Indigenous indignities

Vincent J. Curtis

12 Dec 22

RE: Indigenous leaders, Hamilton councillors to meet on Monday.by Sebastian Bron  The Hamilton Spectator 12 Dec 22.

Hamilton’s councillors are well advised to stay away from this pow-wow.

Let’s start with the meeting setting and place: a tipi on Battlefield Park.  The Indians of the east lived in wigwams and longhouses, not in tipis.  Tipis were the housing of nomadic plains Indians, not the forest dwellers of the east, who were without access to the buffalo hides which form the outer wall of the structure.

Battlefield Park is famous as the place where a small force of British troops surprised and routed an American invading force.  Siting a tipi in the park is like putting a mosque in the Vatican.

The Indian organizers hope to provide an ‘education’ to the new councillors.  What makes this endeavor in condescension especially ridiculous is that, since no Indian can be said to represent any other, the Councillors will be educated in Mr. George’s highly personal opinion.

Mr. George claims to represent the “original caretakers” of the land, must be taken as false, since, notwithstanding that no Indian can be said to represent another, all the tribes who could claim to be the originals were wiped out centuries ago.  The last aboriginals who could claim to be ‘caretakers’, that is, exploiters; are the Mississaugas, who possessed the ‘Land between the Lakes” from 1650 (after the annihilation of the Hurons) to 1792 when it was purchased by the British Crown. The Crown has been the caretaker of the lands in question for longer than any extant aboriginal tribe.

Against lessons on aboriginal holistic medicines and healing and of sacred fires, Hamilton can set McMaster University Children’s Hospital, which is where aboriginals themselves take their children to be cured by European medicine-men.

Hamilton City Council did quite well in 1848 deficient in education in the ways of aboriginals, and, given the revolution of a century and three-quarters, the Council of today needs one even less.

Hamilton’s Councillors are accountable to the electorate, not to their “urban indigenous strategies,’ whatever that is.

The dignity of Hamilton requires their councillors to snub this exercise in aboriginal condescension.

-30-

The bureaucratic mind

Vincent J. Curtis

9 Dec 22

RE: Students must submit form to opt out of masking.  News item by Ritika Dubey The Hamilton Spectator 9 Dec 22.

RE: Negotiations don’t always lead to peace.  Op-ed by Steve Delag, and English teacher living in Dundas, ON.

You have to admire the bureaucratic mind.  Students have a right not to wear masks in school, but they have to fill out a form to exercise that right.  The form may be a little hard to obtain.  Next comes the line that asks the reason why you want to exercise this right.  And the step after that is the determination of whether that reason is good enough.  So, sure you can exercise your right, but you have to fill out the form and give a reason that we find satisfactory.

This progression almost sounds like the evolution of gun control in Canada.

What happens if a student who hasn’t submitted a form shows up at school without a mask?  He forgot it.  Will he be suspended or expelled for not wearing a mask when sitting at the next desk is a maskless student who had filled out his form?

Bureaucrats can be the blandest form of life on earth, but violate one of their rules and you won’t know what hit you.  Or understand the severity.  Or understand why there’s no emotion in administering the punishment.

Steve Delag is right.  There’s no point in negotiating away your defenses to appease a bad-faith interlocutor.  It is true for students, Canadian gun owners, and for Carthage.

-30-

Pigmies stab medical hero

Vincent J. Curtis

8 Dec 22

RE: McMaster University planning to sell Osler house. Hamilton Community News.  The Hamilton Spectator 8 Dec 22.

This reeks of small-mindedness, and of cowardice.  Sir William Osler is being disgraced by nameless Mac administrators in a calculated way for reasons they won’t say.

“Those working at universities have access to books and journals, and they know how to read” is the justification.  Apparently, Osler’s offenses are too startling to be spoken for the delicate ears of today to hear, but rest assured, they’re “racist.”

