Monday, February 29, 2016

Reality TV suicides a sign of increasing narcissism in society

Ages ago when I was doing standup I noticed that there were a lot of comedians with various psychological issues. Some were flat out barking. Others were brimming. There were a few who were just plain miserable. At least one I knew fairly well ended up topping himself, the poor bastard. I know of other premature deaths of Aussie comics due to suicide or resulting indirectly from drug or alcohol abuse.

These sad tales don't seem all that surprising. They do confirm that entrenched "sad clown" stereotype, after all. I've long thought that this had a lot of truth to it and that comics are much more likely to be mentally ill than the wider population.

But as I've gotten older and observed the behaviour of so-called normal folk in more mainstream society I'm not so sure. Your average punter seems to be catching up to screwed up funny buggers when it comes to the prevalence and severity of mental health issues.

I may be wrong. But I think reality TV has got a lot to do with it. The eagerness with which so many people expose their inner, emotional lives to entertain millions of people they'll never meet (and who don't give a tinker's about 'em) is truly disturbing. I reckon you'd have to be a bit psychologically disordered to want to appear in some of those shows to start off with. And if you actually really enjoy watching them, well, I think you'd have to have some issues as well.

The idea that reality TV participants are an unstable bunch seems to be borne out by the fact that many of them have committed suicide in recent years. There have been a lot of these shows, sure. But 21 mostly young people dying by their own hands is an alarmingly high number however you cut it:

Dr Richard Levak, a California-based personality expert who has worked on several reality shows, including Survivor, says the spate of suicides among reality-TV stars boils down to a chicken-or-the-egg debate.

“Does [appearing on reality television] attract people with a higher rate of instability?” Levak asks. “Are people who are unstable more interested? Or do the vagaries of reality TV precipitate people killing themselves?

I think both factors are at play. Reality shows are toxic, destructive environments that attract unstable individuals. And squillions are watching them every day! It has to be having some negative effects on the wider population.

I think the main one is that it promotes a toxic cult of narcissism (which is also fed by social media). More and more people these days seem to believe they need an audience to feel like they are worthwhile individuals.

Consequently they seek out fame at all costs. If they attain it, they're on a high. But when it is taken from them -- which is of course inevitable -- they end up trapped in a very deep low. Some decide that suicide is the only way out.

Sunday, February 21, 2016

WA's AOTY Anne Carey is another SJW, it seems

There's been an enormous amount of controversy over the choice of gender "equality" warrior David Morrison as Australian of the Year. The anger has definitely been justified IMO. The selection of people like Morrison reveal the malign influence of the politically correct Left in a process that should not be primarily ideological.

There are many high achievers from all over Oz who are nominated of course. And the top West Australian AOTY is Ebola nurse Anne Carey from Geraldton. From this summary it would seem that she'd been chosen mainly for her undeniable compassion and courage in helping sufferers of that horrific disease.

But here she is in an interview with the Sunday Times. And she's arcing up about workplace bullying in Geraldton. Eh?

WEST Australian of the Year Anne Carey says she felt “less stressed” working with ebola patients overseas than as a nurse in the WA Health Department.

In an exclusive interview with The Sunday Times, Ms Carey told of her harrowing experience of bullying at Esperance Hospital and the ensuing demoralising grievance process.

She has been so disgusted by the overall bullying culture within the state’s health sector that she was devoting 2016 to “raising awareness of workplace bullying and its negative impact on the health care workforce in WA”.

Now, I'm not saying that there's no issue to be addressed here. There may well be a toxic culture of bullying in her work environment. But isn't it interesting that she's making such a point of utilizing the, er, anti-bully pulpit her new-found status affords to try to bring about cultural change? Seems likely this agenda of hers had a lot to do with her being nominated for AOTY in the first place IMHO.

Her official listing on the site describes her as a "medical warrior". But perhaps "social justice warrior" would have been a better choice of words.

