme individualism and dark nihilism. What should stay behind closed doors is being brought out to the center of attention.
Don’t think that it is all a coincidence. It is clearly designed this way. Like the enormous flood of free pornography did not come from out of the blue. The hidden message is clear: watch as much free porn as you can in your free time, watch football, enjoy booze, and put your sexual identity at the very center of your existence.
Then, define all those who disagree with these sorts of lifestyles as ‘intolerant’, ‘backward’, and even ‘oppressive’.
Why is all this happening? Why are Western countries so obsessed with “sexual identities”?
The answer is simple: because those who are obsessed with their own bodies, desires, identities and endless “rights”, have hardly any time left to think about the rest of the world.
And vice versa: those who are passionately fighting for a better world, building people-oriented societies, sacrificing their own comfort and personal benefits; those individuals often have no time, or very little time, to think about the nuances of their sexuality. For them, sexuality is simply part of their life; often powerful and important, but it is definitely not their center of gravity, not their very essence.
And precisely this kind of optimistic, unselfish mindset is extremely dangerous for the survival of Western regimes, and the Empire itself.
I am all for people to have their right to choose how they want to express themselves sexually. As long as it is done discreetly, and without forcing anyone into anything.
But I am strongly against the so-called sexual identity monopolizing political narrative of entire nations.
There are much more important issues that Western societies should be concerned with, and obviously are not.
And the Empire knows it, and precisely for that reason, it does everything possible to elevate sex and sexuality into something tremendously important, glorified, as well as untouchable. Terms and definitions then get confused: centering people’s identity around their genitals, gets defined as “their identity”. Their struggle for sexual rights is now being defined as “progressive”, even, bizarrely as left-wing.
It is, of course, an absolute nonsense. The fight for sexual rights is the fight for sexual rights: it is not right, or left.
There is absolutely no guarantee that a man who undergoes gender-changing surgery, would gain a deep interest in the US-triggered coup in Bolivia, or in the tremendous torment, inflicted by the West, on the people of Syria or Afghanistan.
I have discussed this issue, in-depth, with my friends and relatives who happen to be professional psychiatrists and psychologists: Jung, who attacked Western imperialism as a clinical disease (pathology), has been criticized and discredited by almost all Western schools. While the self-centred Freud, has been glorified to this very day. He became untouchable in Europe and North America. We are all encourage to see ourselves through his eyes.
We are supposed to think and analyze the world in a Freudian way. To say “penis” or “vagina”, or to show them, and especially change them, is supposed to send a shiver up our backs, to make us feel heroic, progressive.
While the Empire murders millions of people worldwide. While British and North American children are suffering from hunger, while NATO is bringing our planet closer and closer to the next huge war which our humanity may not survive, people inhabiting the Empire are encouraged to think, to write and to fight for totally different issues than those that could save our humanity.
I have to report that, after working in some 160 countries of the world, on all continents, the issues that I am addressing above, are prevalent only in the West. Well, also in countries and territories that have been deeply indoctrinated by the West, like Argentina and Hong Kong, to give just two examples. Which makes one wonder what is really going on?
I am not talking about people being born gay or lesbian and then getting discriminated against (such discrimination should be, of course, confronted), or forced by brutal family practices (like I witnessed in Samoa) to unwillingly change their sexual identity. I am fully, and determinedly supporting people to have their rights, to practice what they feel like, and to be fully protected by the law.
I am addressing here this totally wild obsession with the topic. I am talking about forcing people in the UK, US, Canada, Australia and some European countries, to accept as essential a dialogue, which is absolutely irrelevant to more than 99% of the population on our planet. It is not about LGBT anymore. This is now about something absolutely else; about color shades, about nuances, about details: while the entire world is burning; in flames.
Can we please talk, finally about Hong Kong, Iraq, Bolivia, North Korea?
And as a writer, as a novelist, I reserve my right to create, to write as I want to! If I want to say, “ladies, gentlemen and children”, you can all stop reading me, but I will write it precisely as I want. You can go and read the latest generation of politically correct scribes. Although you know as well as I do, that you will never find any great literature created by them.
The Empire makes sure that many essential topics, including those like whether the world should continue to live under the boot of savage capitalism or whether it should be selecting socialism, hardly ever get discussed on the television screens, and on the front pages of the internet.
Gender changing surgery is now obviously a much more important topic in the UK and the US, than whether Western imperialism should be stopped, once and forever.
But remember: We will all burn if we burn. Heterosexuals, homosexuals, trans-gender individuals, even those whose sexual orientation I still do not understand. If there is a Third World War, we will all be fried.
Therefore, I suggest that we first try to disarm the Empire, stop savage capitalism, give freedom and the right to choose their destiny to all nations of the world, and then… Only then, shall we make sure that we support all the people of countless sexual orientation, that our humanity has.
But first things first, please!
Unfortunately, the majority of people do not have the capacity to fight on various fronts, for numerous causes. And they often choose to struggle for the issues that are extremely close to their waist.
First published by NEO – New Eastern Outlook
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
Amazon made $11.2 billion in profits last year.
Tax paid: Zilch. $0.00.
Ditto Google, Boeing, and virtually any other large corporation you care to name.
Many tens of millions of Americans, the working poor, the new serfs, the deplorables, earn $18,000 a year.
Health insurance for a family far exceeds that amount.
18% of the GDP, $3.8 trillion in “health care”, is wholly eaten up by price gouging and rent seeking by the drug and insurance monopolies. Their CEOs pay themselves $40 million, $50 million, $100 million a year.
$5,000 for an ambulance journey. $750 for a pill that costs 10 cents to produce.
$350 for a month’s insulin for a diabetic, that costs $30 in Canada.
$60,000 for an appendectomy that costs $125 in Russia.
But how many riots, how many mass demonstrations, have their been over these issues?
How many of those responsible have been beaten to death or lynched from lamp posts by angry mobs?
How many public buildings have been burnt to the ground?
What’s wrong with Americans? Aren’t 300 million guns enough?
Instead, they want to riot about the really important issues. Trump’s pussy grabbing antics. Somebody using the wrong gender pronoun. The global warming hoax.
Have to get those priorities right.
My answer to the question of “is it a boy, or a girl”, is, “Yes”.
Today, one is thankful to meet an actual human, and frankly I don’t think anything else matters.
I think this is extremely simplistic Mr Vltchek.
The vast majority of heterosexual men and women I have come across the past 40 years are, by and large, pretty uneducated about politics and focus mainly on schools for their kids, whether the roads are full of potholes, whether their rubbish gets collected and whether their local hospital functions OK or not.
The majority under the age of 50 grew up in relative sexual emancipation, the era of ‘lying back to think of England’ having disappeared in the 1960s before most were born. Women are now having better job prospects than men in the UK and we know that something is wrong when those trying to give ‘affirmative action’ to white boys, the group with worst educational prospects as 2020 starts, are told they are wrong to highlight this (as if it were a threat to the victimhood of blacks, gays, Muslims, Jews, women and Asians).
The media is infested with an extremely unrepresentative body of mainly disturbed people, which explains why the active purchasing habits of the more normal majority are steering progressively away from the MSM. The MSM no longer addresses my reality, nor that of millions of other semi-normal UK people, so people are increasingly zoning out and not buying any more.
There is already a backlash to trans wokism. People are absolutely sick and tired of being told that their whole lives must be oriented around not ‘offending’ <1% of the population. There is nothing 'offensive' about referring to the 99% normal folk, especially if there are no trans folk in the room. You cannot offend those not in earshot, after all.
All this is just like claiming that Jews are the most important people on earth. They are no more important and no less important than Gentiles, full stop. If it is 'offensive' for Christians to celebrate Harvest Festival, then it is equally as offensive for Jews to celebrate Hanukkah, since the celebration is solely a celebration of Jewishness to the exclusion of all else. It takes a special kind of nutcase to be offended at other groups of people celebration their traditions, when you are free to celebrate your own.
Well I personally am sick and tired about hearing about other people’s sex lives in toto. As long as you are a consenting adult and doing it with other consenting adults then fine. Now just fuck off and stop talking about it.
I suspect you mean “fuck on”.
Many lesbians and gays reject identity politics and want to be left alone by these homophobic politics. We are being used and redefined by this ideology which harms us. And other minorities.
Good piece. Identity politics is a way of dividing the Left by disgusting older/more traditional voters so they vote for a right-wing alternative, while at the same time feeding young people with the mantra the main left-wing part ‘isn’t doing enough’, so they vote for a third party. Extreme environmentalist movements serve the same purpose. Note how much time the Guardian gives to such issues.
I couldn’t agree more.
Sexual politics are very divisive and distractive, although the western indifference to who people choose to have sex with, as long as they are consenting adults, is a healthy step, imo.
