Labels

Monday, January 27, 2014

Socialists Hoisted : and Howling.

A studied example from two great speakers and writers of our time, enlivened a sunny afternoon with sound argument for the customers on the patio. Socialism, they said, does not work.

As though to a sensible man it could be otherwise; and to many nonsensical men - and not a few women - in the audience that socialism could even be questioned. But question and interrupt the speakers they did, of course. 

This was a debate and you are free (as we are not socialists here) to make up your own mind.

The Tavern customers like to wrestle with topics of the mind and of social relevance. Often they consider matters that go against the grain of the slippery slope that our society is sliding down.

Daniel Hannan earned his free pints and a square meal first. He is a politician with a sound mind and the memory of an elephant. He can quote off the top of his head almost all the great people of humanity from soon after man began writing anything down to the present day.

Typical of this wise and perfect English speaker, he waves the Red Flag at the lefty Bullies right from the start. How many public speakers would have the sheer gumption to open with Godwin's Law.?


Socialism Does NOT Work | Daniel Hannan | Oxford Union




He was followed by Anthony Daniels, better known as Theodore Dalrymple. Dr Daniels, a psychiatrist, has delved into the deep and dark recesses of the minds of not only the every-day mentally ill and socially decrepit but of the politically ill and evil too. This was one of his rare public appearances and well worth it.

Socialism Does NOT Work | Theodore Dalrymple | Oxford Union

 

 
As you can see and hear, both speakers had spirited opposition to the sense they spoke coming from the audience. Indeed Hannan's talk was interrupted by intellectual midget thugs of both sexes and there was even an attempt by one lady to make her own speech in his place. He dealt with them politely, of course.
 
They had their opportunity in the debate and most of the Tavern customers heard them out. You can too by following the entire debate with each speaker by continuing the links shown after each video.
 
The ensuing discussions continued in the P&B and the UK room where you too can join in.
 
Enjoy.
 
I will charge your glasses.
 
 
Pax

Saturday, January 25, 2014

Sanity in the Gender War

A sane man walked in and showed us why he the best 'spokesmen' for anti-feminism that I have seen and heard. Always cogent, well argued, well supported by evidence and example, and polite. A model of how it ought to be done.

A simple question. Can you improve the 100 metre Olympic Sprint Race by bumping off a few of the black men and having some 'quota' white men in their place?

So, without any further discussion, I will let him speak for himself.  Just sit back with a pot of wine and watch.



On white sprinters and female CEOs

 
The feminist extortionist as Tony Soprano, the waste management executive. Hahahaha. Very good.
The Damned Old Man at the bar knows that despite the logic of the argument we cannot win-over a Feminist easily.  He says:
http://thedamnedoldeman.com/?p=9298

Feminist logic may seem like another one of those oxymorons, like military intelligence. But it isn’t. The military at least thinks it has intelligence. Feminists believe logic is masculine and therefore a tool of the Patriarchy used to oppress women.  
Logic is a form of oppressive power because of its objective stance that is devoid of emotion and ignorance of context. The association with power and domination is what makes it masculine. One claim that is often made is that men and women have different styles of reasoning.
Feminist researchers appear to prefer quantitative research methods over qualitative. In fact, I have seen arguments that qualitative research is masculine because of its reliance on logic and math. Qualitative research relies on neither. It is far more interpretive and expressive and permits researchers far more freedom to draw conclusions. In fact, two researchers using the same sets of data can easily reach contradictory conclusions about that data.  
For the feminist, this poses no problem.  Feminist researchers often talk about multiple realities and the importance of context.  This permits the feminist to make both of the following statements without regard to any double standard.

“A man who criticizes one woman is a misogynist.”
“A woman who criticizes all men is empowered.”
Is feminism a madness or a badness.

With one professional hat  on I say it is psychotic. A madness.

Some might be cured.

With another sleeve turned up, I say it is badness.

Does it come from 'womanliness' ?  Not at all.

Feminism harms men but it harms women too.

And babies. And  Families.


Drink it up. For Clarity.
 
You will need it. You are faced with the Diabolical.
 
Pax

Delays and Preparations.

It gets busy at the Tavern. Folks running around all over the place. So.... apologies for the lack of conversations.