Saturday, February 20, 2016

JB O'Reilly's spared slap for decorative cigarette ads

Here in Sydney half the city is absolutely seething over the lockout laws that have devastated Kings Cross. And over in my old home of Perth there's another pub-related issue revealing the petty stupidity of nanny statists. It involves the charming "eatin' and drinkin' emporium" JB O'Reilly's in West Leederville.

See, they have some ornamental decades-old durrie ads on their walls and anti-smoking zealots wanted to spank 'em for it! Thankfully Premier Barnett scotched the proposed punishment:

“I’m overruling it,” he said.

“It is ridiculous - they are collector’s pieces. They show an era gone by. It’s not promoting smoking

“If that’s the way they choose to decorate their pub, good on them. I support them.”

So funny that lefties in WA have done their darnedest to portray Barnett as this arrogant, out of touch silvertail type. "Emperor", they call him. But while he is from the upmarket western suburbs, the reality is that he's got a much better idea of what most normal, working class folk value than his political foes.

Another prime example of his common sense approach that riled the fluffy wuffies occurred a coupla years back. It was in the wake of a spate of fatal shark attacks and greenies were shrieking up a storm because some noahs had been terminated with extreme prejudice. In one news grab he said something along these lines: "People should calm down. After all, this is just a fish we're talking about."

Like a red blood spill to a bull shark it was. Riled the moonbats even more!

No wonder the guy keeps winning elections.

Friday, February 19, 2016

Caitlyn Jenner is a Republican. Who'da thunk it?

The astonishing transformation of macho-seeming former world-class athlete Bruce Jenner into the glamour-puss sleb Caitlyn Jenner says many things about the current state of Western society. Needless to say, most of these pertain to gender and sexuality. There's the idea of what gender actually means and how society should react to it; what the legal ramifications of a sex change are, and so on.

But there's also a more strictly ideological, even party political dimension to the ongoing story. This is highlighted by the fact that Caitlyn is not a liberal, as you'd be forgiven for assuming. Far from it:

There’s an elephant in the room, and as far as Caitlyn Jenner is concerned, it has more to do with her Republican politics than her gender identity.

“I have gotten more flak for being a conservative Republican than I have for being trans,” the “I Am Cait” star and transgender icon told students at the University of Pennsylvania Wednesday night.

That just says it all doesn't it?

This derails the politically correct narrative that social justice warriors are always trying to enforce, eh! They've been repeating this lie that all Republicans are stodgy, patriarchal white blokes who look down on women and the feminine -- as well as anyone with an unorthodox sexual identity. Yet here's one of their number who's bloody well changed sex!

The SJWs other fave stereotype is that Republicans are censorious, hateful, oppressive. But Jenner herself says that the snark she gets is mostly from liberals -- Democrats -- because she doesn't support them and their ideology.

Just goes to show that the cultural Left aren't really for diversity and tolerance as they purport to be. Their main aim is to get you to accept their grim, simplistic narrative and toe the line. If you dare to be a complex individual with the courage to think for yourself and reject their dogmas they don't like that at all. They'll even lambaste you for it, even if you are a member of one the most marginalized sexual minority groups of all.

What a bunch o' bigots!

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Virginia Hausegger vs Sam Armytage

Spats between the smug, finger-wagging socialists of their ABC and the more popular, harder working and generally better paid reporters and pundits of commercial media are a given. Actually, they generate a fair chunk of content for both realms of the fourth estate. Without their enemies to rail at, quite a few journos would be lost for words, that's for sure.

Usually these conflicts are between blokes, which means they're mainly focused on ideological point-scoring -- and they do tend to stick to the rules. So, can be a tad boring after a while...

But if it's a coupla sheilas squaring off? Well, along with the aesthetic element there's no rule book to start with, which makes the show more watchable IMO. It's a bit like the difference between boxing and mud wrestling.

Take this little snarkfest between Sam Armytage and Virginia Hausegger. As the Daily Mail reports:

Senior ABC journalist Virginia Haussegger has revealed she was once on an interview panel which failed to give Sunrise presenter Samantha Armytage a job.