Unnamed people at McMaster, who apparently couldn’t, or didn’t read, first acquired the Osler home, only to hear “public questions arising” about the father of modern medicine’s “racist” views.  And so, the great man gets cancelled, stabbed in the dark by the nameless on grounds we aren’t allowed to judge for ourselves.  The cancellation of Osler all sounds so very polite society, but is so very small-minded.

(How it follows that one must to sell Osler’s home, a century after his death, on account of his racist views escapes me.  Is Mac, or the administrators, afraid of moral taint from the great man?  Or are they afraid the moralistic machine gun will be turned on them?)

A hand not on the knife is that of Nav Persaud, Canadian Research Chair in Health Justice, University of Toronto, who owes her job to Osler.  She’s the one who, in a medical journal of all places, complained of Osler’s racist views.  Not his view on the practice of medicine.

Except her evidence is too shocking to be reported, even though they’ve been in the public record for over 100 years.  Hers is that ‘public questioning’.

And so a great man gets cancelled by small-minded, anonymous moral pigmies, of insignificant consequence to medical science compared to Osler.  We don’t get to know their names, or to evaluate their evidence and judgement for ourselves.

They have the power, and that’s that!

Mao, with this theory of the guerrilla, would be proud.  Another exemplar of western civilization and culture gets assassinated in the dark, by the nameless, and for precise reasons we cannot know.

-30-

If I called it "dark forces" would that be a racist view of mine, or of the person imputing it?

Garbage in, COP15 out

Vincent J. Curtis

8 Dec 22

RE: Developed countries called on for financial support. A CP story published in the Hamilton Spectator  8 Dec 22

If the COP15 delegates agree on anything, it’s that they need more money and power, and that western civilization should pay.  Seventy years of foreign aid isn’t enough!

In his work, Prior Analytics, Aristotle showed that a conclusion validly drawn from false premises, is false.  In computerspeak, this is called GIGO.  Let’s look at two premises of the COP15 conference.

“Most of the remaining biodiversity is in the developing nations of the global south, while most of the money – much of which has been generated at the expense of that biodiversity – is in the rich countries of the north.”  Disregarding incoherence, the basic idea that the wealth of “the north” has been generated at the expense of biodiversity is false.  The most of the wealth of the world today has been generated in the last thirty years, by the revolutions in high tech and financial engineering.  The internet did not occasion the destruction of “biodiversity,” whatever that abstraction denotes.

Then, there’s this shockingly Marxist claim by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, “We need developed countries to provide meaningful financial support for the countries of the global south as custodians of the world’s natural wealth following centuries of exploitation and loss.”  This example of distilled Marxism, the exploited and the exploiters, makes no sense economically, or even logically.  Has the south’s biodiversity been lost, or not?  How, in exchange for the north’s wealth, will the south export its biodiversity?

GIGO!

-30-

What is the ‘global south?’  Is it really those countries south of the equator, or not?  Only  third of the world’s land mass lies south of the equator; we’re talking most of South America, The Congo and farther south in Africa, a part of Malaysia, and Australia.  I’ve not heard warnings of a massive, immanent loss in species in those regions, and some countries of the global south are developed countries, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, and Australia.  Even here, perhaps, the Marxists speak in euphemisms; it’s not really geographically south but economically south.

 Let's also stipulate that there is no evidence of a mass species die-off as is thought to have occurred five times previously, or if one is occurring, that man is responsible.  Those are mere bald, unproven assertions.  Why is this not all as scam: give us money and we'll stop harassing you!

Nova Scotia gets boondoggled on climate

Vincent J. Curtis

6 Dec 22

RE: Report outlines climate change risks to Nova Scotia. A CP story published in the Hamilton Spectator 6 Dec 22.

The Nova Scotia government got fleeced by the report on the alleged impacts of climate change on the province.  Hopefully, the government isn’t deluded into thinking that Nova Scotia can halt climate change by its own heroism, and instead uses the report’s fearmongering to justify hardening infrastructure.