Sexual orientation, however, is separate from the sexual identity propaganda now being pushed so heavily, and not just online. The entire Establishment is behind this agenda, including mainstream media, the government, the military, the drug companies, the medical industry, the schools and universities, libraries, the police, prisons, social workers, etc.
This is not a push for tolerance, this is an Orwellian attempt to control perception of reality and also to control language. If a man declares himself to be a woman, then you MUST perceive him as a woman, and you must change your language to conform with his self-identity. “Preferred pronouns” are enforced by the police in some cases, and “deadnaming” is a newly invented thought crime which has led to bans and harassment in enforcement.
This is a bold attempt at societal management. It has led to great splits in leftist movements, as people who prefer to remain reality-based, and who base their politics on material reality, instead of ephemeral idealism, consisting of “feelings inside”, are being attacked, threatened, de-platformed and harassed by those who have adopted their master’s agenda.
Longtime leftists, with decades of organizing experience, are being shut out of meetings, lectures, Parties and organizations, with claims that their very presence “contaminates and makes unsafe” entire buildings! And in the case of Helen Steel, a longtime activist in UK, an entire moor was deemed off limits to her, to cater to trans activists and their claims of feeling unsafe.
Having mobs of young people, schooled in queer politics instead of class politics, who attack older activists who still understand that it is the material world which determines reality, not thoughts, prayers and internal feelings, is a very effective way of shutting down any principled resistance to the Empire’s imperialism and to the destruction of the planet by unfettered capitalism.
Today,a new Oxfam report came out where is claimed that 1% of the human species owns the equivalent of 6400 millions of other humans. Comments on social media are appalling, to say the least. Those who dare criticized this situation are called haters and envious by….others also from the 99%. Mankind resambles a well-trained dog, one that learned helplessness….
Some representatives of the Homo “sapiens” fantisizes to have a colony in Mars by 2050 to scape….they are part of that 1%….
As of today, humanity is happily waking to its own demise, and it seems that only through a catastrophic event of biblical proportions, can humanity be saved from itself. Maybe then ,real wisdom will come out and guide those who survive.
Which ‘ social media’?
Criticising billionaires is anti semitic. Stop it immediately!
Refusing to grovel at their feet is, too.
Completely agree with every sentence you wrote Paula.
A while ago, a uni student, who is a customer of mine (I sell a street mag) whose also a member of a group called Socialist Alternative here in Australia came up to me very excitedly, exclaiming “had a really exciting meeting yesterday – we were discussing transgender theory. It was really brilliant”….
I didn’t know what to say – I was almost struck dumb. From the same pseudo left group that kept a stony silence on Julian Assange for years, and who supported the ‘revolution’ in Syria, not even realising they were supporting jihadists.
They had close links with the now defunct International Socialist Organisation in the United States.
I have also heard from reliable sources of certain members of these various groups claiming to feel ‘unsafe’ at the mere presence of others at meetings, and having these people ejected.
“The entire establishment is behind this agenda, including mainstream media, the govt,…” etc etc.
Excellent summimg up Paula.
Next week, I’m going to self identify as a 9 year old Chinese girl.
The week after, I’m going to be a zebra.
After that, I think I’ll be a sycamore tree.
Risking an educated guess this post suggests that this week you mostly be someone who was brought up in the British isles – extracting he urine being he national pastime.
Before you ask: for the foreseeable future I will identifying as 120 years of age in order to extract fifty odd years of company and State back pension (not to mention several decades of winter fuel allowance).
No doubt everyone else will be identifying as as a totally unrelated collection of single individualised atoms in a tribute to Descarteian reductionism.
Holding meetings in railway stations or airports – those being the only locations containing a sufficient number of individual telephone kiosks to enable them to meet on their own, by themselves, alone without suffering the trauma of sheer hatred involved in any encounter with discernable objective reality which might contradict in any way, shape or form the subjective, self defined opinion based reality inside the head of any individualised atom.
E. M. Forster’s short story ‘ The Machine Stops’ springs to mind. As does the episode of ‘Red Dwarf’ featuring Johnny Vegas as a police constable in a pink uniform aboard a space ship community which has banned all criticism, including tutting.
It is not morally uplifting to parody the concerns of poor creatures suffering from extreme neurotic illness. The manipulators, the Divide and Rule overlords are the villains of this piece.
The ruling parasites are Protean in their successful efforts to Divide and Rule. And considering how extensively and for how long Green groups have been infiltrated by The Filth, I rather suspect that many of the more extreme Identitarians may be agents provocateuses.
The Gay Mafia have a 5 point, thin-end-of-the-wedge programme.
This is the first stage.
“We just want to be left alone to do our own thing. We aren’t doing you any harm. Please just leave us in peace to get on with it.”
Everyone has to accept that homosexuality is at least fully equal with, if not superior and preferable to, the majority heterosexual lifestyle.
All sorts of changes have to be imposed on society to accommodate their life style.
Gay civil partnerships. Gay marriages. Gays allowed to adopt children. All sorts of administrative changes, like “Parent 1 and Parent 2” details instead of “Mother and Father” details on school enrolment forms.
Gay lifestyles in general, and strident, politicised, campaigning homosexuality in particular, are promoted and celebrated as something wonderful in themselves, that everybody must embrace.
Public money devoted to Gay Pride jamborees. Gay outreach workers. Politicians queuing up to declare how marvellous this all is.
People who are not gay are required to participate enthusiastically in these celebrations.
Firemen and other people in public life who are not gay are required to actively join in.
Homosexual propaganda and indoctrination are targeted at very young children from the age of five onwards. A legally required part of the curriculum.
People who refuse to join in, or who fail to do so with sufficient enthusiasm, are subjected to punishment.
Non gay firemen who decline to join in a gay parade as directed are disciplined and fined.
A housing worker who expresses his opinion on social media, in his own time, that “gay marriage might be a step too far” is dismissed from his job. There is no evidence that he has ever discriminated against or disadvantaged gay people.
Devout Christians who run a bakery and do not wish to bake a gay wedding cake are prosecuted and threatened with the loss of their livelihood.
Moslem parents are prohibited by law from demonstrating against the premature sexualisation and homosexual indoctrination of their primary school children.
Anyone who says a word out of line, or who is deemed to have “offended” the gay mafia in any way, faces the loss of their job and the end of their career.
1. and 2. are relatively harmless in themselves, but are just the thin end of the wedge and invariably lead on to 3., 4., and 5. Most homosexuals would probably be content with 1. and 2.
But it never ends there.
This just incites extreme anger and hostility – “do whatever the f… you like, but leave my kids alone.”
As usual, Vltchek is spot on.
The cia, from its very beginning, has been deeply influenced by the group psychology/mass manipulation theories of Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Bernays, who worked for the agency after the war. Since today all u.s. mass and social media are controlled by the cia, it is fairly easy to see that the gender identity hysteria is another manipulation whose purpose is to divert left-leaning people in the west away from the true aims of leftism — anti capitalism and anti imperialism — towards an ideology which is harmless.
The citizens of the empire need to wake up: the free world will not tolerate for much longer their nation’s crimes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn0I26EJi1o
I remember back in the ’90’s reading Triton by Sam Delany when I was into Sci Fi that was written in the mid ’70’s where the protagonist was fixated on gender issues and contemplating changing his sex which he eventually does. I think I eventually lost interest in the book and what passes for Sci Fi or what they now call “speculative fiction” these days.
Anyway like Margaret Mead and Toffler’s Future Shock crowd at SRI that Sci Fi like Delany instead of speculating about the future were creating it through gradual social engineering. This gender issue is a case in point. Since who would have thought it would actually have been an issue back then?
Even after Gore Vidal wrote Mrya Breckenridge which became a best seller and the movie was a blockbuster that started a fad for a while but then people went back to more substantive issues other than getting a sex change in Sweden yet now it seems that the media has gone into a full court press on this issue. So one has to ask “what’s behind it?”
Personally I think it is a last resort for a dying empire that has lost any credibility as you seem to be pointing out Andre.
Ha, ha, ha… Censorship converts Off-Guardian in The Guardian…!!!
Consumer capitalism thrives on discontent. Convincing everyone that their hair is wrong, their skin is bad, their face doesn’t look right, their clothes are awful etc. to get them to buy buy buy. And sex is the most intense engine of this constant drive to induce self-loathing. Everything conspires to tell you that you are repulsive, that you will not find a mate unless you splash out on this and that – and once you’ve found a mate, perhaps he/she isn’t really the one for you. The sex you’re getting is never as good as it could be. Look at all those glamourous stars. Imagine what they’re getting up to. Hell – you don’t even have to imagine! Look at those glossy images! Read about this kind of sex and that kind of sex. Bet you’ve never had anything like that etc. Thus this glorified sex is the most perfect embodiment of the laboratory rat wheel. No matter how fast you go and how much you buy, you stay in the same place. And yet images of ecstasy pull you on. And all the time you’re buying buying buying.