This revelation comes after an ongoing public argument between the women which started when Haussegger wrote a scathing opinion piece about an embarrassing Sunrise segment, labelling Armytage a 'bimbo'.

Armytage hit back by saying she didn't know who the ABC journalist was - but that backfired on social media when Haussegger told the world how they had met.

Will be interesting to see if this fires up any more, or just peters -- sorry, petas -- out.

But just on Hausegger's original sledging of Armytage: Interesting how feminists often get so viciously sexist when criticizing other women, eh? In this example, Hausegger called Armytage a "mindless bimbo". Yet any male journo using such a term to describe a high profile woman would risk being widely lambasted as misogynist -- especially if she were one of the socialist sisterhood. Could easily lose his job, or have to publicly plead for forgiveness for his crimes against all of chickdom to retain it.

So, massive double standards apply, as is so often the case. Still, this farcical element kinda makes the whole show more entertaining, don't ya reckon?

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Stephen Fry leaves Twitter. SJWs got to him, too!

A helluva lot of people on Twitter have been long time followers of Stephen Fry. I'm not one of them, but this isn't because I don't like him. He's a leftie, sure. But he's so funny, witty, articulate and well-read. He's also not a censorious type; much more of a free speech supporter in the tradition of Christopher Hitchens. The reason I never got around to checking out his tweets was lack of time, really. I'm following too many smart people already...

In any case it looks like I've missed my chance to do this -- at least for a long while. He's left Twitter, see. And surprise surprise it was due in major part to those vile SJWs! Turns out they were not amused by what he said while presenting the BAFTAs:

Fry has been presenting the Bafta film awards for 11 years and audiences have become used to his cutting wit, often involving quips about many of the stars involved.

Beavan, who won the Bafta for Best Costume Design for Mad Max: Fury Road, came onto the stage at London's Royal Opera House wearing a black leather jacket, white t-shirt and dark trousers.

Following her acceptance speech and once she had left the stage, Fry said: "Only one of the great cinematic costume designers would come to the awards dressed like a bag lady."

Fulminating frightbats aplenty went apoplectic over this quip. It turned out to be the straw that broke the camel's back. In Fry's own words:

To leave that metaphor, let us grieve at what twitter has become. A stalking ground for the sanctimoniously self-righteous who love to second-guess, to leap to conclusions and be offended – worse, to be offended on behalf of others they do not even know. It’s as nasty and unwholesome a characteristic as can be imagined. It doesn’t matter whether they think they’re defending women, men, transgender people, Muslims, humanists … the ghastliness is absolutely the same. It makes sensible people want to take an absolutely opposite point of view. I’ve heard people shriek their secularism in such a way as to make me want instantly to become an evangelical Christian.

Given that Fry is renowned for his defiant atheism, that last line is pretty significant!

Though he's in a class way above the vast majority of socialists, this is still a case of the Left eating its own. While it is an unfortunate development it is another sign that the scourge of the SJWs is likely nearing its end.

Hell, if a mega-famous gay atheist and darling of the Left can become a target of these bolshie bullies it proves no one is safe from them. That he finds their attacks so dispiriting that he throws in the, er, twowel is a testament to just how toxic they truly are. From now on, either those under attack from these vicious trolls will become immune to them or end up leaving the social networks en masse. I think the former outcome is the most likely.

Well, I certainly hope it is...

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Ironboy vs Ultron reminds us of good vs evil in the real world

If you're in Sydney doubtless you will have heard or read about Ironboy vs Ultron. It's a kind of epic one day event run by Make a Wish with the cooperation of the NSW Police. This report sums up what it's about:

Nine-year-old Domenic, who has cystic fibrosis, has always dreamed of being a superhero — and today that wish comes true, with him being sent on a special mission under his new identity of Iron Boy.

Of course it's a great way to give this kid a truly memorable experience. It's fantastic PR for a worthy cause as well as for the boys in blue.