The authors couldn’t have done so much as a comprehensive literature review.  The forecasts of 4.5℃ temperature rise comes from RCP8.5, the most extreme climate model that scientists don’t take seriously, but is the one used by policy makers to scare the public into granting them more power.  The unrealistic RCP8.5 model requires over 1000 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere to achieve that temperature rise.  The realistic models predict between 460 and 580 ppm by 2100.

The forecast of a one metre rise in sea level is far higher than the IPCC forecast of between six inches and a foot rise by 2100.  The prediction of a 5.1℃ rise in ocean temperature won’t be caused by climate but on the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation phenomenon, the Atlantic Ocean’s version of El Nino.  The Atlantic Ocean – shockingly - will control Nova Scotia’s climate, not CO2 levels!

The business of storms like Fiona becoming stronger and more frequent requires amnesia to accept.  Atlantic hurricanes have been decreasing in number since the 1950s, and 2022 was a year of low activity.  Responsible meteorologists dismiss storm intensity as a climate phenomenon.

Nova Scotia’s risks are from money wasted on climate change, not climate change itself.

-30-

I wrote in my Oct 24^th 2022 piece, “Paris Accord Rests on Quicksand” the following concerning the RCP8.5 model:

“Nobody knows what the CO2 concentration will be in the year 2100.  I’ll test a couple scenarios to illustrate the nonsense.  The RCP8.5 model (Representative Concentration Pathway) forecasts 1000 ppm CO2 in 2100, producing a temperature rise of 4.3℃ and a “radiative forcing” (i.e. the greenhouse effect of that CO2) of 8.5 W/m².  But for 8.5 W/m² of additional forcing to increase temperature by 4.3℃, it requires the “global average temperature” to be 204K, by the Stefan-Boltzmann law.  That’s -69℃!”

COP15: Their real agenda

Vincent J. Curtis

5 Dec 22.

RE: Seeking hard targets on biodiversity. A CP story by Bob Weber.  The Hamilton Spectator 5 Dec 22.

The earth once had trilobites, dinosaurs, sabre-toothed cats and woolly mammoths.  They’re long gone.  Mass die-offs occur all the time.  There are thought to have been five major mass extinctions in earth’s history, and none of these are attributable to the wickedness of man.  Which brings us to COP15 that holds that a mass extinction is occurring and that man, or at least the attendees, given enough money and power, can put a stop to it.

No doubt COP15 will recommend fossil fuels for extinction, even though rising CO2 levels are an unmitigated boon to plant life.  Plant life being the basis for all the world’s food chains, without plants there’d be no animal life on earth either.  The relationship between vigorous plant growth and animal life escapes the attention of the likes of Extinction Rebellion.

There’s nothing special about the set of particular species presently existing on earth, except for the human species.  And that’s the one that is targeted for extinction.  The enemy is western civilization and the enlightenment, which have enabled the human species to increase in number to eight billion.  “Ecojustice” demands that this number be reduced by 75 percent by the year 2100 – to save the planet!  A reduction in number by 75 percent in 80 years is considered to be a mass die-off.  But that’s the goal.

You won’t have lithium batteries if all the children of Africa are dead, and China doesn’t care.  The means of maintaining biodiversity runs through the extinction of western civilizations, the enlightenment, and ultimately of the human species.  And the attendees all agree they need more money and power.

-30-

Horowitz on Progressivism

Vincent J. Curtis

4 Dec 22

About ten years ago, American political activist David Horowitz began a speaking tour on college campuses throughout the United States to warn people, especially students, of the true nature of progressivism.  He knew progressivism from the beginning; he knew it inside and out.  I surmise that his lectures were video-recorded, and some of them wound up on YouTube.  I was so impressed with this one that I took notes.  Below are the raw notes I took from Horowitz’s lecture.  Jonah Goldberg, a few years ago, wrote a book entitled “Liberal Fascism” which covers the same waterfront and is likewise insightful.  It’s book I recommend.  Horowitz’s analysis is pithy and pungent.

David Horowitz on Progressivism:

Progressives break things, and leave it to others to clean up the mess.

