|
I heard a female podcaster, of Latin descent, say she refers to immigrants as citizens, "because they contribute" to our culture and society. Fair enough, I respect her freedom to express her "feelings" just as I respect those who hate Israel to say so. I don't have to agree with people to grant them the freedom of speech. In those instances, when folks make comments about their "feelings" it is appropriate to remain on the sideline. It will accomplish nothing to attempt to inject rational thinking where emotions are ruling the conversation. Modern society has grown accustomed to accepting emotional reasoning as admissible facts when we talk to each other about sensitive issues like citizenship, voting rights, property rights, and right to life. The neo "common sense" is that everyone has their own definitions. That we must respect their sensitivities because causing discomfort is no less offensive then physical violence. To tell a person who identifies as "nonbinary" that they are confused and their are only two genders, is no less caustic than calling a black person a "ni**er". According to Laura Wamsley at NPR, " Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Some argue that such a diagnosis inappropriately pathologizes gender incongruence, while others contend that a diagnosis makes it easier for transgender people to access necessary medical treatment." "If I was introducing myself to someone, I would say, 'I'm Rodrigo. I use 'him' pronouns. What about you?' " says Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, deputy executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality. "It may feel awkward at first, but eventually it just becomes another one of those get-to-know-you questions." OK, but isn't that just a little narcissistic? Why is your sexual identity any more important than the color of your eyes? Or your preference for real butter over margarine? Some guys prefer boxers over briefs, and some women prefer to go braless. So what? Why do all of the rest of us have to conform to your standards? I could get upset if another man suggests I need to grow some gonads. I have seen guys start a fight over what could be considered an insult to their manhood. But when that happens most reasonable people consider the fight impulse as selfish and immature. We admonish them for being violent and brutish. Either they grow up or we avoid them, isolate them, and shame them. Hypersensitivity is a cultural anomaly. Or maybe I should say it used to be. Currently it is becoming the New Normal. Sensitivity over self imposed identity is out of control. After thousands of years of fighting over religion, caste, or any number of cultural rituals, mankind has decided to fight over the single most unifying element of human existence, sex! Instead of marveling about how sexual attraction between men and women reduces us to silly and childish joy, we have chosen to pitch men and women against each other. We have invented armies of "others" to march into battle with anyone that refuses to join ranks and abandon historic gender definitions and traditions. It is not enough to accept that some people suffer confusion, confrontation and a sense of abandonment over their sexuality. Now we have to redefine all of our language, our traditions, our relationships and how we communicate. We have to place those who "believe" they are different, into the center of the world of concerns. Their needs and "feelings" must come first! That is how children act. They demand to be put at the head of the line. They want what they want, and if denied, they scream. They cry, they have a tantrum. Clearly, the LGBTQ+ community has learned how effective that behavior is. In some parts of our country there is an invasion of illegal immigrants, who have learned the same tactics, and as they waltz into the Greatest Country On Earth, unencumbered by any form of scrutiny, they mimic the tactics of the sexual identity pirates. The Gender Pirates scream "Let us love who we want!" The illegal immigrants scream "Our lives matter!" It is one special interest after another hijacking the culture and undermining traditional values. The fabric that has held our nation together for nearly 250 years is being stretched to it's limits. When citizenship was recognized as a privilege, as a status of respect and responsibility, it served to build a culture of unity and progress. As it has deteriorated into nothing more than occupancy, to a commodity of little or no distinguishable value, the country descends into chaos. Immigration activists suggest those who have successfully trespassed should be honored with the right to vote, because they are working and contributing to society. But the facts betray that claim: A 2022 report by the Center For Immigration Studies notes "A hefty 59 percent of households headed by either a green card holder or an illegal alien are on welfare…" In 1968 students rioted at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. They were protesting the War In Vietnam and the way both parties were determined to keep feeding young Americans to the jungles of Vietnam and they were in support of the anti-war candidate Robert Kennedy running against the establishment candidate Hubert Humphrey. The drum beat was "We have to stop the Communists from taking over all of South-East Asia". We had to support South Vietnam to stop the "Domino Effect" which would lead to the Russian communists from militarizing and dominating Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand and potentially Laos. This was all very reminiscent of the motives for our involvement in the Korean War. In 1965, Lyndon Johnson was escalating his commitments, pouring more money and equipment into the Vietnam war which had been going on for a year, and by 1968 it was simply a grim and directionless mess. Nixon was promising to end it if he was to be elected, but the students weren't buying it. They were convinced the war was nothing more than a way to build the strength of the American economy, to feed the Military Industrial Complex, and to project American hegemony around the world. After conceding a stand off in Korea, and signing a treaty to stop fighting, it looked like the US was just relocating their battlefield. And the draft age people were the victims of wars that had no exit strategy. Nixon finally gave in and ordered our soldiers out of Vietnam. The North Vietnamese communist forces took over, nothing terrible happened in the region. In fact, over the last half century, Vietnam and the surrounding countries have become major traders to the US, creating an upsurge in the median income to their citizens. After 14 years we moved the battlefield to the Middle East. And we created a new bogeyman called Islamic Fundamentalism. We decided that the area was of vital importance because it provided the world with energy supplies and the threat of Russian-backed, radical theological terrorists dominating the whole area of Syria, Iraq and Iran was a threat to our national security. So once again we stepped in to change the dynamic. We went after the perceived weakest link, Saddam Hussein. We were convinced (or at least inclined) to believe he was developing nuclear weapons, and that gave us the moral authority to declare war on Iraq. Once we destroyed his military, and most of Iraq's infrastructure, and we discovered there were no weapons of mass destruction there, we moved the battlefield again. Each time, we walked away without the enemy conceding defeat after spending billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives. On to Afghanistan. And now Ukraine. And the theme remains the same. Let me cut to the chase: There is an unmistakable pattern here…We are not really in these battlefronts to win anything. We are there to create demand for new and better weapons that also cost enormous amounts of money, provide good paying jobs, and make us look like a formidable force around the world. We are playing politics with human lives, with the fortunes of relatively small and insignificant countries, while creating vast amounts of wealth. We haven't won a war since WWII and it should be obvious, we aren't really trying to win. It is the process that provides us what we want. For the United States of America, war is simply real estate development. We bulldoze the old order, spend billions of taxpayer dollars to annihilate any resistance, then pay ourselves to rebuild a new, much more US dependent economy. We get trade partners, natural resource supplies, and a government that stands with us when we go do the same thing to the next part of the world that is vulnerable to the "Communist Domino Effect". We do this with the one thing no one can interfere with: The power to print US dollars. Which we then hand out as "foreign aid" but is actually invested in weapons we build, then laundered by the victims of "Russian aggression" and eventually finds its way back to the US economy, spent with our massive foreign service contractors, to rebuild the now war torn country. It is really just another Mafia-style shakedown scheme. |
Subscribe to my Substack
(it's Free) Click Here
Archives
January 2025
|
RSS Feed