Now, maybe I'm gonna sound like a flint-hearted arsehole when I say this. But I can't help feeling a tad unsettled by the exercize. Now, my reservations are not so much about Make a Wish and the plods, but the mainstream media in general.

They have really gotten into the spirit of this event big time. They've been enthusiastically playing along, broadcasting updates on a fictional story about good vs evil. And surely a big part of their motivation for taking part is to do some good.

So, there's a lot to like about what they've been doing today. But there's another epic war going on in the real world. That's the one between the West and Islamism. Now I'm not saying that the former is wholly good, and the latter wholly evil. But surely when it comes to Islamic State in particular, evil is not too strong a word. (Hell, they roam around chopping kids heads off, pack raping women and girls, burning people alive! What else can you call them?) Also, it's a tad naff to say that this global conflict is only about good and evil. But that's definitely part of the wider story, which is really about civilization and barbarism.

And in this very real war -- which has already taken lives in this very city, and many thousands elsewhere in the world -- the mainstream media's reaction has been strange, and reticent. It's like they don't really want to know about it.

Now, I'm not saying that they all have to side with the democratic West in every case, although it would be a pleasant surprise if they did occasionally. It would also be heartening if they reported developments objectively (and comprehensively) much more often than they have been.

The really disturbing thing is how sympathetic to Islamism and disdainful towards Western values they so often are. Rather than doing what they're supposed to do and telling us what's going on without fear or favour, they've been selective about what they report. They've even occasionally engaged in cover-ups about the extent of the violence and depravity of some Muslims. Events in Rotherham, Sweden and Germany come to mind here. Then there's the mainstream media's line that Islam never has anything to do with terrorism, and their tendency to condemn anyone who criticizes it as being Islamophobic, and racist.

It's so silly it's actually kinda childish. (Which may actually explain why they're so enthused about reporting on a cartoonish heroism tale to make a kid's fantasy come true!)

Now, I'm not saying that they literally believe in Ironboy and Ultron. Nor am I saying they should apply the moral simplicity of today's theatre to the real world. I'm just noticing the incongruity. My point is that this is a good cause that the media have taken seriously and have been fired up about -- albeit for just one day. Yet there's another good cause that they seem very reluctant to get behind -- namely, documenting the extent of Islamist evil in the world.

You gotta wonder: Why do they find it so difficult?

Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Frumpy Fairfaxistas miss pussy pun fun of minxy manx and sexy rex!

There are many reasons why Fairfax is struggling. One of the main ones is that they are so drearily right-on and humourless. Their writers seem to think that their job is not so much to inform and entertain, but to attitudinally reconstruct by saying how appallingly eeevil, wrong, racist, sexist and homophobic we Aussies are.

Then there's their obsession with AGW, and how it's the root cause of almost every ill known to man... and beast. It's just such a No Fun Zone. Take this recent story with a warmist angle:
Not only is it absurd. But in typical Fairfax style the cover only half-heartedly attempts to exploit the verbal potential the story offers.

I mean, FFS. If you're gonna run such surreal BS, then at least seriously try to score a few wuckas with it. And let's face it, this is a pussy pun goldmine! Sure, they're groaners. But so what?

Here are some title suggestions, best read with this sound effect played at the end of each:

Climate cat-astrophe! Humans dread global warming but tabbies think it's purr-fect

Weather that's muggy makes moggies huggy

Feline strange? It's climate change

Cougartown. It's in your backyard

Planetary heatin' leads to Cheetoh cheatin'

Just think what the NT Daily News would do with this story, especially if there was a croc angle in it somewhere. (It'd be hard to find, sure, given that crocs are cold blooded -- something that could never be said of their staff, or readership!)

If you have any other title suggestions feel free to leave them in comments below.

Sunday, February 7, 2016

Is "malsplaining" Turnbull losing favour with tribal leftie luvvies?

One thing you can count on with the Left is that sooner or later they start to eat their own. Sure, they see conservatives as contemptible "unpeople". But often their most intense hatred is reserved for those who are on their side, or once were.

