Archive for October, 2010

I am, obviously, constantly searching for the reasons for our current disaster. And I think I have unearthed many of them. Unfortunately, most if not all of them are inherent in human nature and incurable. Socialism is caused by greed and sloth. Egalitarianism is caused by the natural envy felt by the incompetent for their superiors. Militant atheism is caused by the desire to indulge in petty cruelty and hedonism. Kowtowing to Mohammedans is caused by cowardice. All sorts of things too numerous to mention are caused by sadism.

All of these causes are inevitable. But are the present results inevitable, eventually? At least, when technology advances to the point to make some of this indulgence practical?

I would like to say not, because for such a nightmare to be inevitable does not strike me as likely to be part of God’s plan. But then, I cannot claim to actually know what God’s plan is. He has told us, through prophets, that in the end He will right everything, but more than that we cannot know.

I hope this was not inevitable, if only because the world would be terribly bleak if it was.

Read Full Post »


Thus far, two different people, hearing the sentiments I expressed in my last post, jumped to the conclusion that I was talking about one particular deviant act. I had at least four separate ones in mind. This should probably be disturbing. But I’m probably behind the times; everyone else probably stopped being appalled at the other ones years ago. Personally, I’m about ready to wish that Judaism had a monastic tradition.

Here is more elucidation of the nature of bureaucracy, which I wrote about some time ago.

Because I have, in recent months, lacked the energy for much intellectual rigor, I have avoided reading much “decline of the West” literature, but this one did slip through my filters and I have been meaning to share it:

Are the American people obsolete?

Have the American people outlived their usefulness to the rich minority in the United States? A number of trends suggest that the answer may be yes….

In North America and Europe, the economic elite agreed to this bargain because they needed ordinary people as consumers and soldiers. Without mass consumption, the factories in which the rich invested would grind to a halt. Without universal conscription in the world wars, and selective conscription during the Cold War, the U.S. and its allies might have failed to defeat totalitarian empires that would have created a world order hostile to a market economy.

Globalization has eliminated the first reason for the rich to continue supporting this bargain at the nation-state level, while the privatization of the military threatens the other rationale.

The offshoring of industrial production means that many American investors and corporate managers no longer need an American workforce in order to prosper. They can enjoy their stream of profits from factories in China while shutting down factories in the U.S. And if Chinese workers have the impertinence to demand higher wages, American corporations can find low-wage labor in other countries.

We are likely seeing the death of capitalism, though not in the way that the Left hoped. It seems that Western man, having wielded the ingenuity and industriousness to create modern technology and infrastructure, has rendered himself obsolete. Just as our governments are intent on electing a new citizenry, our corporations are intent on electing new customers.

Read Full Post »

Forgive me for my long absence. Posting will resume, but there will probably still be a few weeks between posts.

I have been as lax in reading blogs as I have in writing one in recent months. I have limited concentration for serious matters these days, so my reading has been mostly focused on things like Hyperbole and a Half and Dr. Boli’s Celebrated Magazine. So yes, I have been AWOL in comment sections as well as in my own letters to the Times.

This is just going to be a short post, but I wanted to discuss something I’ve noticed, though it’s rather embarrassing for me to talk about. I am not going to post any links because they would be to yucky stuff, but the various blogs and articles I happen upon have given me reason to believe that women today are engaging in all sorts of sexual acts which just a few decades ago were, to say the least, highly unusual. Of course, most of my friends are either religious sorts who aren’t on the open market, or else nerds who are too busy reading the complete Sherlock Holmes for the fourth time to be on the open market, so I haven’t personally talked to any of these women who are, according to various accounts and allegedly scientific surveys, getting up to all sorts of things I wish I didn’t even know about.

I don’t think I’m that much of a prude. It isn’t as if I automatically condemn every act that is a little, er, creative (though one should be married to the person one is creative with). But a lot of these acts I’m reading about are dangerously unhygienic and people who engage in them are very likely to end up seeing a doctor.

More disturbingly, one article about this which I recently read in train-wreck fascination announced that a large number of the women surveyed had not only said that they had engaged in a certain act that very few women of my generation could ever have been persuaded to, they had also asserted that they had greatly enjoyed it. Male writers and commenters, naturally, gobbled this information up uncritically, and are doubtless sending the links to their girlfriends, much like Florence King’s college suitor who in a moment of passion assured her that it had been scientifically proven that women cannot get pregnant their first time. (I think he actually believed this, but it shows how little most men understand women. Miss King remarked that if he had said something desperate or romantic she probably would have come across, but scientific data might as well have been a cold shower.)

But as someone who actually occupies a female body, I am more than skeptical. Some of these activities, it is physically impossible for a woman to derive any satisfaction from. If men believe these articles, it just shows that decades of effort on the part of sex-positive feminists to enlighten men about what gives women pleasure have been for naught; apparently men can’t even remember where we keep our nerve bundles.

And I must note that players and aspiring players are not the only men subject to this sort of delusion. Men in general are clueless about women. Miss King pointed out that many men enviously confuse “the female ability to be penetrated with the female desire to be penetrated”. As if to prove it, a traditionalist man told The Thinking Housewife that he knew a woman who discovered self-gratification in college and achieved satisfaction ten or more times a day, and he said that he had heard similar stories from “countless” other women. I say humbug. Maybe there are a few women out there, one in every 100,000 or so, who can actually do this, but I think the young lady who told him this was more likely making it up to shock or titillate him. Good heavens, gentlemen, ask your wives before you go accepting this sort of thing as fact.

So why are women saying this?

Well, time was, men hoped to find a woman who had qualities they valued, like loyalty, chastity, and kindness. Certainly they hoped to find these qualities in a pleasing shape, but when only a few women were willing to consider premarital sex, men had little choice but to consider what life with the pretty girl they were ogling would be like. Would she be a shrew making his home life an ordeal? Would she beat their children or run off with the milkman?

Now, of course, attractive men are able to pick and choose whichever is the most exciting and novel member of his current harem. I think that women are enduring these repulsive acts and claiming to enjoy them out of competition, in hopes of seeming like the flashiest product on the shelf.

Like most conservatives, I have a large libertarian streak, and I am reluctant to simply recriminalize pornography. But the “pornification” of popular culture we are seeing is completely unacceptable, and it does seem that the ready availability of porn is jading people. If a young man has already seen the conventional acts depicted hundreds of times, he is apt to find it uninspiring in real life. He will require something more, well, novel to keep his interest alive. This is based on anecdotal evidence, but I suspect that excessive exposure to “normal” pornography makes men more apt to develop fetishes. And, well, there are fetishes and there are fetishes. I doubt many women would object to finding that their husbands were fixated on garter belts, but not all preoccupations are so benign.

It will likely take worldwide disaster to break Westerners of our current sexual unhealthiness. In the meantime, gentlemen, don’t believe everything you read. Women can and do lie if they think it will make them more attractive to desirable men.

On the other hand, I suspect that once a modern woman believes that she has a man committed to her, she is going to have an unprecedented number of headaches to escape the acts she claimed to enjoy so much.

Read Full Post »