This week has seen me working hard preparing for 'events'. A couple of them are connected to a local club - in fact it is State-wide, nation-wide and world-wide - and I am honoured to be the State Secretary. The club is Mensa.


Much of what we do is quite social and the Tavern is a good venue, but occasionally we venture afield - as I did last November, to Perth - so as to include members from far afield. Hence the Taverners are busy preparing for the annual BBQ.

This will be held in Ross, tomorrow.

Ross is a small village and quite old by Oz standards, in the middle of the Island and just a bit to the East. Members can get to it from all points and not over-extend their travelling.

And I have also been busy preparing to put on a 'Show' in the Tavern itself, in the music room, with a Mensa member from the UK who has brought her Harp with her.

The Fine Harpist and Celtic Singer.

Moira Grayland.

An evening with Moira Grayland is being organised. Moira is a fairly new friend of the Tavern, drawn by the ambience.

As with most Mensa events the audience is confined to members but I will be bringing some highlights from the rehearsals.

But that is to come. Soon.

So, sit in your favourite place, sup some fine wine brought to you on the shoulders of an Angel.... and be patient.

And keep the place tidy whilst my back is turned.



Pax




Saturday, January 18, 2014

The Source of the Pain

Our society is in pain. Everywhere. Trying to use logic, common sense, and pointing out the obvious - and the obvious solutions - is continually met by resistance.

The talk in the Tavern often wrangles over these 'pains'. Thank goodness we can be diverted by a little humour, some aeroplanes, some song and dance and fine glasses of Ale instead of ail and wail.

Resistance to 'fixing' the problems lies at the root of many ongoing further problems.




It is not just the 'woman-man' thing either.

Think about it.

Consider just why this is running in the Spirits Bar.

Teacher and Principal Tell 6 Year Old Student She Can't Talk About Religion in School 
The parents of a six-year-old girl said their daughter was humiliated when a teacher interrupted the child’s one-minute speech and told her to sit down because she’s “not allowed to talk about the Bible in school,” attorneys for the California family allege. 
The incident occurred Dec. 19 inside a first grade classroom at Helen Hunt-Jackson Elementary School in Temecula, Calif. The previous day the teacher instructed boys and girls to  
"find something at home that represented  
a family Christmas tradition."  
They were supposed to bring the item to school, and share the item in a classroom presentation. 
Brynn Williams decided to bring the Star of Bethlehem that adorned the top of her family’s Christmas tree. She also worked on a one minute presentation to explain that her family’s tradition is to remember the birth of Jesus at Christmas time
“Our Christmas tradition is to put a star on top of our tree,” the little girl said. “The star is named the Star of Bethlehem. The three kings followed the star to find baby Jesus, the Savior of the world.” 
Before the child could utter another word, the teacher intervened, according to Robert Tyler, the general counsel for Advocates for Faith & Freedom – the law firm representing the Williams family. 
“Brynn’s teacher said, ‘Stop right there! Go take your seat,’” Tyler said. “Bryn was not allowed to finish her presentation by reciting the Bible verse, John 3:16.” 
Tyler said the little girl was the only student in the class not allowed to finish her presentation. 
“She confirmed there was no way Brynn could finish that presentation,” the disappointed mom told me. It was to protect the other students from being offended by Brynn’s presentation.” 
http://townhall.com/columnists/toddstarnes/2014/01/15/teacher-and-principal-tell-6-year-old-student-she-cant-talk-about-religion-in-school-n1779456
 
 But a talk about the Koran would have been treated with great respect, of course.

Have a drink before you are driven to drink.


Pax

Friday, January 17, 2014

Ruin-Nation by Education

We try to use plain English here in the Tavern. You know; the sort of language that normally-educated folk used to speak, even here in Oz. Admittedly there are a few words of three syllables that get employed but usually they are the appropriate ones. Most people here can understand.

Not so our younger patrons: those who are still in school or who have been there in the last decade or so. They have not been as fortunate (see, a three syllable word!). It means something similar to 'Lucky', as in "The Lucky Country". That phrases has become mangled in our education system and many of the up and coming generation have not been taught that it was used to say that we had 'escaped' the consequences of history through sheer luck rather than clear thinking and deliberation.