But perhaps it’s all too easy now? Everyone is used to the common variations. Time for some new stuff. Time for the sequel, the new series, the new fashion, the new lovely little honeypot scam. Let’s invent loadsa new sexualities. New areas for creating anxieties, hang-ups, phoney controversies, with all the concomitant books and programmes and magazines and scandals and whipped up confrontations between prejudices etc. KaChing! Looooovely!
Advertising is definitely capitalism’ s most toxic psychological and spiritual poison. The deliberate fomenting of feelings of inadequacy, greed and envy, pummeled into our minds from every vista, around the clock, with relentless repetition, courtesy of Pavlov and Skinner, is a crime of truly stupendous dehumanising impact.
Western Imperialism & Capitalism died March 10th 2008. We are in a Post-Capitalist world now.
Usually the capitalists are the last people to find this out. Much like Marie Antoinette.
Globo Homo (aggressive, politicised, strident homosexuality; aggressive premature sexualisation and indoctrination of children enforced by law, and outright paedophilia; aggressive promotion of transgender dysphoria; bestiality and incest, together with the virulent denigration of normal healthy family life) is a symptom of an irredeemably degenerate and very sick society on the verge of total collapse.
There is nothing new in any of this. The same things were very much in evidence in ancient Rome as it declined and fell, with a cross dressing emperor plying his trade as a prostitute.
The only difference is that these things are now aggressively promoted by a degenerate globalist paedophile elite, both to legitimise their own habits and perversions and as a harmless distraction from their other activities, their criminality, tyranny, parasitism and abuse of power.
The same is true of the Great Global Warming Hoax, with Soros- and Wall Street-funded Little Greta astroturfing her way across the planet, so that Green Eco Warriors like Mark Carney can raid the pensions and transfer trillions upwards into the pockets of the 0.1%.
I don’ t think you’ ll get too many adherents to the notion that global climate destabilisation is a ‘ hoax’ here in Australia, after our hottest day (by one degree Celsius, beating the day before, to 41.9 Celsius averaged over the entire continent)our hottest year and driest 12 months, and the greatest wildfire Holocaust in our history since White invasion. Followed by choking smogs for days and weeks, then, bizarrely, but you’ d better get used to it, massive downpours, one-in-a-hundred year deluges and hailstorms so violent that they have shut down much of Canberra as the carnage is examined. Greta may be a fraud, but what she says is 100% true, and Carney is just a parasite.
I don’t think it is a hoax but is it man-made and can we do anything about it?
I recently read a piece by Dmitry Orlov which raises interesting questions. The whole piece is behind his Patreon wall but I’ve pasted some of the key points here.
“30 years is a really short period of time to average over. And that’s what climate is: weather averaged over some long period of time. Major climatic changes are observable over much longer durations—a century or more.
Within the last 30 years climate scientists were looking at the slowing Gulf Stream and predicting that another ice age is about to begin.
To say that climate scientists tend to agree with each other is more of a social effect than a scientific one.
Climate scientists who believe that the climate is impossible to predict because it’s just too complicated don’t get any funding at all and drop out of climate science altogether. When a whole bunch of scientists agree with each other, that’s called “groupthink” and it doesn’t mean anything.
The only thing that means anything at all in science is whether the experimental results agree with the theory, and when it comes to climate theory the experiment takes a few thousand years to run.
To say that the science behind the theories of climate change is settled science flies in the face of the evidence: 222,060 papers on this subject have been published between 1980 and 2014.
The 1.5ºC number? That’s probably an estimate of average global temperature rise over pre-industrial levels but we don’t know those levels. Around 40 years ago we started receiving data from satellites that covered the entire planet, but before that time we had thermometer readings that only covered certain spots, mostly in Europe, North America and a few parts of Asia. Based on such limited information, it takes a lot of fudging to come up with a global pre-industrial temperature estimate, and we shouldn’t necessarily trust it. For the parts of the world for which we do have records going far back, such as Northern Europe, we find that the 12th century was much warmer than it is now, and then came a mini ice age, and both of these were definitely pre-industrial. So, which of those two temperatures do we plug in as “pre-industrial global temperature” not to be exceeded by more than 1.5ºC—the one higher than now, or the one lower?
How do we know how much global warming there is going to be? The estimates (which is all they are) are based on climate models, which are basically toy climates built inside a computer. They are toys because representing all of the Earth’s geophysical systems in great detail would require a computer that’s half the size of the planet and it would take centuries to come up with an answer, so the solution is to approximate things as much as possible. These climate models are certainly useful for testing various theories as to how the climate functions, but is it safe to say that they can be used as a basis for predicting long-term climate shifts? Weathermen can’t give us accurate forecasts five days out, and yet climatologists claim to know the future decades and centuries out.
It seems strange to put so much trust in the climate models given how bad we are at every other kind of prediction. Plus we know that the climatologists are fudging things. They admit so themselves. For instance, clouds are very hard to model accurately because a lot depends on what happens at the microscopic scale. If the top of a cloud consists of water droplets, they act like tiny mirrors and reflect sunlight back into space, thus cooling the planet, but if they consist of ice crystals, then they act like tiny prisms and scatter the energy inside the cloud, warming the air. This sometimes causes the cloud to warm enough to melt the ice crystals and make them act like tiny mirrors, resulting in negative feedback. But climate scientists are only now starting to realize how complicated this all is, and for now they are just plugging in what are called “fudge factors.” They tweak their models until they stop blowing up and start predicting what they want them to predict.
Here’s another example: ocean currents are extremely important in determining the climate. When they function, they redistribute heat from the equator toward the poles, keeping the planet warm. But when they stop, ice caps and glaciers form near the poles. These reflect a lot of sunlight back out to space and then what we have is an ice age. Looking back over many thousands of years, we see a pattern: long ice ages and short interglacial periods. We are nearing the end of an interglacial period. And although this is just another theory, what seems to trigger the onset of ice ages is global warming: the planet warms enough to rapidly melt Greenland’s ice cap, causing fresh water to pour into the North Atlantic, preventing the Gulf Stream from sinking and causing the entire conveyor belt to stop. So, what do climate models have to say about this? Well, it turns out that large currents like the Gulf Stream are as important as small currents and very small-scale interactions that determine the mixing of warm salty water and cold fresh water. This is too complicated to model, and so it’s time for another fudge factor.
Last on our list of fudge factors is the sunlight itself. Climate modellers treat solar output as constant even though we know that it fluctuates. There seems to be a rhythm to the sun, but we don’t know what causes it or how reliable it is. All we know that is that we can’t predict solar output but that it has a large impact on climate.
We also can’t predict volcanic eruptions which can emit massive amounts of greenhouse gases and a large eruption can toss enough dust up into the stratosphere to blot out the sun and cause a couple of summers that seem like winters, with failed harvests and massive starvation. The 1257 Salamas eruption is thought to have triggered the medieval mini ice age. But we can’t predict such events, and so all climate models must carry a disclaimer: “provided there are no massive volcanic eruptions.”
So, given that clouds, ocean currents, solar activity, volcanic eruptions are all too difficult to model, the climatologists seized onto something they can both measure and model: carbon dioxide. It is thought to cause global warming, although there are two different ways to think about it. You could think that increased atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide causes global warming by trapping solar rays. Or you could think that global warming causes atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide to increase, along with other trace gases that warm the climate such as methane, nitric oxide and water vapor. Keep in mind, that these last trace gases are far more potent as greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. But it’s hard to understand where they come from, and even harder to figure out who to blame, whereas with carbon dioxide we can blame us humans who are burning fossil fuels.
And so that’s what the plan seems to be: blame people for burning fossil fuels and try to make them stop, or at least feel guilty about it. Invest lots of public money in green technologies such as wind and solar. Of course, these only make electricity while oil-based liquid fuels are needed for transportation, and the electricity they produce is intermittent, which is to say, unreliable, so if all you have is wind and solar you’ll have no end of blackouts and society will stop functioning. To make it work you also need to maintain gas-fired power plants—exactly as many of them as you’d need without any wind or solar, but they’d spend quite a lot of time just spinning without much of a load, but ready to start producing energy as soon as it clouds over or the wind dies. Gas-fired plants can do this, unlike nuclear or coal-fired plants which need a long time to ramp up. But this is a very inefficient way for them to operate, and therefore very expensive—so expensive that any country that goes in this direction will be faced with electricity rates so high that it will not be able to afford to manufacture much of anything, such as solar panels, wind generators or gas turbines. Plus what’s to be done about transportation? All the ships and the locomotives and long-haul trucks require diesel, and there is no alternative technology available for replacing them.