This is due to the obvious impracticality of their stupid ideology. They just can't figure out that demanding special consideration for one group will eventually piss off others.

The ongoing Oscars racism ruckus is an example of this. Leftie (liberal) black actors said they were being treated unfairly. Then Julie Delpy said "hang on, what about us chicks?"! Then Ian McKellen chimed in with "don't forget the gays". And just recently black comedian Chris Rock -- who's actually hosting the supposedly white supremacist awards ceremony (sheesh, no contradiction there, eh!) -- lambasted Jennifer Lawrence (world's highest paid actress, who thinks she's some kinda victim of sexism!) and said "try being a black woman!". And on and on it goes...

Lefties are just so tribal, aren't they? They simply must blame someone else for their own misery. They must form a pack. They must pile on and kick the crap out of their enemies. They just can't help themselves, the poor little poppets.

I think this same process is starting to happen here in Australia with our current PM. Sure, Malcolm Turnbull isn't a leftie radical by any means. (Actually, I don't think he has any strong political passions. Just stole the top job to satisfy his relentless hunger for power and glory.) But he's certainly beloved by many lefties across Oz -- particularly those in the meeja -- and he knows it. That's why he's been showing them so much respect and mouthing their platitudes.

But now I think they're starting to get sick of him. They want action, not talk. They want to see some sort of grand revolutionary program in the tradition of Whitlam -- you know, something that will prove that he's truly one of their number.

But all he does is blather on and talk down to people. Conservatives express their disdain for this by calling him the "Wentworth Waffler". Lefty feminist chicks, on the other hand, call this "malsplaining". Of course this is a variation on their misandrist term "mansplaining". While it's just a snarky little word I think it's quite significant. By associating his behaviour so closely with something they obviously detest, they're saying "you're not one of us, pal".

I believe this sentiment will gather momentum as the days wear on and there's more pressure on him from fellow LNP pollies like Cory Bernardi to satisfy the Coalition's traditional, conservative base. The wider electorate, too, will force him to be less right-on and more realistic -- particularly when it comes to the growing terror threat. If he does make a few hard calls these will further enrage the leftie luvvies.

IMO the leftie romance with Turnbull is close to being over. Sooner or later there'll be a clear falling out. They won't demonize him to the extent they have Abbott. But he will eventually become a bona fide hate figure along the lines of Mark Latham, I reckon.

What do you think?

Saturday, February 6, 2016

Julian Assange saga riddled with politically correct absurdities

Some quick thoughts on this seemingly endless Julian Assange saga. It really shows how crazy the world can become when lefties have so much control over things. Absurdities abound! Too many to list all in one post but here are some:

Assange, who bangs on about freedom of information and the importance of transparency, etc, is a control freak who even threatened to sue The Guardian -- which was always very much in his corner.

Then there's the fact that he divulged squillions of state secrets, yet claims to have not put any lives at risk! Of course his leftie fanboys and girls go along with that line unquestioningly. "Snitching" is only bad when their foes do it... Not surprising that these same dupes, who think of him as such a hero speaking truth to power, are often the ones most determined to see people silenced for their politically incorrect views.

Now, the UN says he's been "arbitrarily detained". Eh? He chose to hide rather than face justice.

Another leftie hero, Edward Snowden, reckons Britain's rejection of the UN's pro-Assange view sets a bad precedent and "writes a pass for every dictatorship to reject UN rulings". Eh? The UN writes a pass for dictators by letting them join in the first place! Everyone knows it's chockas with tyrants. Not only that, it gives them a platform to lecture free, open democracies on human rights! FFS.

Then there's Sweden, where this whole tawdry soap opera began. It's one of the most pro-feminist nations on Earth, with extremely strict rape laws. From what I've read it seems unlikely that in most other Western countries whatever Assange was alleged to have done would have even resulted in charges in the first place. But if he'd been a Muslim? The Swedes prolly would have charged the women instead...