In recent times we have found our luck ran out as the socialist climbed in through the back windows.



No, this is not just about the Feminist Domination of Education and their obsession with creating a feminised society of whining, greedy, selfish and sexually-obsessed ever-children.

It goes far deeper than that.

Much has been heard amid the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Left, about the current Conservative Government turning its attention to the school curriculum. The lefties cry foul. They claim that the Conservatives want to 'Politicise' the school curriculum and brainwash our children.

Talk about 'Projection'. One could argue a fine case that it is the Left who HAVE spent a decade doing just that. But I will let someone else make that case. as Nick Cater  did just yesterday, standing in the P&B.

You can make your own mind up.

Australian curriculum beyond saving 
"LANGUAGE," claim the authors of the Australian Curriculum, "enables people to interact effectively." They then proceed to demonstrate in 238,000 laboured words that this is not necessarily the case. 
The curriculum is written in the private language of educationalism, which, like Latin in the hands of the medieval clergy, serves to keep the rest of us in our place.  
The implication is that parents, employers and general citizens don't know what they're talking about. Curriculum development is a job for the experts. 

The first task of the government's curriculum review panel should be to translate this doorstop of a document into English, eliminate the verbiage and publish it for public discussion. Forget all the stuff about content descriptions, content elaborations and learning continua. 
Don't bother telling us that the English language "provides rich and engaging contexts for developing students' abilities," or that "texts provide the means for communication".   
In our own inexpert way, we had sort of gathered that. 
Just tell us how you plan to teach literacy and numeracy, and what else you are planning to put into the kiddies' heads. 
Then we can let the public decide whether "creating a more ecologically and socially just world through informed action" is a task for public schools
Do we want educators or evangelists?  
Do we send children to school to "create texts that inform and persuade others to take action for sustainable futures"?  

Should a child under 10 be expected to produce "a persuasive audio-visual text to promote action on an environmental issue" or "promote awareness about how people can reduce their impact on the environment"? 
By Year 9, they will be encouraged to ponder "Gaia - the interaction of Earth and its biosphere" and to think about the "limits of growth - that unlimited growth is unsustainable". 
They will be asked to "interrogate" Rachel Carson's The Silent Spring and 1970 editions of Mother Earth News magazine, before considering the "rights of nature recognition - that humans and their natural environment are closely interrelated". 
The words "sustainable" and "sustainability" appear 139 times in the Australian Curriculum;  
"business" crops up six times,  
"markets" twice  
and "free markets" not at all.  
"Prosperity" features three times and "economic growth" is mentioned just once (and not in a nice way), for history is not the tale of steady improvement but just one shameful act after another
Year 3 students will be taught significant days and weeks in the Australian calendar: Australia Day, Anzac Day, Harmony Week, National Reconciliation Week, NAIDOC week and National Sorry Day and Mabo day. 

Doubtless this is uncontroversial stuff in the sheltered common rooms of public schools, salaried and superannuated from the bottomless pockets of the state.  
To much of the rest of Australia, however, this romantic, closed-minded view of the world seems eccentric.  
Non-expert citizens - that is those without a PhD in critical pedagogy - 
.....might wonder how a child infused with such a narrow world view, who finishes Year 12 without any appreciation of wealth creation, could possibly emerge equipped for the challenges of the 21st century. 
The history curriculum includes the Harvester Judgment, but says nothing about the Sunshine Harvester, Australia's most successful manufactured export, made in the factory where the work conditions test case was struck.  
In 699 pages, the curriculum mentions capitalism twice, but merely as one of the "competing ideologies" to communism. 
At every turn, the curriculum appears intent on taking the most dismal brutal view of every episode in human history.  
The industrial revolution's contribution to the world is restricted to "the transatlantic slave trade and convict transportation". It led, we are told, to "longer working hours for low pay and the use of children as a cheap source of labour" and is best interpreted through reading the works of Charles Dickens. 

