Sketches From The Collapse

     The days come and go, as do my moods. Some mornings the news is bad enough to make me scream “Get it over with, already!” This is one such morning.

---

     1. Gendered Injustice.

     It’s becoming all too clear that America’s “institutions of higher education” are no place for a young man:

     A male student from Williams College in Massachusetts accused his ex-girlfriend of sexual assault. A month later, she made a counterclaim against him. Guess whose accusation was taken seriously.

     The article, produced by the estimable Ashe Schow, deserves to be read in its entirety. It’s a microcosm of the war women are conducting against men, in many cases through college and university administrations. These particular Special Snowflakes, having been told repeatedly that:

• “You can have it all;”
• “You deserve it all;”
• “The patriarchy will do its best to stop you;”
• “All men are your enemy;
• “Regret equals rape;”

     ...feel virtuous about victimizing young men who don’t give them exactly what they want – and right BLEEP!ing now.

     This is Exhibit Googolplex in the parade of indications that, as Robert Stacy McCain has argued for some time, feminism is evil, wholly destructive, and responsible for driving women insane. It’s also a good argument that a young man “in want of a wife” might be best advised to consider a woman well past her college years. Such a woman is more likely not to have been infected with the virus of gender-war feminism, or to have successfully fought it off.

---

     2. Friendly Fire?

     I’m fast becoming a major fan of Bre Faucheux: This morning she cites a case of auto-da-fe in the gender wars:

     I found one guy on Reddit that said something I found rather unsettling. When a woman was asking if guys liked women who wanted to be stay-at-home moms, the guy responded quite coldly with, “I want a partner. Not a dependent.”

     I could only wonder why someone would say something like this. Reasoning would tell me that this guy didn’t have children. He didn’t have a wife. He didn’t have any traditional values. And he had obviously been indoctrinated like I once was.

     I knew that stay-at-home moms had taken a knocking as of late. Thank you, feminism. But I was surprised to see that some of the anti-mother concepts had reached inside the minds of men as well.

     Once again, please read it all. Ponder whether the unnamed fellow Miss Faucheux quotes in the above is likely to find a “partner” who will accord him the respect he thinks he deserves. Reflect also on the implications for the ongoing demographic collapse of the First World, including these United States of America.

     Thomas Paine once wrote:

     “Ignorance is of a peculiar nature; once dispelled, it is impossible to reestablish it. It is not originally a thing of itself, but is only the absence of knowledge; and though man may be kept ignorant, he cannot be made ignorant.”

     Miss Faucheux demonstrates the invulnerability of a mind once opened to reality.

---

     3. Why No Single Politician Can Save Us.

     Reagan was well-intentioned. His values were certainly sound. Yet he was thwarted in his aim of shrinking the federal government. Much the same is likely to be done to Donald Trump. Pseudonymous Breitbart.Com contributor Virgil shows us why:

     Do the Democrats want Donald Trump to become the 45th president? Of course not. And how about the Democrats’ handmaiden, the Main Stream Media? Do they want Trump in the White House? Of course not. And how ‘bout all the other affluent residents of the Washington “swamp,” which Trump has pledged to drain—do you think any of them want Trump? Of course not. Together, these anti-Trump constituencies help form what has been called the Deep State, which is a real and serious thing, and which we will explore further in a moment.

     Yet first, we can take a look at the latest news, because let’s not kid ourselves: These anti-Trump constituencies might have lost the 2016 presidential election at the ballot box, but they don’t intend to lose their power. And to that end, they have real clout, and they are using it.

     In particular, wily in the ways of Washington, the anti-Trumpers are operating behind the scenes, using their well-greased legal and political machinery to block the President-elect, or at least to discredit and de-legitimize him, such that his presidency is crippled. And as a part of that backroom effort, the MSM is always ready with a supportive, momentum-building headline or two—or two thousand.

     Once again, I beseech you to read it all. Do we really expect to pit one man, however determined, against all that, and bet on his victory? He’d have to be a hero for all ages. And the odds are that if he were such a titan, he’d disdain public notice, preferring to be left completely alone.

     That’s not a reason to throw in the towel, of course. Dum spiro, spero, and all that. But we should be cognizant of the breadth and magnitude forces guaranteed to oppose the incoming Trump Administration. I hope Trump himself is aware of them.

---

     4. Envy And The State.

     Today, Dystopic augments the sentiments expressed here. A particularly piercing bit:

     Appeals are often made to our Christian faith. Jesus was a pretty swell guy, they will say, and he helped the poor and the less fortunate. So we must do so also, or we are not good Christians. It’s an overly simplistic narrative, of course, but even so it is easy to dismiss. At no point did Christ tell us that charity ought to properly come from a distant government. Quite the contrary, Christ extolled us to give freely, which implies a choice… not a gun held to our head that says “give us 50% of your crap or else you’re not a nice person.”

     Also, take special note of this:

     I remember when I was young that used toys your children didn’t want anymore would often go to the poor. Again, better that an old fire truck toy go to a child who would otherwise have a bleak Christmas than for it to find its way into the garbage. Now, toy drives specifically explain that everything must be new, in its packaging, and accompanied by its receipt. I have no doubts there is some government regulation, or de facto legal precedent (somebody suing because the toy was not new) for why this is true.

     The ruling principle is that all charity must be funneled through the government, or failing that, must at least be tightly regulated. It is impermissible that the benefactor be allowed to interact directly with the recipient; that might induce some doubt in the benevolence of the Omnipotent State.

     Yet innumerable commentators puzzle over the rise of anomie, alienation, and our ever increasing distance from our fellow man. It does keep the self-help gurus in business. Full employment, don’t y’know.