Communists, fellow travelers, and dupes.

They’re not Jeffersonian Democrats, they’re communists.

The mentor of the entire American Left today is Saul D. Alinsky.  Don’t telegraph your agenda, he recommended.  Lie.

Four features of the Leftist mentality.

“Man if born free but live everywhere in chains.  Society did it.  People in a state of nature get along, they’re not greedy, they don’t lie, they’re not vain, they’re not driven by their ego.  Everybody on the Left believes this crock.  That’s why they think government can solve problems.  (Government the creator of slavery, segregation, war, whatever.)  You take people who are lying, cheating, and stealing, and oppressing, and we give them lots of power, and they’re going to fix everything???  No, they’re not, they’re going to go on being what they were before they came to power, only much worse.

Conservatives understand that the root cause of social problems is us.  We’re the problem; that’s why it’s never been solved.  We are the problem; therefore, the founders devised a system of government with checks and balances, to make it really difficult to change things.  To tyrannize over our fellow citizens.

If you believe that social institutions are the source of the problem, and that if you change social organizations you can change people. Even Hillary Clinton said we have to redefine what it means to be human in the 21^st century.  That is communism.  That is what drives them.  Their core belief that if we get enough power and change social institutions, we’re going to create new men and new women, and we’re all going to get along with each other.

Second characteristic:  They like the term progressive because they believe history is in a forward march.  Things are getting better and better; now and again there are setbacks.  “The moral acrc of the universe is bent towards justice.”  NO IT ISN”T!!  Is there a worse century in history than the 20^th century?  The slaughter of human beings, and slave labor camps, the oppressions, 100 million people were killed.  Progressives believe that there’s a happy future.

Progressives are focussed on the future, not the past like conservative, and the chief characteristic of the future is that it’s imaginary.  The future they’re focussed on has never existed in human history.  It’s very destructive, as we know from the progressive movements of the 20^th century, which killed 100 million people - in peacetime.

Progressivism is a crypt-religion.  The world is a fallen place, and we’re going to save it.  They see themselves as the savior.  If you think the redemption is going to take place in this life, and you’re going to be part of it, that’s the Hitlers, that’s the Maos, that’s the Lenins.  If we have the power we can do it.  If you believe that social institutions can change things, then, looking at your opponent, they’re not going along with the program, you see yourself as the army of the saints.  Who are they?  They’re the party of Satan.  That’s why they’re rude, that’s why they’re interrupting, that’s why it doesn’t bother them in the least that there are no conservatives on their faculties.  Conservatives are evil!  They’re spreading ideas that are evil, and are keeping people from enjoying this paradise on earth that they’re going to bring about.

Third characteristic is their problematic loyalty to America.  Alienation from America.  America’s the problem; what weakens America is actually good.

Fourth characteristic is that they lie.  You cannot be a Leftist without lying.  Without lying about the most basic strategic facts about who you are.  The kingdom of heaven on earth that they’re going to bring about.  (How arrogant is that?)  Progressives cannot telegraph their agendas.  How can they be so delusional?  Because in their minds, these are just building blocks to a Socialist America.  If you are prepared to use the IRS to punish your political opponents, if you have a healthcare system controlled by the government that controls the services that can save the lives of loved ones, and you have spy agencies that know everything that’s going on, you don’t need a secret police to destroy any opponent. 

Bill Ayers:  I despised Bill Ayres because I was a Marxist revolutionary, and he was a rich, snot-nosed irresponsible twit, and an ignoramus.  Which he remains today. 

If you believed you could bring about heaven on earth, what lie would you not tell, what crime would you not commit?

The more noble and lofty the idealism the bigger the crime it will justify.  (quoting Nietzsche).

Read their books.  The most extreme racist views.  Racist against white, but they’re still racist views.

Progressives show contempt for the people they’re defending: to say that’ they’re brainwashed all the time, and have no volition of their own.  They allow themselves to be socially constructed.

-30-