But there is more to it than that. All of this “green new technology” is probably just an attempt to paint a happy face on a sad situation, which is that fossil fuels are running out. The coal that is still available is of increasingly poor quality; conventional, easy-to-get-at oil production peaked in 2005-6; and the remaining natural gas, which is favored because it burns cleanly and produces three times less carbon dioxide per unit energy than coal, is mostly found in three countries: Russia, Iran and Qatar. The inevitable conclusion is that there will be a lot less energy available, climate action or no climate action.”
Bog standard denialist disinfo.-Orlov’ s position is most disappointing. The assertion that we do not know the sources of methane (rice production, belching cows, fugitive emissions from fossil fuel operations and melting permafrost and submarine clathrates) nitrous oxide (industrialised agriculture) and water vapour (a positive feedback from warming, at a rate of 7-8% per one degree Celsius rise in global average temperatures)is deplorable disinformation. The basic fact, and please try denying this, is that the increased level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, from c. 280ppm 200 years ago to 415 ppm today, and 490 equivalent taking other greenhouse gases into account, has destabilised the planet’ s heat budget. the re-capture of solar energy in the troposphere by greenhouse gases, interrupting their reflection back into space, has caused an increase in the heat energy stored in the Earth system that amounts, art present to c.4 watts/metre2 per second, ie the equivalent of several Hiroshima bombs per second. The accumulation of heat energy, 90% of which is sequestered in the oceans, must have an effect on the climate of the planet. How could it not? The 150 zettajoules (10 to the 21st power) accumulated in the oceans over those 200 years ensures planetary climate destabilisation for millennia. As for computer modeling, first such models are used throughout the world in multifarious areas-do you reject them all? The models have proved more and more reliable, but seem, if anything, to have under-estimated the recent rapid climate changes.
I’m not denying or rejecting anything. I merely pasted a piece which posited a different viewpoint. I think the debate is still open and Orlov makes several points which are interesting. As regards other greenhouse gases he pointed out that we can’t accurately measure them. You seem to have made your mind up so it is probably pointless debating.
Yes-since I heard of the ‘ greenhouse effect’ at High School, already science well over 100 years old, I have come to a very settled opinion. It is an opinion shared by ALL Academies of Science and scientific societies on Earth, and 99% of actively researching climate scientists. Moreover, as I garden a lot, and live in Australia, where the effects are already quite marked, I have seen rapid climate destabilisation with my own eyes, most recently in the last few weeks, having to decamp twice as wildfires neared.
Over those years, as the science became more and more solid, and as the observations from reality of melting glaciers, ice-caps, sea ice, permafrost, submarine methane clathrates, raging megafires, the spread of diseases and pests etc, I also noted another, far more malignant and malevolent development. The creation of a denialist industry, by the fossil fuel Moloch and Rightwing ideological psychopaths, on the pattern of the tobacco harm denial industry (with some of the same alumni)has actively and successfully worked to thwart any action to avert the climate destabilisation Holocaust, and helped make certain the deaths of billions, perhaps all, of human beings in the next few decades. Of course this is the greatest crime in history, or ever possible-the deliberate destruction of Life on Earth for reasons of greed and ideological hatred.
Bizarrely enough, the denialist industry has succeeded in conscripting some allegedly ‘Left’ and ‘anti-elite’ fools to this omnicidal campaign. The fanatics thus conjured up, if they are not actually PR flacks posing as ‘Left’ or anti-capitalist, have that true stigma of the Dunning-Kruger type, that evidence and facts contrary to their position only make their fanaticism more obdurate. The great global warming conspiracy that has become their perverted religion now encompasses the IPCC, the UN, climate scientists, the global scientific superstructure, etc, and, oddly enough, the global cryosphere and the world’s weather as well. And as their death-cult becomes ever more odious to humanity, their paranoid delusions grow ever more lurid and inventive, so the megafires in Australia were not caused by record heat and record dryness, strong winds and ‘ dry lightning’ strikes, but by armies of arsonists, Green, Islamic or Chinese depending on your strain of Rightwing insanity, arsonists who the police (plainly part of the Great Conspiracy) categorically state do not exist. Thus Homo sapiens goes to meet its fate, driven to self-destruction by malignant and paranoid imbeciles.
Don’t know why I’m bothering to respond really as you have made your mind up so it is probably pointless debating. Orlov is not financed by the oligarchs you refer to and doesn’t deny that the climate is changing. His view is that the change could be part of the normal pattern: long ice ages and short interglacial periods and that we are nearing the end of an interglacial period. A little tip for you. If you comment on here to project righteous anger, carry on as you are doing. If you seek to persuade others to consider your views, stop calling people you disagree with fanatics, fools and imbeciles and engage with their points.
Disinformation peddled in the service of the fossil fuel industry that makes human extinction more probable, does cause ‘ righteous anger’ in morally sane people. I imagine that ‘ does not compute’ for you. And when I see the same lies and imbecilities peddled, year after year, by Dunning-Krugerites too dumb to realise that they are being used, or by knowing disinformationists whose moral status is akin to the extermination camp kapos, I call it for what it is. I attemptecyears of rational argument with denialist fanatics, but it’ s like disputing with a rock. Orlov’s ‘ position’ is lamentaly wrong and ill-informed. Just why he has descended to such levels of obscurantism, because this destabilisation is not in any way a ‘ normal cycle’, a point proved over and over again for decades, is beyond me.
I’m still waiting for the New Ice Age “all the scientists” were promising us 40 years ago. The snow shoes and the skis are still gathering dust in the attic. We were going to have to dump millions of tons of soot on the North Pole to warm it up a bit.
That is one of the denialist industry’ s biggest Big Lies. Even forty years ago far more climate scientists predicted a warming trend, than a rapid descent into an Ice Age. But the denialist industry just lerves its old lies.
Nope, I remember it all clearly. It was all New Ice Age, get ready to fight off the polar bears when you go out to post a letter. Then they lost interest in that and invented Global Warming instead. I’ve been keeping the snow shoes for when they change their minds again and it’s all Back To Square One.
That is simply wrong. You, like everyone, choose to remember what you wish to recall. Time had the New Ice Age on its cover, but that was just about it. The vast bulk of climate scientists already were far more concerned about global warming than any imaginary New Ice Age.
Funny how things that don’t fit the required narrative are always simply disappeared down the memory hole.
Also. I’d like to hear our own Norman Pitkin’s opinion of this.
Andre is correct of course, but there is another angle. It’s not just identity politics as distracting and divisive. It’s that identity politics, especially sexual identity politics has emerged when it has–i.e., in the last few years. So, here is my thesis. The world system of capital is breaking up. Among its signs are multi polar violence, ecological collapse, returning fascism, etc. The system of capital is based on class relations, and class relations underlie all other human relations. Sexual relations are basic to the human condition, regardless of the political economic system. Therefore, as capitalism crumbles all social relations go into flux, including sexual relations. Public hysteria about sex is mainly a sign of a global system breaking down and a new in forming.
Time to read The Mass Psychology of Fascism, again, and dust off the old orgone energy collector.
Let’s not forget, identity politics is not just about gender. It’s all sorts of cultural, ethnic, religious, environmental groups and factions along with sexual and gender based groups. I think this has evolved partly because of social media, and partly because our political representatives are so shit. They’ve all been telling us that class is dead, when it clearly isn’t and the rot starts with local politicians who are, mostly the worst people qualified to represent us.
The only way to fix this, imo, is to take the marketing, lobbying and public relations out of politics. The we can get on with addressing the issues that are important to people, and everything else will be a whole lot easier.
As we all know there is only one Identity that is not subjected to division.
The aim is to atomise society into a mushrooming number of arcane identity groups, based on race, gender, religion and sexuality. The 57 varieties of gender that are being peddled, with punishment for people who forget to use the right invented pronoun. People can then be classified according to their identity group and sub-group and sub-sub-group above all other considerations, rather like an extreme version of the Indian caste system.
So people should vote for Clinton because she has a vagina. If she is a corrupt, mendacious warmonger with blood on her hands, that doesn’t matter, because she’s one of the wimmin.
You see the same mentality with people like Jess Phillips.
Ignore the fact that we are being ruled over by a psychopathic, self serving, kleptocratic kakistocracy that is lying through its teeth, robbing us blind, and subjecting us to blanket surveillance, among other things. Just go charging down the rabbit hole of your choice. And get the gender pronouns right.
As the T-shirt, in the 80s, in Queensland, under the reign of the sub-fascist, corrupt, bumpkin, Joh Bananas and his consort, Flo, said-‘ Flo has one, Joh is one’.
Mr.Putin got it right on this issue.
Live free as you wish but I am not changing the bathroom signs and I am not altering the Russian language.