Really, what a clusterf**k.

Well, whatever happens from now on I feel a bit sorry for Julian even though he's a narcissistic arsehat. Being holed up indoors these last few years has not been kind to him. He's aged heaps and is actually starting to resemble Gandalf. For the next biopic they'll have to get Sir Ian McKellen to play him.

(That said, there's another possible explanation for the long grey mane and beard. Maybe he was planning to get away unnoticed from the Ecuadorian Embassy disguised as an alpaca? Given all the other absurdities related to this saga, I wouldn't be surprised if that were actually the case.)

Related book: Inside Wikileaks: My Time with Julian Assange at the World's Most Dangerous Website

Friday, February 5, 2016

Lisa Wilkinson blasts Clive Palmer, scores own goal

Lots of cheering on of "feisty" Lisa Wilkinson over her clash with Clive Palmer this morn. Can't say I have any sympathy for the bloke. As far as I'm concerned he's a blustering buffoon who got into politics to expand -- or perhaps save? -- his business empire, or to wreak havoc on his foes... or something. Whatever his motivations, they seem not to include sincerely wanting to make things better for Australians generally.

That said, there's no denying that the Today Show host was extremely rude to him. Didn't really ask him questions so much as rattle off a list of accusations. Clearly, she wasn't interested in what he had to say. Just wanted to shame him before her audience by using the "shirt-fronting" approach. (Actually that's prolly not the best phrase to use given the bloke's girth. For the same reason neither is "toe to toe", employed in this article about the clash. Still, I'm sure you get my drift.)

The exchange was truly unedifying to watch. If Wilkinson were clever and professional, she could have asked some hard questions then, er, respectfully let him beclown himself. She could have increased this effect by pointing out the falsity of his answers. That's a much more effective approach.

Another obvious conclusion to be drawn from this little episode was her selectivity. Doubtless there's no way she would use this aggro tactic on one of her own anointed leftie fellow travellers. Take David Morrison for example.

He also deserves to be taken to task for his actions. But can you imagine Wilkinson -- or one of her fellow travellers in the MSM for that matter -- ever treating him with the contempt she showed Clive Palmer? Odds of that happening: less than one squillionth of buggerall.

Thursday, February 4, 2016

David Morrison debacle to spell doom for Australian of the Year?

Pretty obvious that the Australian of the Year award has been totally hijacked by right-on, finger-wagging blowhards. Hell, it should actually be renamed Social Justice Warrior of The Year!

The last few winners have been increasingly PC and sanctimonious -- annoying the crap out of a huge chunk of the Australian population. But the latest recipient, David Morrison, has turned out to be the most, er, problematic by far. His conduct in the years leading up to his winning of the award is coming under increasing media scrutiny. Looks pretty clear that he threw some fine soldiers under the bus as he ponced about before the cameras proclaiming zero tolerance for military misogyny.

David Morrison looks to me like the classic SJW. (BTW, here's a great book on their psychology and tactics.) Like all of them he appears to be what I would call a political narcissist. They claim to care deeply about social justice, equality, fairness, morality, etc. But deep down they don't give a rat's. They think everything is about them and their precious fee-fees. They only seek power and glory for themselves, and are more than happy to destroy the careers of better people on the way up to achieve this goal. And if they are finally held to account for the harm they've caused and forced to leave they'll happily trash the joint on the way out!

I think this is what might happen with Morrison. There's a massive push from within the army to have him hand back his award. And his cynical treatment of one now ex-soldier unfairly linked to the "Jedi Council" scandal was just appalling. (Ben Fordham's interview with this guy is well worth a listen.) Now Jaqui Lambie's gunning for Morrison as well. Crikey! It's a full-on, multi-pronged assault. Just as well he's a battle-hardened former soldier, 'cause it's war, no doubt about it!

And if prominent feminists -- whose support and ideological instruction were instrumental in his rise to prominence -- had any moral courage and principle, they'd be attacking him too. Why? Because he's charging way more for speeches than his female predecessor Rosie Batty did. Pretty poor form for a bloke who bangs on about gender equity, don't ya think?