The reforming instincts of 19th-century liberals that led to the end of transportation, slavery and child labour are whitewashed from history. 
The measurable improvements to diet and health, made possible by agricultural innovation in sheep breeding, frozen meat transportation and broad-acre farming, form no part of the story. 
They would have sounded a discordant note in the curriculum's miserablist narrative of Australian history. 
Instead, Year 4 students will be taught "historical terms for example 'penal', 'transportation', 'navigation', 'frontier conflict', 'colonisation' ". 
In Year 6 they will be introduced to "experiences of citizenship and democracy" with reference to "internment camps during World War II, assimilation policies, anti-discrimination legislation, mandatory detention, pay and working conditions" and "children who were placed in orphanages, homes and other institutions". 
After all, the curriculum helpfully reminds us,  
"democracy is an abstract noun expressing an intangible concept". 
Gramsci - The Long March through the Institutions.

The leaden imposition of "cross-curriculum priorities" indigenous awareness, engagement with Asia and sustainability contaminate the curriculum writers' thinking. 
In English, "the priority of sustainability provides rich and engaging contexts for developing students' abilities". 
In geography, "the sustainability priority and concept afford rich and engaging learning opportunities and purposeful contexts". 
In history, sustainability "provides content that supports the development of students' world views, particularly in relation to judgments about past social and economic systems, and access to and use of the Earth's resources". 

In mathematics, "sustainability provides rich, engaging and authentic contexts for developing students' abilities in number and algebra, measurement and geometry, statistics and probability". 
Sustainability in science develops "an appreciation for the interconnectedness of Earth's biosphere, geosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere". 
Christopher Pyne has been condemned as a culture warrior for having the audacity to question this tosh
The opposition has accused him of attempting to politicise the curriculum, and has labelled his chosen reviewers, Kevin Donnelly and Ken Wiltshire, as ideologues. 
If the Education Minister is to be criticised, it is for imagining this irredeemable document can be tidied up and put back on the shelf when the only realistic course of action is to  
tear the damn thing up.
 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/australian-curriculum-beyond-saving/story-fnhulhjj-1226800948151#&mm-premium
 

With translation from the pay-wall by JJ Ray
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com.au/

The education of Australian children produces agitpropped dummies in the main. But we are still marginally ahead (I think) of the Americans.

Just watch .... and weep.




I bet you will need a sustaining pot of Ale after that.

Pax.





Thursday, January 16, 2014

Drinkers and Drunkards in Conversation

Mixing drinkers and drunkards together in conversation is like adding oil to water.  They will separate but only after the oily, rowdy mob have sullied the waters. It is the same in discussions of any sort and if a tavern is known for anything other than drinking, it is the fine conversations that can take place in conviviality.

My Bouncer is doing a good job keeping the trolls away.

In every blog there is the 'troll' issue, just as every Tavern has people turning up having already had a skinful of cheap and nasty brew. The troll's 'views' are usually just as incoherent as the drunkard's.

I was reminded of this by listening to a regular here, Bill. He was itemising the sorts of stupid, mindless things that the homosexual 'activists' say. They have learned their lessons in dog-rhetoric from the Feminists.

We love sharp pins in the Pin & Balloon bar, and Bill brings his own.

Over to Bill.

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2014/01/16/five-really-dumb-things-the-activists-say/

 Five Really Dumb Things the Activists Say
by Bill Muehlenberg 
 
One could easily write an entire book on all the really moronic and senseless things the homosexual activists say when they "argue" with us. Of course one has to use the word "argue" quite loosely here, since what the militants engage is can hardly be described as arguments - more like sophomoric rants in fact.
Now, I have to ask you, as you listen to Bill, that you widen your scope to include many of the different 'Activists' for various issues that surround the Tavern on a sunny day.  No doubt you will have stumbled into the path of some of particular note to yourselves.
So as you discuss or debate with these activists, bear in mind they will almost invariably throw some real doozies your way. These remarks will have very little to do with logic and rationality. They will not be actual arguments or well-reasoned claims. 
They will just be foolish attacks lacking in any merit. But this is just how the other side operates - time and time again.  
This is their standard modus operandi.  
Here then are five of these dopey claims you will likely hear over and over again in such discussions: 
1. You are just homophobic 
This is a classic from the other side. It is as typical as it is stupid.  
It is of course just a conversation stopper. It sure beats actually dealing with the issues and mounting an argument.  
It is simply an ad hominem attack, and the homosexual activists specialise in such attacks. Name-calling, mud-slinging and personal attacks are the primary weapons in their arsenal.
I had one just the other day. A 'fellow' Mensa member on facebook called me a racist. Why? I had posted up without any comment a scholarly article on IQ. The chap, a German I am supposing, objected to the study because it was published, in his view, in a journal of  which he disapproved. Therefore I was a racist. Forget the data !!