Homosexuality is like the black man when it comes to societies. If you see the colour of the skin and feel the need to discuss it, to address it, then you are the racist amoung us.
Do you need a court to tell you what a racist is? Do you need a government ? Same thing with sexual orientation.
Morgan Freeman explains it well enough for those with an IQ high enough to understand it and reason with it.
On the subject of Morgan Freeman’s IQ:
It is another form of destabilisation that West is desperately keep on creating. It could be a sign of a state of panic they are in.
When was it the last time they showed mercy for the plight of Assange’s solitary confinement?. Those pulling the strings are hiding their crimes against nations and against humanity with even more crimes, reserving lethal weapons for brown people and poisons and identity politics for anyone with internet connection.
When the West targets other societies over, say, gay rights, with their usual vicious, supremacist, racist arrogance and contempt, it does not do the ‘ victims’ any good whatsoever. Their cause becomes a symptom of malignant Western interference, and is often set-back. The scum tried it on with Cuba, but the Cubans themselves put the Latino machismo behind them, and integrated gays into society, without the aid of hypocrites from the West.
A great article to start the week – especially after yestetdays … don’t know what to call it.
Identity and sexual politics and sport and porn and politics and war .. all tied up into one – an article to keep and share especially to all these still lapping up the Grauniad cool aid – which stuffs the nonsense down their throats daily.
Thank you Andre for your takedown of the vapid banality and extreme me-ism of identity politics.
I’ve said it a few times before on the site, and I’ll repeat it: Identity Politics has been a very effective Trojan Horse used to fragment and splinter and create disunity. Especially amongst the Left; who by and large have jettisoned class politics and class struggle in favour of this postmodernist cul de sac crud.
My sexual orientation is just one part of who I am. A segment of the whole. It’s not something I shout from the rooftops, it’s not something to ram down other people’s throats.
My ideal is Live and Let Live – treat others as you’d like them to treat you – regardless of who they are.
And yes, I’ve been bashed twice because of my sexuality, including by ‘workmates’ while at work. I’ve had many instances of homophobic abuse directed at me over the years.
And I’ll say this very clearly:
I fully oppose and reject identity politics, despite my own history.
Our real enemies are the parasitic 0.01% billionaires, the ruling elites who pull the strings, the Warren Buffets, Jeff Bezos and Rupert Murdoch’s who rake in vast fortunes from pillaging this planet and screwing so many into the mud; the Wall St Banks, the Hedge funds, the IMF and World Bank, the Multinational Corporations, the very Economic System which creates such despair and inequality and the deaths of so many human beings.
To benefit so few.
Identity Politics is a cynical distraction from all of this bloody carnage. It separates us when we need to unite more than ever.
Michael Parenti on gender inequality issues and how to tackle those issues (really funny)
“in this very exploitative society which we must continue to resist and rectify”….
Thanks for the clip Willem, and yeah, Michael Parenti nails it, as usual.
The push towards the dominance of sexuality and gender based identity in the West has been in various successive waves. The most recent one was in response to the Occupy movement successfully putting plutocracy and extreme inequality on the agenda with its 99% vs 1% memes back in 2011. I agree with the article that this push was very deliberate.
Worst answer ever:
Amazing how great the hate against ‘Transgender’ people is in a majority of Christian/Orthodox countries.
I have a solution for all you flaming hypocrites and story peddlers:
Why don’t you push all the Transgender folks into the ovens? You surely remember how its done, right?
What a pathetic piece of drivel – blaming of course those whose lives are exploited and who are murdered every day in the most cruel ways. Like ISIS style cutting off of the head. Like Jewish/Christian/Muslim stoning of people that don’t deserve to live – because of: sexual acts.
But for the last time for people like Vitchek et al:
SEX IS NOT GENDER.
GENDER IS NOT SEX.
If it would not be for religious freaks that are stuck in a morally flat world view the world over, people that do not conform to their narrowminded and fanatic delusions would not be murdered.
It is saddening that OffGuradian has published this hate piece.
Especially, since the whole Gender and Sex thing is subject to greater evolutionary processes Mr. Vitchek et al are incapable to detect. Well, haters.
To sum it up quickly:
Transgender Folks are responsible for everything that is fucked up on earth – making them fucked up as well. They went to illegally assault and invade Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and voment overthrows of democratically elected governments. They have corrupted the Western world with citizen united and poison the world with glyphosate and GMO. They steal trillions of dollars from the war ministry and thus from the taxpayer.
No wonder religious people hate Transgender Folks so much. They are the reason for all evil in this world. As a matter of fact, they could also be called ‘satanic’ – as they only aim at disrupting the bigoted, sex addicted minds of religious freaks.
This world would be a much better place if people just focused on WHAT REALLY HURTS AND HARMS.
Oh, and yes, of course. Mr. Vitchek, you were obviously not able to give a voice to those at the receiving end of the stick. Only the voice of the emotionally hurt religious fanatics.
Congratulations for succinctly managing to exemplify what the article is describing. Since you have failed to grasp that the article, and the issue it brings up at large, is not attacking the morality of individuals associated with the LGBTQ+ alphabet , I suggest you read it again. And again, if necessary.
I don’t think he’s attacking trans people, just the self absorbtion of those engaging in identity politics, while denying/forgetting the class struggle. I don’t see any hate here towards trans people, just the fact that it’s a personal issue that’s been politicised. If we had a culture more like that of the Maoris and less reliant on the Bible’s teachings, this would never have been an issue.
Well you just stepped right into it didn’t you.
Exemplified almost perfectly what Mr. Vitchek was trying to bring out in his writing.
all part of the fiendish cocktail of divide & rule they’re putting in the water these days..
Confusing personal identity with social identity (which is about what you do) is bad enough but insisting that everyone accept that they are (a) both the same and/or (b) the social should be subservient to the individual – both on penalty of being ostracised from having the right to survive and exist on the basis of having and expressing a different world view being equated to hatred – is not grown up politics. It’s the sort of approach one meets in a school playground.
Fortunately, like everything else in life, most sensible people – whatever their individual identify – realise and comprehend that in any organised realm of life there are always sub-groups of any particular group who kick the backside out whatever it is.
It’s just a fact of life that those who make the most noise muddy an issue and are not necessarily representative of the whole of a particular group.
Whatever it happens to be, the notion that one specific individual or sub-group subjective opinion should trump either any differing subjective opinion or objective discernable reality on the basis that simply articulating or holding either equates to the hatred of those belonging to that whole group is dangerously divisive.
Society and social identity does not operate on the basis of someone, anyone, dictating that just because they say something is so than it must be so and anyone challenging that is guilty of hatred requiring not only their being ostracised from social media but that they should lose their job for having such temerity (and it has happened); having the crime of rape against them trivialised (again, it has happened); their hard fought rights to specific representation reduced (it’s currently happening in various organisations); that they be incarcerated and lose their liberty (once again, this is being demanded).
The social space is a shared one. My right to throw out my arm with a clenched fist ends at the point of someone else’s, everyone elses, nose tip. My rights only start where someone else’s ends. And vice versa.
That’s how society works and remains coherent.
On the same basis as detailed above the post- modernist left who push this line are not representative of the left per se. They are a noisy and naive sub- group kicking the arse out of it for everyone else and the sooner they grow up the better.
Meanwhile in the real world of divide and rule:
We see nothing but excuses, excuses, excuses:
Ah! But Corbyn.
Ah! But Brexit.
Ah! But scroungers.
Ah! But immigration.
Ah! But Russia.
Ah! But “lefties.”
Ah! But Assad.
Ah! But China.
Ah! But The “Undeserving” Poor.
Ah! But Iran.
Ah! But beggars.
Ah! But The Unions.
Ah! But Identity Politics.
Ah! But them over there.
Don’t forget to doff your cap and tug your forelock as you move forward in the queue towards the oblivion of being surplus to requirements as there is no emergency exit – even for those with the gumption to know there is need for one.
It’s called social identity. It comes with wider responsibilities.
Your response simply confirms what Andre has written in this superb article. Your post was a narcissistic rant, very similar to others which I have read in the past year.
If someone wants to identify as something else and it doesn’t impact on other people, then go for it, fill your boots. However, should you overstep the mark and make unreasonable demands on society as a whole, to present yourself constantly as a victim, then society will look less favourably at you.
Let me give you an example – male bodied people, irrespective of how they identify, do not belong in women’s sports, women’s changing rooms or women’s refuges.
Yea, they’re going to rape them aren’t they. You’re just echoing feminist facists. I’m a woman by the way.
Trying to wrap my head around this.
Anyone who self identifies in a way which seeks to protect themselves, using standard methods of risk assessment, is a fascist?
Is such a position not one of invalidating the self identity of an oppressed individual, group, or sub-group and therefore under the same terms as applied in these cases tantamount to hate speech/hate crime on the basis of openly seeking to invalidate other peoples self defined identity?
