The ABC of Wokery Nicholas T. Parsons

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2023/07/an-abc-of-woke/

Originating as black American parlance for resisting racial and social inequality, Woke has morphed into a generic term for radically left-wing social and political awareness. According to Perry Bacon Jr. of the Washington Post it represents the following doctrines for the American Left: rejection of American exceptionalism; a claim that the United States has never been a true democracy; a claim that non-white people (“people of colour”) are victims of systemic and institutional racism; that white Americans enjoy “white privilege”; that African Americans deserve reparations for slavery and post-enslavement discrimination; that disparities among racial groups are explained by discrimination; that US law enforcement agencies are designed to discriminate against people of colour and so should be defunded, disbanded or at least heavily reformed; that women suffer from systemic sexism; that individuals should be able to identify with any gender or none; that US capitalism is deeply flawed.

Bacon’s list is not definitive, but the common subtext of Wokeism is invariably victimhood. This is a psychologically determined attitude, considered by Wokeists to transcend any contrary empirical evidence. Professor Jean-François Braunstein of the Sorbonne has remarked that Wokeism offers theories of knowledge that validate feelings over facts. Sometimes celebrities empathise with victimhood by claiming it for themselves. Prince Harry wanted us to believe that he had been “cut off” financially by his father, despite having been able to buy a multi-million-dollar Californian mansion; he also claims to “want his family back” and an apology from it, picturing himself as the injured party after insulting the royal family repeatedly in public.

Victimhood is now also becoming an excuse for violence by fringe groups with a dubious and anti-science agenda, for example “trans-activists”. Generational victimhood relating to climate change holds white civilisation responsible for creating global warming in the industrial revolution and exporting climate-damaging technology to the rest of the world, which is not therefore responsible for climate damage and should be paid reparations. Little or no mention is made of the astonishing benefits to mankind yielded by the industrial revolution, or of the self-critical culture of free countries that made them the first to urge action against climate change (as also against slavery).

Although European countries have quite different political and social features from America, they have imported Woke ideology pretty much wholesale. Even France, arguably the country least susceptible to Wokeism due to its “universalist” tradition, which in principle is blind to people’s colour and origin, has now got an incipiently woke Minister of Education. Pap Ndiaye told Le Monde that he did not experience racism growing up in France and only “realised that [he] was black” when he was twenty-five and studying in the United States. Indeed, importation to Europe happens chiefly through academia, where mediocre scholars have weaponised Woke ideology as a way of advancing their power by targeting individuals and institutions that can be presented as insufficiently conformist to Woke assumptions.

How Science is Done These Days Tony Thomas

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2023/08/how-science-is-done-these-days/

There’s nothing new about mainstream climate scientists conspiring to bury papers that throw doubt on catastrophic global warming. The Climategate leaks showed co-compiler of the HadCRUT global temperature series Dr Phil Jones emailing Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, July 8, 2004:

I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth, a colleague] and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!

Thanks to a science whistle-blower, there’s now documentation of a current exercise as bad as that captured in the Jones-Mann correspondence. This new and horrid saga – again involving Dr Mann – sets out to deplatform and destroy a peer-endorsed published paper by four Italian scientists. Their paper in European Physical Journal Plus is titled A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming and documents that extreme weather and related disasters are not generally increasing, contrary to the catastrophists feeding misinformation to the Guardian/ABC axis and other compliant media.

The witch-hunt has Australian elements. Last September, The Australian’s environment writer, Graham Lloyd, highlighted the paper (paywalled) and its conclusion that the “extreme events emergency” was overblown. Sky News Australia, which twice reported the study, picked up more than 400,000 views and thousands of comments.

The green-left Guardian countered with a hit-piece by in-house cataastrophist Graham Readfearn featuring professors Lisa Alexander and Steve Sherwood, both of NSW University. They alleged cherry-picking and misquoting. Their main specific complaint was that the Italians’ paper had drawn on the 2013 5th IPCC Report rather than the recent 6th Report. (The Italians say they submitted the paper before the 6th Report emerged).