Hello !!

After all these years I discover I am a racist. !!
And the term itself is simply vacuous. It means nothing in this debate. 
No, I do not have a fear of the same, as the terms literally means. I do not fear others of the same sex. I do not fear other males.  
I will tell you what I do fear however: the destruction of marriage and family, the threat to our children, and the risk to society at large when we allow the radical homosexual agenda to run unchecked. 
2. You hate homosexuals 
More name-calling.  
What does speaking the truth about homosexuality have to do with hating anyone?  
Indeed, it is the most loving thing one can do in this case. Telling a homosexual that his dead-end lifestyle is a high-risk and dangerous affair, one that can be avoided if so chosen, is the most loving thing one can tell a homosexual. 
If a person is racing toward a cliff with certain death the impending result, the obvious and loving thing anyone can do is warn such a person. Indeed, you will do all you can to alert such a person to the dangers involved, and seek to avert disaster. To fail to do so is a failure to love the other person. 
And the simple truth is this: mere disagreement does not equal hate.  
The very heart of a free and democratic society is the ability to differ, to disagree, to express different points of view, without fear of the other side blasting you for "hate-speech," and using the heavy hand of the law to shut you up. 
That of course is not tolerance. That has nothing to do with acceptance and diversity.  
That has everything to do with totalitarianism: stamp out any contrary points of view, and criminalise any speech which dares to differ.  
That it seems to me is real hate. 
3. You are really a repressed homosexual 
I get this all the time. The activists actually seem to think this is some sort of sensible argument. Really! Indeed, as if to prove my point, I just had a guy post this on my site: 
 "Such vitriol repeatedly directed against homosexuals is almost invariably indicative of repressed homosexuality on the part of its instigator. Bill, how about stepping out of that closet and getting yourself some fresh air?"
To which I replied: 
"Thanks Todd. Such vitriol repeatedly directed against Christians is almost invariably indicative of repressed Christianity on the part of its instigator. Todd, how about stepping out of that closet and getting yourself some fresh air? 
Now there is a fine response. Turn the table and show just how silly the argument is.
 "Actually you must be a Christian, since I find it hard to believe that any homosexual activist would publicly embarrass himself with such a moronic claim. You might as well argue that those who stand against rape are actually rapists, or those who speak against pollution are in fact polluters. No wonder no one takes your side seriously with such imbecility."
Of course the list is endless hear: Those who are concerned about crime rates are in fact closet criminals.  
Those who oppose war are actually repressed militarists.  
Those who resist the tobacco industry the strongest are in fact three-pack-a-day-ers.  
Those who stand against racism are really members of the KKK.  
T hose who protest the loudest against Japanese whaling are actually Japanese whalers. 
Or as one wit put it on another site: "And surely you've noticed all the haughty vegans who condemn all who eat meat? Obviously all of them secretly run butcher shops." Yet the militants keep on using such incredibly idiotic "arguments". 
4. You are forcing your morality on me 
Umm, no - I am not forcing anything on anyone. To stand up for the well-being of children, to stand up for marriage and family, to stand up for the social good and basic morality is not forcing anything. It is called living in a democracy, and having the right to state one's point of view. 
Mark that. Use it yourself, if only to hold your temper with dolts.