But of course the frightbats won't do this. He's in the tent with them so, like Tammy Wynette, they'll stand by their man no matter what.

Given the size of the forces lined against him, and the well established fact that SJWs always double down and never surrender the ground they've stolen, then this battle could get bloody indeed.

If he hangs on until the bitter end the award is completely and utterly stuffed. It will be a poisoned chalice for years hence. But if his critics ultimately prevail and he is forced to resign his position as Australian of the Year then his frightbat boosters will be baying for blood. If their chosen candidate doesn't win next year they'll do all they can to discredit the one who does.

It's definitely a lose-lose situation. If subsequent governments have any sense they'll realize this and just euthanase the entire bloody award! That really would be the most humane thing. Unlikely, of course, but possible.

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Waleed Aly nails everything, every time!

Sneering hipsters are simple folk. They can't actually think -- let alone think for themselves. They can only obey their precious feelings. And being stuck in a state of perpetual childishness those feelings tend to be pretty narcissistic. Terrified of individualism, they are the ultimate conformists. Needless to say, they roam in packs. When they get told what to think (or rather, feel) by prominent social justice warriors they all dutifully obey.

Part of this process involves the near-deification of certain slebs. These anointed airheads can do no wrong. Every one of their often daffy pronouncements is seen by PC taste-makers as some kind of searing insight into the human condition that's never been expressed before.

Perhaps the most prominent of these right now is Waleed Aly. He strikes all the politically correct poses, natch. Added to this he's a Muslim, which immediately makes him seem rebellious, and therefore cool. Speaking of which, he's also an accomplished guitarist. His gigs as TV and radio broadcaster, academic and columnist mean he just keeps popping up all over the joint. Hell, if it weren't such a Eurocentric (and therefore, Islamophobic) term, he'd be called a bloody Renaissance man!

Pretty much every one of his smugly wrong-headed gargles on The Project or in Fairfax is met with reverence from his squillions of acolytes. Trained to "follow Waleed-er", and each other, they immediately start raving about his latest asinine offering on social media once it's live. Their fave way of doing this is to say Aly "nailed it". It's such a noticeable phenomenon that I tweeted this a while back:
But don't just take my word for it. Even Mark Di Stefano, prominent leftie fan of Aly, just made a similar observation. He wasn't being sarcastic, but.
You can also see the same phenomenon on Facebook and the search engines. Amazing.

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

Stan Grant and Gordian Fulde on Q and A

So now the silly season is well and truly over for most Australians. But at their ABC, it's only just started. Yep, those democracy hatin', anti-free speech, pro-Islamist, gender warriors have had their tax-funded break and are now well and truly back into the, er, whinge of things.

And perhaps the whingey-est of all their programs -- as well as the most sanctimonious and incoherent -- is Q and A. True to form the first episode of 2016 was chockas with leftie luvvies engaged in a nauseating orgy of right-on virtue signalling. To list every example would take hours. So in this post I'll just focus on one strand of the discussion, namely racial separatism:

MADELEINE CHARLES: Is it right that we continue to hold our national day on a day that marks the invasion of Australia, when we have so many better dates that can be celebrated in Australia? 

Doesn't matter what date is chosen. Lefties, luvvies, and sundry Australia-hatin' activists will find reasons to bitch and moan about it.