Or do these concepts only work one way for those who shout the loudest?
Can we please have a grown up rational conversation?
Nice try. Would you ostracise a male or female from some areas like changing rooms, toilets, gyms, swimming pools, beaches, unisex facilities because a particular faction found it immoral, unwholesome or threatening?
We all have things we don’t like, some of them are inherited, some are the result of experience and some are safety mechanisms. This article is about “identity politics”, not men who have undergone gender reassignment. Identity politics takes many forms including extremist feminists. I think all of it is unhealthy but I’m not happy that this thread has been appropriated by social conservatives who are only able to see “man as men, and women as fragile women. There are many shades in-between.
Would it be possible to define some of the terms used here please?
‘Faction’ for example.
Would that include children? Vulnerable adults? People with physical disabilities? In the context of specific facilities designed for their needs?
Why, for example, would I or any other able bodied individual feel “ostracised” in any way by not having access to disabled toilet facilities.? Or being unable to freely enter an infant/junior/even senior school without a chaperone or being vetted?
Or for that matter a swimming pool which has been booked for a school swimming lesson?
Life is full of such common sense examples which attempt to negotiate the objective discernable reality of reducing risk.
Concepts such as “unwholesome” or “immoral” do not enter into the context here and are merely baggage used to bolster a particular argument.
It is perfectly legitimate, sensible and in keeping with social values to protect everyone from risk of harm, regardless of who they are or their identity on an equal basis.
To reiterate: My right to throw out my arm with a clenched fist ends before the end of everyone else’s nose. Such rights only start where everyone else’s end, not before. And it is reasonable and sensible to apply that principle on an equal basis for all without anyone, regardless of who they are or what their social identity (which is not the same as individual identity) seeking to extend their rights at and over the expense of others using the pretext of being ostracised from society and their place in it through being labelled and charged with hate crime/thought for not rolling over and complying.
Nice try at erecting yet another phony battle. But the fact is that most people don’t give a flying fuck about “transgender” people – and indeed don’t even know, and have no wish to know, what it means. That’s because most people are smart enough to know that by this time next year we will have any number of new wondrously inventive demographics (Trans-glandular? Trans-testicular? Bio-quadrangular?) to give the infinitely concerned an opportunity to scream about intolerance etc. And how revealing that you drag religion into it for maximum divisiveness.
You managed to create another category of people to demonise and attack: the so-called religious fanatics and freaks.
Thanks very much for making things so much harder for the rest of us to resist the slice’n’dice categorisation and the lifestyle-marketing brainwashing that goes with it
Your hysteria does you no credit, nor your cause any good, whatsoever.
Worst contribution to Off-Guardian ever
In many of his books Professor Antony C Sutton argued that the narrative of left and right was false. Furthermore, he said the notion of division in politics was created by and encouraged by transnational finance. To put it simply, it set up divisions which were used to manipulate the masses. Hidden History, the secret causes of WW1, also illustrates how an enemy was created in order to justify the mass murder of millions of people which is being repeated by the new designated enemy. It’s called propaganda. Vitchek is correct in his analysis of this latest wave of distraction from the most important issues affecting humanity. How do the transnational financial overlords achieve these conjuring deceitful false flag narratives. Well, ignorance through control of the media, academia and promotion of right thinking apparatchiks is one method besides of course the deep stratification of society through the cast system. Aldous Huxley looked at this in his book Brave New World. What is the end goal of it? A feudalistic system of serfs, servers and sovereigns!
Left/right is an ECONOMIC continuum with a specific meaning, but of course the waters have been so thoroughly muddied and so many unrelated issues being peddled as left/right that most people don’t even know what they’re arguing about these days.
It’s an artificial construct to deflect from the real agenda . Humanity against the transnational financiers.
There is one great division in humanity, that between those who love or at least accept others, and those who hate, in varying, degree, other people. From the hate follows fear, exploitation and violence. That is why the parasitic elites in the West do all they can to foment and foster competition, egotism, greed and dominance. The success of China is based on their ancient preference for harmony, within society and between societies.
It’s the old ruse: bread and circuses.
The new opium for the people is ‘identity politics’.
The 99% of us should ignore it.
And the 99% of us should boycott the media outlets that push it.
This would be the democratic way to defeat this nonsense.
If like me, you don’t use social media or msm, identity politics rarely, if ever, becomes a topic of conversation. It certainly isn’t threatening to become bigger than issues of geopolitical importance or combatting the effects of austerity.
I know nothing whatsoever about intersex, however, people have been changing sex for as long as there have been the means to do so, and before that, they pretended. So let’s not fall into the trap of becoming all social conservative about it. When articles like this are published you usually get rather flippant use of “trannies” etc. It’s just a thing that affects some people so much they feel they have to do something about it. All the rest is fashion or fad imo.
No human being has ever changed sex, it is biologically impossible.
True. But there again not everyone is as judgemental or certain about gender abnormalities as you.
For instance, what would you do if your son/daughter were so certain they “were in the wrong body”, they would take their own lives if the situation wasn’t addressed homonially and medically?
“Homonially”? If I didn’t know better I’d think you were taking a satirical view.
What would you do if your son/ daughter felt with total conviction that his/ her limbs did not belong to him/ her and had to be amputated for life to be tolerable?
Oh, I’d buy a scalpel and a bone saw facetious Frank.
It’s your comment that’s facetious, lundiel. My question was a serious one aimed at testing your logical and moral consistency. I may also remark that you avoided answering it.
Besides, you probably already have a bone saw.
I’d give him a good kick up the arse.
Sounds like a classic case of KUTAD, Kick Up The Arse Deficit.
Sex and gender are two very different things.
You avoided my question. I don’t think sex has anything to do with gender (can’t think of the word) self hatred. What would you do if you granddaughter attempted to take her life, repeatedly, and psychiatrists informed you that the problem lay in her insistence that she were a man?
PS. You need to do some reading of research before you tell people what “is and isn’t” true. I used to think like you until I read about the first sex change in Communist China and how a political officer visited the patient and psychologists treating her on many occasions before reporting back to the central committee who sanctioned surgery. Another analogy could be the Cuban Communist party’s apology over their treatment of homosexuals. Like I said, you need to read more and stop judging people.
You cannot change sex, it is a biological impossibility to swap chromosomes.
Why would anyone be so closed minded to vote down a perfectly reasonable question that goes beyond MSM speak and popular mythology? I live in a council flat in a tower block in a solid working class area and there is a woman here who has had gender reassignment surgery. Everyone accepts her yet “Andy old Labour” won’t and a few authoritarian s here agree. We’ll, tough shit, I hate identity politics too but I won’t stand for populist Christian bigotry based on fear.
Let us get this straight, you have ignored where I said people should be free to choose what they wish to do, unless it impacts negatively on others. Secondly, gender reassignment surgery can never change a person’s sex, that is down to biology and the genes/chromosomes you were born with.
I guess that to people such as your self, biology must seem so old fashioned.
Actually, I have said in all my posts that sex and gender are different. With regard to “sex change” operations, I leave that to psychiatrists to decide, along with medical professionals to determine the effects of hormone boosts during pregnancy, chromosome abnormalities, intersex etc. It was you who started ranting about “women’s changing rooms” and as a woman, I don’t take kindly to your intervention on behalf of my gender.
Maybe you should change your name to Andy old DUP as they’re the only political party who support your views.
Reading through these posts I think there may be some misunderstanding.
Firstly, I don’t believe people can change sex. However, I accept that, for various physiological and psychological reasons people may believe, or come to believe they are the opposite gender “inside”. I also accept that once they have been treated with hormones and had surgery, they tend to live uneventful lives. Whereas before, they attempted suicide, self harming, drugs and prison etc.
Secondly, I don’t concur with current thinking regarding children/young adults who wish to be the opposite gender or somewhere in between. However, I am a layperson so I can’t propose an argument against or for, based on science.
As a natural born woman, I am ambivalent to sport, I really don’t care either way. However, when you include changing rooms, that gets my goat. I don’t frequent sports facilities but do do you think we all sit about like we’re in a harem or something? There are plenty of toilets that are for men and women and even harems had male eunoch attendants.
My only point is that gender reassignment has been going on for a long time now and results are generally good. Other societies are fine with it (Maori for example). It is only the culturally conservative societies that have a problem and that includes rural England.
I think it’s time to separate identity politics from the small number of people who find it necessary to undergo gender reassignment and the politicisation of it is no help to anyone.