To Stand up for ... is not forcing anything 
It is in fact the other side which is forcing its morality on everyone else.  
All over the Western world they are demanding that everyone bow in obeisance to their radical demands.  
Everywhere they are forcing those who disagree with them to violate their own consciences.
Everywhere we find those who refuse to bow the knee losing their jobs, being fined, an even being jailed.  
That sounds like forcing one's morality on others. All we are doing is seeking to defend what we highly value from the relentless attacks of the activists. 
And we did not start this fight 
We did not unleash a reign of terror on anyone who dares to disagree.  
But when things we treasure come under such ferocious attack, such as the institutions of marriage and family and the wellbeing of our children, then of course we will respond; of course we will stand up and defend such things from those attacking them. 
5. You should keep the state out of our bedrooms 
This is another silly furphy so often thrown out by the militants. If in fact they just wanted to do their thing in the privacy of their own bedrooms, no one would make a peep about it.  
But this is far more than mere private behaviour, done discreetly, impacting no one. 
This is about a very public social revolution in which everyone is impacted. As I have demonstrated elsewhere, we are all at risk because of the radical homosexual agenda.  
Everywhere the activists are forcing their lifestyle and their demands on hapless populations.
And the demolition job on things like marriage and our social fabric of course is not some mere private activity: it is a very real public activity with some very real public consequences.  
All societies have a right to withstand such threats and to champion long-held values and norms.
We have a right to stand up for historically proven institutions which help societies, help children, and help couples.  
Things like marriage are far too valuable to let go of without a fight. And the activists have made it clear that marriage and family and everything else are in fact in their scopes.  
They are in fact the ones using the state to promote and enforce their agendas. 
There are obviously many more such lame remarks which get thrown our way with appalling monotony. This is all standard operating procedure from the militants.  
They believe that if they keep throwing out these baseless and senseless accusations, they will simply overwhelm us, wear us down, and win by default. 
Admittedly it is frustrating and time-consuming to deal with these hollow clich├ęs over and over again, but we must proclaim and defend truth even when it becomes tiresome and tedious.  
We cannot let the activists win by default. So keep on keeping on, and learn to recognise these thread-bare "arguments" as they get thrown in your face.

A lengthy speech and deserving  of a few clear pints of refreshing Grace.

In MY Tavern we welcome anyone. Many are called and this is an outpost on the road.

We get homosexuals and feminists, racists, in fact sinners of all types. We even get overly- angry Men's Rights Advocates and strong-minded Pastors like Bill ! They are all welcome when they are not already drunk on their own self-interested bile and especially when they are decent folk who are at the end of their tethers.

The Ale I serve here comes from the Best Supplier. It calms and clarifies.

It is clean and refreshing.

The wicked HATE it.

Pax.





Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Charity Rip-off.

Charity is one of The Big Three virtues, along with Faith and Hope. Hope has yet to become the Industry that Faith and Charity has become, although Obama tried hard to package and sell it. There are lots of gullible people willing to buy.

The chat in the bar was quiet today but centred around Charity. That was possibly because one of the many people that the Tavern frequently helps out was mopping the floors and cleaning the tables, and attracted attention.

Over the past few years we here have provided a temporary home for half a dozen or more people down on their luck. Trolls may accuse me of being uncharitable regarding asylum seekers and the like but I wonder if they have ever given a room in their own home to one. Or to a homeless person. Or someone without the mental competence to manage by themselves.

I do.

And I encourage them to do something useful for it, and pay their way.

It is a matter of self-esteem. Theirs.



Charity begins at home. It is a personal thing. At home, all 'muck-in'.

But a Quiet Man pointed to alternative, modern ways, in which the compassionate heart (and wallet) is ripped off by the charity workers themselves. Especially when the Government gets involved.

http://www.4liberty.org.uk/2014/01/13/charity-more-like-pickpocketing/#comment-23990 
Charity? More like pickpocketing!

Charity is supposed to be voluntary giving, where you choose a cause and give some of your cash towards it. At least that used to be the definition of charity in the old days before the government decided which causes your cash was going towards…
'Charity' charge for plastic bags will net millions for Treasury, admits minister 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10568840/Charity-charge-for-plastic-bags-will-net-millions-for-Treasury-admits-minister.html 
A mandatory “charity” plastic bag charge which comes into force next year will rake in millions of pounds in tax for the Treasury, Telegraph discloses. 
Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, unveiled Government plans to charge 5p for plastic bags from October 2015 at September’s party conference. 
He justified the new plastic bag charge next year by saying it will raise money for charity and stop damage to the environment. 
However ministers have now admitted that the charge will raise millions of pounds a year in VAT for the Treasury. 
Dan Rogerson, the environment minister, told MPs on the Environmental Audit Committee that he expected the charge to raise £95million a year, only £70million of which will go to “charitable causes”.
Now I suspect that many people might just start taking their own bags to supermarkets, although there will be times when it isn’t possible.