STAN GRANT: It’s not an easy one to answer. I also work for National Indigenous Television and we hear from Indigenous people particularly on that day, our people, my people, about how tough it is to come to terms with a celebration around what was an invasion of our land, the dispossession of our people and everything that has come from that, that people still live with every day. You said before that there can many other dates but what other dates are there? Do we celebrate the day of Federation? We haven't even resolved the issues in our Constitution yet, the race provisions in our Constitution, the failure to recognise Indigenous people in our Constitution. Do we celebrate on Anzac Day? Well, that’s only part of our story as well. I think if or when we become a Republic, that will present itself as an obvious and natural day. But I just want to say this: for us, as Indigenous people, there are many aspects to it. One is to mourn the invasion, to mourn dispossession and the consequences of it, to celebrate our survival and that is not to be under estimated, the survival and the resilience of Indigenous people, our families but for me, as well, to acknowledge the fact that Australia is a remarkable country. Now, I’ve spent my life reporting from some of the worst hell holes on earth and Australia is a remarkable country and we need to acknowledge that and I don't want to diminish the right of Australians to acknowledge that day and to celebrate that day but remember the people on whom Australia's prosperity and success has been built and that is often the suffering of Indigenous people. It is very problematic

"Problematic." Luvvies just love that word, don't they? It's code for nasty, wrong and baaaad!

But I'd say Grant's gargle is problematic itself in the more general sense. It's riddled with incoherence and makes no bloody sense at all! He talks about "our people, my people" to refer to Aborigines. This is clearly racially separatist. Then he talks about "our constitution"... Eh?

Any sensible person thinks, "FFS, mate! Make up your mind. You can't have it both ways."

Now of course lefties say that this attitude is in itself racist. But what if a whitey-tighty were to talk about "my people" in such an ethnically specific way? We all know the answer to that question...

TONY JONES: Stan, are you suggesting the whole nation should effectively celebrate and, at the same time, mourn

STAN GRANT: Yeah, I really think it needs to be a much more inclusive day. Noel Pearson has spoken to this and he said you’re looking at a three pronged celebration or commemoration: the original landing in Australia of the first peoples more than 50, 60000 years ago; the coming of Europeans, First Fleet, which was transformative. That is the bedrock of modern Australia, we can't deny that; and Noel has also pointed out the end of the White Australia Policy, which helped give rise to the multicultural society that we have today. To be able to bring all of those elements together on a day where we celebrate, we commemorate, we are able to express ourselves, reflect on our identity, would give that day more meaning but we are not there yet.

Makes the nation sound like a very large family on the way to a picnic. The sprogs/citizens are in the back seat of the bloody great people mover saying "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?"

Truth is, according to the regressive Left we'll never be there. They don't want us to arrive at any sort of well defined political destination. It's all a process, you see. They just want to keep exploiting discord so they can lambaste people and boss them around.

If Stan and "his people" want to mourn and celebrate at the same time fine. They should go for it. But he's foolish to expect everyone else to feel what he and his activist ilk demand of them. They didn't commit the dispossession, oppression and all the other horrors. Nor do they have any wish to. They just want everyone to get along, and all be treated equally and with respect.

Interesting that later in the discussion Grant said this: "Now, we saw incidents of flag burning on Australia Day as well and that's an indication of the roiling anger that can still exist in Indigenous communities. And in this country, as a democracy, we have a right to express that."

Okay... Wonder what he and his fellow activists would say if the Aboriginal flag were burned?

Speaking of flags, some sane thoughts were expressed by Senior Australian of the Year Gordian Fulde:

GORDIAN FULDE: Very simply, I think what everybody is saying forgive me is that we really want to be Australia is for Australians and one of the things I am conscious of, not that I think a flag is everything, but I'd like to see us all under one flag. New Zealand is changing their flag, whatever. I'm not saying we should change the flag but I think it is sad that we have three flags whenever there is an official occasion. We should have one flag, one Australia for all Australians.

Well said! And isn't it interesting that he felt he had to apologize before expressing this eminently sensible, non-discriminatory idea.

Gotta wonder: will he be invited back on the show? He could have blown any chance of that! As we all know, being a sane, rational, humane adult is verboten on Q and A. The whole point of the show is to reinforce infantile, divisive, politically correct dogma.

The production staff member who suggested Fulde be invited has probably already undergone, er, counselling. Some other minion is probably on the blower to Zaky Mallah to try and erase the damage right now...

(For those interested in the way Australia's past is depicted, The Killing of History is a good book.)