Identity politics is little more than hyper-individualism, a liberal creed of self-centered contemplation which abjures anything involving collectivist, communal and societal structures and orientations. The individual is placed at the centre of the universe and is held to be responsible for his/her own developmental needs and choices. This is a very lonely place and makes enormous psychic demands on the atomised and exposed individual. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that when social solidarity is undermined all sorts of morbid social pathologies make their appearance in our brave new world. It is not difficult to understand; it is Durkheim 101.
At the present time the cultural fabric of our society is being ripped apart and replaced by the all-encompassing, liberal creed of unrestrained egoism. In Thomas Hobbes’ words bellum omnium contra omnes (a war of everyman against everyman). Of course the centrifugal forces unleashed in this social architecture will result increasing fragmentation. Unleashed appetites have no frontiers and are never satiated. Result? self-destruction through the usual methods.
The simple fact that liberals attempt to obscure is that people need people. The world is not peopled by Robinson Crusoes, who anyway wanted to get out of his miserable existence. The existence of communities which endure through time and have a distinctive culture attests to the fact that people are not only social beings, but they cannot be anything other. Culture is that force which glues things together, and individuals both create culture and are created by culture.
The sick Ayn Rand(ist) view of life and more generally the attack upon culture by extreme liberalism is a feature of contemporary ‘civilization’. It cannot and will not end well.
Should perhaps have said “…the obsession of much of the left with identity politics…”
That’ s not the real Left. That’ s the pretend left, as described by the FoxNews poltroons.
In which case, left organisations must be rather thickly populated with them.
Yes, they are. People are brainwashed to hate ‘socialism’ and love capitalism, even as it kills us. Then the clever rulers, who can get some ‘Leftists’ to protect the fossil fuel Moloch by becoming climate destabilisation denialists, work on Left fools’ sympathy for persecuted or merely disdained minorities, and, having no interest in class, economics or geo-politics, the poor dears waste all their precious time, and they haven’t got much left, concentrating on toilet provision. It’ s so effing ludicrous that it is both tragic and hilarious at once.
A top article – needed to be said. In Australia (and elsewhere in the western world) the left’s obsession with identity politics at the expense of class politics has almost disabled it – made it irrelevant to the working class.
George Galloway’s new party proclaims itself socialist and opposed to identity politics “because it divides the working class”. Spot on – that’s what the left needs to hear. The true left-wing position.
In the 1970s, identity politics was called ‘sectoralism’, but it was less narrowly focused on sexuality. Certainly sexuality was part of it (gay liberation and so on), but so also was women’s liberation (which cast off its implicit class critique to morph into straight bourgeois feminism, ‘socialist’, ‘radical’, ‘Marxist’ or otherwise as the 1970s wore on); environmentalism (save the whales, ban uranium mining and nuclear energy, stop pollution and fossil fuel consumption); vegetarianism/veganism and organic food production/consumption; spiritualism (the proliferation of trendy ‘eastern wisdom’ religious cults and sects was amazing, typified by the Hare Krishnas, Ananda Marga, etc); and fads (eg rolfing). These movements grew alongside and within the New Left politics of the sixties, and much of the New Left took on board many of the precepts and outlooks of these movements.
The end of the US’s losing war on Vietnam brought an end to the New Left and also finally brought to an end the political naivety whose ‘highest’ expression, and last vestige, was to see everything new and different as a manifestation of ‘The Revolution’. With Watergate a cynicism and disdain for politics in general was infused that fueled the essentially apolitical lifestyle movements (labeled ‘lifestylism’) whose proponents saw themselves to be on some kind of higher moral plane than the rest of us who remained ‘unenlightened’ and ‘unliberated’, especially if still engaged in grubby politics.
One response to all this was Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism — American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations (1979), which essentially characterised the 70s lifestylism as a pathological narcissistic outgrowth of pampered white American middle class youth benefiting from the Keynesianism of the postwar boom who then retreated inwards as the boom came to its unexpected end (around the same time as Watergate and the first oil crisis of 1974). Today, especially in the corporate workplace, the ‘culture’ of narcissism is a culture of socio- and psychopathy, which has always been there but mercifully now it’s much more known and recognised. To Lasch ‘the new consciousness movement’ represented the shift from ‘economic man’ to ‘psychological man’, all within a bourgeois framework.
Much of the opportunist left tried to co-opt the less apolitical movements, particularly feminism, gay liberationism and environmentalism, by adopting many of their programs but especially their essentially petty bourgeois, classless outlooks as its own. The opportunists made sure to bury any class-based advocacy that may have been part of their history up to then. Essentially their line was that that only the oppressed can know how to liberate themselves, and that only the oppressed will liberate themselves(!). Some ‘socialist’ feminists, for example, used to advocate sex and housework strikes by housewives (against their partners) in campaigns for wages for housework, and their reformist left water boys (and girls) supported such ‘radical’ actions as a viable strategy for women’s liberation. Many feminist movements excluded males on principle, and most of the opportunist left also went along with that.
The anti-class outlook of sectoralism/identity politics, which has remained entrenched as its defining trait since the 1970s, to an extent automates the role of the bourgeoisie’s ideological and repressive apparatus in policing radical politics — by explicitly and rigidly excluding any notions of class struggle that may actually help to liberate the given sector. This is all that counts for the rulers — ixnay, ixnay on the ‘class’ word. Yet on their own, the ‘sectors’ of the oppressed have no social power to liberate themselves, as was shown vividly by the impotent Women’s March on Washington against Trump, which achieved nothing.
Oppression oppresses, and its essence — the essence of hegemony — is the false belief of the oppressed in their own oppression. And of those who are aware of and want to liberate themselves from their oppression, that their particular experienced oppression is the sole key to informing and attaining their own liberation. In reality, such false consciousness in the politics of the oppressed sector only reinforces the oppression — insidiously, which has been aided and abetted by numerous opportunist/reformist ‘left’ organisations — more insidiously.
Have you ever thought about two odd things, or notions in this regard?
1) Things always turn out different than one thought.
2) Is Homo Sapiens now excluded from evolution – since it can alter the code of over millions of years naturally evolved life forms, including itself?
Or is EVERYTHING, every little bit of action, movement, vision, goal, intend, aspiration, drive and desire, part of human evolution, or – much better – the Universe evolving along every ‘day’, with all it is.
When will be able to see ourselves evolving from a bigger picture perspective? So far, it pretty much remains just the talk of an evolved ape. Ape explaining to Ape how things are.
For all its worth, the ‘Global Consciousness Project’ includes a great story about the crime rate in Warshington District of Criminals. during summer. The police chief said it could not be done. Reducing the crime rate significantly enough, to prove that a collective of minds connected and visualizing Warshington District of Criminals having a more peaceful and less violent summer that year.
But working, it did. Proving that collective, focussed ‘positive thoughts’ can reduce not only the crime rate during a Warshington District of Criminals summer, but is very slowly expanding. It appears, that the biggest obstacle to the liberation of the human mind is religion.
But it works for countless reasons. Every letter we type is a necessary piece and parcel of evolution.
1. I enjoy being wrong — then there’s a puzzle to solve and lessons to be learnt.
2. Homo Sapiens isn’t excluded from evolution but it does largely protect itself from nature’s mechanisms for natural selection. Humans like are every other life form and have genes that can mutate; but more importantly it turns out, we have epigenetic mechanisms that can turn on and turn off otherwise un-mutated genes to suit changing conditions. If the new conditions remain fixed, then more of those whose changes worked best will survive to reproduction age and they will become more populous. Until the next major environmental change occurs.
As for ‘collective consciousness’, etc, from well-conducted trials of intercessory prayers offered for the sick, no significance difference in outcome (recovery, survival) has been found between those randomly assigned to be prayed for versus not being prayed for. To replicate the Washington summer crime result properly would require, for example, randomly selecting a sample of 200 cities (say), then randomly assigning 100 of these to the Global consciousness protocol over a summer, compare each city’s crime rate with its crime rate for the previous summer and then compare the average of this change with that in the remaining 100 cities not exposed to the protocol.
Stephen… In the context of your comment, just reading a book called ‘The Frankfurt School, Post Modernism, and the Politics of the Pseudo Left’ put out by the Socialist Equality Party; which I’ve just joined.
One of the reasons I did was their implacable rejection of identity politics, which I agree with.
A quote from the book: “Pseudo Left politics, centred on race, nationality, ethnicity, gender, and sexual preference, has come to play a critical role in suppressing opposition to capitalism, by rejecting class as the essential social category and emphasising, instead, personal “identity” and “lifestyle”
It also puts a microscope to the New Left of the 60s and early 70s.
A couple of questions you might want to ask the SEP:
If China is now capitalist (according to them since c.1976), how did it manage to have a counterrevolution without a shot fired and the same state machine and same party still holding power?
Do they support or oppose state interference in trade unions?
Yes, excellent stuff.