The Guardian’s fuss caught the attention of Agence France-Presse’s (AFP) Marlowe Hood, who modestly styles himself “Senior Editor, Future of the Planet” and “Herald of the Anthropocene”. He penned his own diatribe for The Australian (paywalled but also here) against the Italians’ paper. Jumping the gun on any editorial inquiry, AFP branded the study “faulty” and “fundamentally flawed”, involving “discredited assertions” and “grossly manipulated data”. This abuse was normal since AFP and The Guardian are leaders of the Covering Climate Now (CCN) coalition of some 500 media outlets with reach to a 2 billion audience. These outlets signed the CCN pledge to hype catastrophism and rebut and censor any scepticism about our planet’s forecast fiery fate.

The Summoning Rituals of the Left By David Solway

https://pjmedia.com/columns/david-solway-2/2023/08/23/the-summoning-rituals-of-the-left-n1721490

The malignant playbook of the contemporary left is generally considered to be Saul Alinsky’s 1989 “Rules for Radicals,” and there is certainly much truth to the story of the book’s destructive influence. But the source text for social and political upheaval is Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven’s far more detailed and authoritative 1997 manual, “The Breaking of the American Social Compact.”

The Cloward-Piven strategy seeks to hasten the fall of the free market and the republican structure of government by overloading the administrative apparatus with an avalanche of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis mode and eventual economic collapse. Choking the welfare rolls, for example, would serve to generate a political and financial meltdown, break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears, and bring the system crashing down. The fear, turmoil, and violence accompanying such a debacle would provide the perfect conditions for fostering radical change.

We see the strategy in action today, forging a situation that was unnecessary from the start via a series of tactical steps, among which: the campaign against productive farming; the so-called 15-minute city herding people into condo-congested urban centers where they are readily supervised and mastered; open borders allowing for a refugee tsunami to alter the character of the nation; a censoring and disinformative media rendered corrupt to the core; the mandating of useless masks or plausibly toxic vaccines; and the implementation of a digital currency in which citizens’ spending can be monitored, restricted, or even frozen. Such phenomena have no basis in even the remotest necessity but are essential in order to prepare the ground for an imminent totalitarian state.

This is the rationale for the so-called COVID pandemic and the bugbear of “Climate Change.” A bad flu season affecting mainly the elderly with comorbidities is not a viral pandemic, as Dr. Vernon Coleman ironically shows. The climate is always changing as a matter of course — the term “climate change” is a gross oxymoron; the thesis of anthropogenic forcing obscures the fact that carbon is material for life and nitrogen for farming. COVID and Climate are tactical phantoms that have nothing to do with reality and everything to do with social control. The Clowardly rePivening put in place by the Democrat Party has only one aim: to create a crisis out of thin air and then seek to defuse it by creating a real crisis that advantages only the Party. It is the diabolical form of creation ex nihilo.

Thus, a ginned-up pandemic is a perfect excuse for mail-in ballots and ballot harvesting, especially if the voter rolls have been flooded with uncountable and counterfeit names and the voting stations have been commandeered. There is no immigration chaos unless a chain system is entrenched and the border is left wide open. There is no such thing as “white supremacy” unless it is apodictically proclaimed and false-flag operations are carried out. There is no need for costly, largely ineffective, and harmful renewable energy installations unless drilling has been rendered illegal and the oil pipelines have been shut down to avoid a bogus climate catastrophe. The bible of the Democrat left begins: Let there be a crisis. And there was a crisis.

Reshaping the Narrative How the discourse on DEI has changed—in a constructive direction. Christopher Rufo

https://rufo.substack.com/p/reshaping-the-narrative?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Last month, I published an op-ed in the New York Times arguing that DEI programs in public universities had created a “stifling orthodoxy that undermines the pursuit of truth.”

The Times has published six letters to the editor responding to my op-ed, under the headline: “University D.E.I. Programs: Do They Help or Harm Education?” Most of the letters were critical, though the editors made sure to include some supportive opinions, including this one from Wayne State University professor Jukka Savolainen:

Thank you for giving voice to Christopher Rufo, who has exposed the diversity-industrial-complex for what it is: a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Mr. Rufo is exactly right when he says that this should not be a partisan issue.

The central purpose of universities is to pursue truth. This mission requires an environment of open debate and political neutrality. Unlike Mr. Rufo, I am not a conservative. In recent presidential campaigns I have voted for Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

However, in the role of a college professor, my loyalties are with an altogether different ideology: the scientific value system. This ideology is inconsistent with identity politics of any flavor.

Government-Funded Science Journal Admits Over 2,600 of its Papers May Have ‘Exaggerated Claims’ By Eric Lendrum

https://amgreatness.com/2023/08/23/government-funded-science-journal-admits-over-2600-of-its-papers-may-have-exaggerated-claims/

A top science journal that receives funding from the federal government was recently forced to admit that well over 2,000 of the research papers it has published contain “exaggerated claims.”

As Just The News reports, over 2,600 papers from the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s (AAAS) peer-reviewed journal Science were closely scrutinized by rival research journal Scientometrics. In the subsequent study, it was determined that, from 1997 to 2021, the journal saw a 40% drop in the use of “hedging” words.

In scientific research and other forms of academic writing, “hedging” words refers to terms and phrases such as “could” or “appear to,” in order to provide some room for doubt rather than depict absolute confidence. In 1997, there were roughly 115.8 examples of hedging for every 10,000 words. However, by 2021, that rate had fallen to just 67.42 per every 10,000.

Responding to the criticism, the news division of Science acknowledged that this new research “suggests a worrisome rise of unreliable, exaggerated claims.”

The non-profit watchdog group Influence Watch reports that “the federal government is the largest identifiable source of funding for AAAS,” as the association has received roughly $3.3 million per year from the federal government between 2008 and 2017, in addition to many other grants the association received.

Standing with the next generation of pro-Israel leaders We were proud to attend a summit with young people determined to stand up for Israel despite resistance.Rep. Alma Hernandez And Daniel Hernandez

https://www.jns.org/column/israel/23/8/23/312985/?_se=cm9sYW5kLm0uaG9ybkB0LW9ubGluZS5kZQ%3D%3D&utm_campaign=Evening+Syndicate+Wednesday+8232023&utm_medium=email&utm_source=brevo

Siblings Alma Hernandez and Daniel Hernandez Jr. are current and former Democratic members of the Arizona House of Representatives.

One of the privileges of serving in elected office is the opportunity to stand up for what we most passionately believe in. We are the youngest woman ever elected to the Arizona House of Representatives and co-founder of the first LGBTQ caucus in the Arizona legislature, respectively.

Long before we began our service in the Arizona House, we were shaped by our heritage as Jewish- and Mexican-Americans. We are proudly progressive and proudly pro-Israel, and we are thrilled to have had a chance to share that message with 400 student leaders at the Israel on Campus Coalition National Leadership Summit earlier this month. The young people we met there deeply inspired us. We saw a new generation of diverse pro-Israel leaders rising to meet the demands of our times, answering the same call we heard at their age.

We grew up in a vibrant Latino family in Tucson, Arizona just 60 miles from the southern border. Our mother was born in Nogales, Mexico, giving us deep roots in the immigrant experience. Our identity is layered, as our maternal grandfather was Jewish. Alma converted in 2015 and celebrated her adult bat mitzvah two years later. Daniel has not taken that step but has been active in Jewish community life, attending synagogue on the High Holidays and preparing family meals for Passover and Hanukkah.