It was interesting to see the debate on who is going to be the next leader of the Labour party. The interesting thing was that of the 5 aspirants 4 were women. On the surface there was nothing wrong with this, but giving the abject cynicism of party politics, I was inclined to think that the candidates were not being assessed on their talents or level of competence, but because they were women. There was another example of this some time ago when some aggrieved feminist thought it unjust that there were so few women billionaires! (sic). What next? Transgendered billionaires! Personally I think we need less billionaires of any type. I would be all for a cull.
Then there is the increasing proliferation on both TV and Radio and print broadcasts pushing the identitarian propaganda line. All the usual typologies either subliminally or overt are there and always presented as normal, enviable and fulfilled. An insidious attempt at covert propaganda and political correctness.
The notion that transgenderism is good, seem to me to be just a value-judgement, it might also be considered in certain circumstances to be highly dysfunctional.
But I refuse to be manipulated into the dubious claims of identitarianism. Identity politics is simply another outgrowth of liberalism and the fixation with me, me, me. I suppose this one particular facet of a society in irreversible decline.
Rania Khalek is an excellent journalist and a keen satirist. See this for her take on ‘imperial feminism’:
And here’s a comment that risk begin accused of racism:
I really don’t care about the issue or race but it is really starting to annoy me how the casts for TV programmes seem to be compelled to “tick all the right boxes” – even to the extent of making a nonsense of a story. And this also shows up that the Right can make some valid criticisms e.g. the usually obnoxious James Delingpole noted a problem with the recent TV production of Philip Pullman’s “Dark Materials”. The Pullman books have a race known as “Gyptians”. From Wiki:
On the TV version these Gyptians are – predictably – represented by blacks, whites and every shade in between – just like the non-Gyptians. As Delingpole noted, this has the ironic effect of creating a deadly dull and meaningless homogeneity. It’s like remaking The Lord Of The Rings only you’re not allowed to have the Hobbits all small. So they have to be all heights. And the dwarves, elves, orcs etc. are not allowed to have their defining characteristics etc. You end up with groups where each one has a mixture of all sorts.
Delingpole is always obnoxious – you should never approach him nearer than a barge pole. If you do you may suddenly fall within his perception management field and start agreeing with him – you should at this point call a friend.
Has Pullman raised any objection?
I read the books, saw the NT play and watched the film – as with most fictions I prefer the books because the pictures they make in my mind are exactly what i read.
Expecting these mental picture to be exactly reproduced is what the word literal was invented for – but we all have different pictures in our heads when reading or listening.
So not going to accuse you of racism because it isn’t but if you are looking for criticism i’ll offer ‘you literalist’!
Not seen TV as refuse to have licence.
I would say that the TV version of Dark Materials is way better than the movie. For one thing – actually the main thing – it has far more time to develop. PP’s concept was weird and complex and needed room to breathe. The film was too short and they tried to cram too much in. The TV version does have a great cast despite what I said about demographic box ticking. As for PP’s own opinion – I daresay he’s happy enough just to get it televised and is probably willing to overlook deviations from the books. There is indeed a large deviation in that the first season, based on the first book, also introduces bits of the second book. But that’s logical in that the TV medium tends to work faster and has to make its points quicker. The boy from the second book – Will – turns out to be black. That annoyed me initially since it seemed another bit of contrived “wokeness” but I’ve adjusted.
I appreciate your warning about Delingpole. It’s dangerous to skirt along with him since he is so completely evil. I seem to have drawn “ down” votes in another post for quoting Lovecraft in relation to Delingpole but frankly the way he looks reminds me of one of those slimy underworld hybrids “who have learned to walk but ought to crawl”.
This has a lot to do with the consumer capitalism’s relentless search for (read: creation of ) new customer demographics cf. the musical field with its splitting up into folkies, hippies, punks, mods, rockers etc. (There are a whole range of more recent examples which I don’t fully comprehend: nu-metal, hip-hop etc. – yes I’m that old). The increasing compartmentalisation is most excellent for boosting customer sales, generating phony arguments (which can lead to all manner of new lucrative fields of employment (books, magazines etc.), and of course dividing people up. And this is where the way capitalism works anyway is also helpful in the field of political rule and so generating money very conveniently blends into a tool for oppression.
And this will be presented as a “left-wing” phenomenon and so the “oppositional” group will be right wing who can present themselves – with some justification – as “the voice of reason”. Meanwhile the true oppositional voice can be pushed away to the margins and ignored.
Identity politics is just the latest manifestation of ‘ Divide and Rule’. Self obsession also reduces the risk of joining mass movements like the ‘ antisemitic’ UK Labour Party or the ‘ terrorist’ Extinction Rebellion. And it is a whoreson useful device to attack ‘ lesser’ societies that have not yet reached the glorious moral empyrean that are the Western states.
Odd that you mention Extinction Rebellion. The group is precisely a conglomerate of self obsessed identities who seem to be more worried about letting us know how unique, rebellious and kind they are, than in thinking about political strategy or about the true causes of ecological disasters.
It is very common that they tweet articles such as “the burning of the amazon is directly related to patriarchy”, or that subgroups such as Rainbow Rebellion emerge and move the conversation away from Climate Justice™. They had Queer weddings on stage during their protests; two members of the “terrorist organisation” were at the BBC, telling us why they didn´t (and we shouldn´t) assign a (traditional) gender to their (our) child(ren)…
I think that in fact Extinction Rebellion is a great example of what the article is talking about: self obsessed individuals with a notable concern about sexual identities who are so absorbed with themselves, so sure about their moral superiority, about their rebelliousness, that makes it easy to convince them to “rebel” against the government (by demanding it takes stronger actions?), against the “corporations that destroy the world” (and that so kindly fund their movement?), etc.
A movement of the establishment, for the establishment. A movement with no cohesion, no time for radical ideas or the wish to engage in self criticism, if it is not, of course, to address their lack of diversity or train members to detect and neutralise the distracted true rebels that sometimes end up on their ranks .
P.S. I never got your reply from our other little conversation.
Oh, dear-I know little of XR, save that the Establishment fear them, or are PRETENDING to. If they are basing a total critique of capitalist omnicide on features of capitalism like patriarchy, hierarchy, the Rightwing Authoritarian Personality type with its boundless ego and greed and innate misanthropy, all to the good, I say. The system must go or we will. If they are just being manipulated, and how could they not be in a system as totalist as neo-liberal capitalism, then they’ ll go the way of Greenpeace and Thunberg (I presume).If the ruling parasites thought that they were a REAL threat to capitalism, they’ d disappear from the news like the Yellow Vests, and be dispersed with vigour, as ‘ terrorwists’. It may be coming.
‘…that IS the Western states’.
The ubiquitous American and Western MSM’s obsessive focus and reporting on “identity politics” at the expense of critiquing bi-partisan war, torture, drone murders and illegal immoral regime-change policies – evokes memories from my youth during the 1970’s.
Entering the decade of the 1970’s many young people actively identified as being part of the most politically “activist” generation in American history. Then suddenly and uniformly throughout the 1970’s the popular American MSM of the day began reporting increasingly and incessantly on how we (our younger generation) were no longer really interested in social change and political activism anymore. We had, according to media reporting, somehow magically morphed from activists into – “the me generation” – in the blink of an eye. By what seemed endless media reports in newspapers, magazines and on television – our generation was now more concerned with inner exploration and spiritual enlightenment, or perhaps just taking drugs and navel gazing – anything, anything it seems, except remaining on the path of political & social activism we had collectively been on.
I remember that this was rather mystifying for me as a twenty-something during those times. However, now in retrospect, and now much more familiar with just how deeply the CIA was involved in shaping the public mind in America and Europe – I now suspect that the CIA’s so called “mighty Wurlitzer” of controlled media were simply carrying out the latest coordinated propaganda efforts. It was of course so much better for oligarchy that we shift from social and political activism to each having our own inward journey, individualistically disconnected from social and political bonds and interconnections, now interested only in meditation, macrobiotic diets and our own personal path to spiritual enlightenment.
The classic quote from Yogi Berra seems rather appropriate: – “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”
Gary, I never had any difficulty blending inner journeying with outer political activism, right through my life. I do recognise, though, the determined attempt that was made to lure people into individualist narcissism in the ’70s, and on from there to the present.
Rhisiart – “Gary, I never had any difficulty blending inner journeying with outer political activism, right through my life.” – nor have I Rhisiart, in fact I’d say they are important parallel journeys. I did not intend to suggest otherwise through my observations.
We now live in a selfie world.
Narcissism is the new ‘normal’
Humility is seen as a personality defect.
Ambition as a desirable trait.
The future looks very, very dark.
Yes that sums it up. I saw this article published elsewhere yesterday and thought it would be put up here. It’s a subject I’ve been pondering lately but Andre’s clear thinking really helps explain it well. That’s what I like about his articles.