Israel – a mega-billion-dollar battle-tested laboratory for the US Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ9nS6GBsEU&t=1s

Israel’s use of the F-35 benefits the US

A recent mega-billion-dollar increase in the export of Lockheed-Martin’s F-35 combat aircraft is due to overcoming a series of pivotal glitches. This was achieved by Lockheed-Martin, as well as by Israel’s air force and aerospace industries (especially the innovative Israel Aerospace Industries – IAI), known as the cost-effective and battle-tested laboratory of the US defense and aerospace industries and armed forces.

In June 2016, Israel became the first country to use the highly-computerized F-35 operationally. Israel soon became successful in solving initial glitches, that caused concern among prospective buyers.  

The battle-tested Israeli laboratory – which communicates 24/7 with Lockheed-Martin (as it does with a litany of US defense contractors) – solved most of the operational and maintenance glitches by marshalling its intrinsic features, which have been the derivatives of the uniquely challenging and threatening Middle East environment: optimism, patriotism, defiance of odds, out-of-the-box thinking, risk-taking, do-or-die state of mind, can-do and frontier-pioneering mentality.  

The scores of Israeli solutions to the F-35 glitches – in the area of data gathering and processing, electronic warfare and firing control accuracy – have been shared with the US manufacturer and the US Air Force, sustaining the F-35 superiority over its global competition; sparing Lockheed-Martin mega-billions of dollars in research and development; enhancing the manufacturer’s competitive edge; increasing exports by a few additional billions; and expanding the employment base of Lockheed-Martin and its multitude of subcontractors.

The critical upgrades in the current F-35 – achieved by the manufacturer and its Israeli battle-tested laboratory – have produced a combat aircraft, which is substantially superior to the original generation.

In fact, the enhanced performance of the F-35 demonstrates Israel’s role as an important source of US’ weaponry modernization, reduction of the unit cost, and expanding job creation in the US.

Similar mega-billion-dollar benefits to the US economy and defense have been generated by the hundreds of Israeli solutions and add-on, which have upgraded the performance of the technologically less-challenging F-16 (Lockheed-Martin) and F-15 (Boeing).  In fact, all US manufacturers of military systems employed by Israel have benefited in a similar manner.

Moreover, some 250 commercial US high-tech giants (e.g., John Deere, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, Texas Instruments, Intel, Nvidia, General Motors, Microsoft, AT&T, IBM, Dell, Google, Facebook, Intuit, etc.) have established research and development centers in Israel, leveraging Israel’s brain power and innovative spirit, in order to sustain their global lead, yielding a consequential increase in global sales.

Similarly, the US defense and aerospace industries established their own Israeli research and development centers through the hundreds of US military systems, which are employed – and systematically improved – by the Israel Defense Forces, yielding to the US consequential benefits to its economy and defense.

US-Israel mutually-beneficial two-way-street

Navy veteran Hung Cao enters GOP race to challenge Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine in 2024

A Vietnamese immigrant who spent 25 years in the Navy, including service in combat zones around the world, Cao pledged to be a “fighter” at a time when he said the country had taken a “dark turn.”

“We are losing our country. You know it. But you also know you can’t say it. We’re forced to say that wrong is right,” he said in a video announcement that took aim at President Joe Biden.

Cao will join an increasingly crowded field of Republican contenders — at least eight other candidates have filed paperwork — aiming to run next year against Kaine, who so far faces no primary opponent. See this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBUE5uft_9k&t=201s

MY SAY: IN DEFENSE OF VIVEK RAMASWAMY

At the risk of incurring some anger from valued readers, I wholeheartedly approve of Ramasamy’s reflections on ending aid to Israel in 2028.

Aid to Israel has historically been a cudgel to force Israel’s acceptance of policies inimical to its independence. Examples abound:

In the shuttle diplomacy following the October Yom Kippur War of 1973 Israel bowed to the demands for withdrawal made by the aggressor Anwar Sadat of Egypt after a crude warning by Kissinger that failure to do so would lead to a” reassessment” of aid. Again, during the Camp David Accords of 1978, Vice President Mondale pressured Menachem Begin to accept all Sadat’s demands for territorial concessions by hinting at a reduction in aid. In 1992 Secretary of State James A. Baker III gave Israel’s Prime Minister Itzhak Shamir a blunt public warning that unless Israel halts building Jewish settlements in so-called occupied territories, it would not get $10 billion in U.S. loan guarantees. In October of 1998 after the Oslo Accords failed to get Israel’s full commitment to abandon the cities of Judea and Samaria to the PLO, a meeting was held at the Wye River in Maryland where Secretary of State Madeleine Albright hinted that aid would be reconsidered if Prime Minister Netanyahu did not accede to Arafat’s demands.

Ramaswamy recognizes the value of the Abraham accords to ensure peace and deterrence to Iran’s genocidal agenda.  A defense agreement with sharing of intel is far superior to aid at a time that America’s economy, military and infrastructure are failing.

I’m saving my opprobrium for the trio of rats- Matti Friedman, Daniel Gordis, Yossi Halevi who are issuing a call to world Jewry to “support Israel but not its present government”…..How does one do that? By threatening to cut off aid unless the democratically elected government is toppled? rsk

Liz Peek: Vivek Ramaswamy could surprise everyone at first Republican debate

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/vivek-ramaswamy-surprise-everyone-first-republican-debate

Republican presidential hopeful Nikki Haley is going after Vivek Ramaswamy. She’ll have plenty of company Wednesday night; Ramaswamy is surging in the polls making him, like Ron DeSantis, an obvious target at the GOP debate. 

My guess: Ramaswamy will hold his own and then some. Why? Because Ramaswamy is super smart and is talking common sense. Boy does this country need a big dose of common sense!

Haley pillories Ramaswamy for pledging to cut off aid to Israel in 2028, saying he’s “walking away from America’s special alliance with Israel” – a headline-grabbing accusation. But Vivek would only do so, he explained in an interview, if his plan to negotiate peace between Israel and other Middle East nations is successful. If he fails, then Vivek would continue to support Israel’s defense. Common sense.

The political novice, who was virtually unknown six months ago, traffics in controversial statements (Haley also jumps on him for saying he would defund the FBI, for instance) but seems to say what a lot of Americans are thinking.  As he recently told Fox Business’ Neil Cavuto: “I’d rather lose this race and speak truth at every step than to win by saying what I’m ‘supposed to.’”

An Emerson poll shows Ramaswamy at 10 percent of the vote, tied with DeSantis for second place. Five months ago he did not even register on the Real Clear Politics average of polls. Vivek is still miles away from catching up to Donald Trump, who in that poll has 56 percent of the vote.   

Asked a few months ago how he might secure the nomination, the long-shot candidate said winning in Iowa and New Hampshire would be key. Currently, he is trailing far behind in both states.

But, like Bernie Sanders and other improbable political stars, Ramaswamy has authenticity – a vital attribute that money cannot buy. (Just ask Hillary Clinton.) Also, he is carrying zero political baggage and owes no one, having mostly financed his own campaign.

Ramaswamy recently introduced these ten bold “truths,” as he calls them:

“1. God is real. 2. There are two genders. 3. Human flourishing requires fossil fuels. 4. Reverse racism is racism. 5. An open border is no border. 6. Parents determine the education of their children. 7. The nuclear family is the greatest form of governance known to mankind. 8. Capitalism lifts people up from poverty. 9. There are three branches of the U.S. government, not four. 10. The U.S. Constitution is the strongest guarantor of freedoms in history.”

Liberals hate these opinions, because they shred the progressive double-think that is destroying our country. The kind of idiocy that says letting criminals go free will reduce crime. Or that an open border which allows deadly drugs to flood our nation is “humanitarian.”