And, no doubt, they will soon be dubbed 'mean and uncharitable' for not contributing to the 'charity' impost !

That said giving the government £25 million in VAT because the boy Clegg wants to be a poster boy for the environment strikes me as a step too far in the usual ill thought out government scheme.  
Nor do I like the idea that the government deciding where the rest is to go on ‘charitable’ causes, mostly because their idea of a charitable cause isn’t mine.  

They are quite likely to spunk it away to enviroloon causes and global warming prevention rather than somewhere where it might actually do some good. 
Essentially we are in the realms of fake charities  
....here where groups suckle at the governments teats for funding, some of it to do with lobbying the government to do what the government wants to do anyway, but making it appear like its a popular decision by ‘the people.’  
You can normally spot them by the name, although some long established so called charities have gone down this route too where they are doing very well (paid directorships etc) from supposedly doing good, although a quick check of the accounts will tell you the 
majority of the funding goes on wages and lobbying, rather than charitable works.
A legion of acronyms spring to mind -f amous ones - in which highly paid lobbyists employed by and under the direction of even more highly paid 'Directors', actively seek Government Funding - ie Taxpayers' funds - to  assault Government to pay even more taxpayers' monies over in an eternal and

lucrative circle of pocket-lining - 
and Lying.
This in essence is why charitable giving by many members of the public is tailing off simply because the bloody government is giving away our taxes direct from out pockets and deciding who gets our cash, rather than us deciding who if what gets it. 
Unfortunately whilst we have morons like our current crop of politicians who believe they know best who should get their ill gotten gains, this will continue… at least until we hang them all.
These 'charities' are not simply the enviroloons that the Quiet Man pointed at but a whole range of societally false flags.

They use animals and even children as weapons. 

And Breasts.

And illegal immigrants.

The 'poor'.

The incompetent.

In fact anything and anyone that they can deploy as a weapon, as a means of attacking the normal human compassion that all but the Directors, lobbyists and Politicians have.

How can one resist the devastating tales of poor, wailing little children in leaky boats crossing the high seas? We weep at the nightly sight on our TV screens.



But don't mention their callous parents who are intent on the benefits to be stolen from the Taxpayer and handed over as 'compassion' by a corrupt government. They outnumber the children ten to one.

How can one not weep for the family of the poor woman who has breast cancer. So vulnerable. Follow her 'brave struggle' on the news. But don't mention that the Pill and abortion are direct causes of increased breast cancer incidence, both of which are encouraged. Just focus on her legitimate illness. Shake the tin. Make it two tins and a 'fun run'. Men-only fun-run, of course. We don't want to make the women 'feel uncomfortable'.

Quite a scam. She CHOOSES to stay in a wheelchair even though not a cripple, and lives with another woman, raising a child, on YOUR money.

Pay the Director half a million a year because 'they do so much' for 'brave' women.

Inject BILLIONS in taxpayer funds into a 'research' Industry.

But don't fund alternatives for abortion. Certainly do not 'fund' a solution to the destruction of Marriage and Family.

Oh dear no.

Protect the children from Child Abuse. From nasty men of course. But don't mention that the vast proportion is by nasty women. Some have breast cancer.  And they are struggling 'single-mothers'.

Pay the Director $300,000 to keep one quiet and spin the other.

And don't forget to take even more from the taxpayer so that the single mother can shag yet another bloke and have another child to support. Ot even have an abortion !

Let us never mention that. 
It is not 'charitable'.

Show me the Director of any 'shelter' or 'charity' who puts a homeless man in their spare bedroom.  98% of the homeless are men.

Best outlaw plastic bags instead and make everyone pay extra.



Pax

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

From Boys to Men

The trolls who have been here recently seem mainly to have been chaps. A particular sort and an increasingly common sort. They are not the Men we were used to throughout history. Our society is producing emasculated men.

Much has been written and spoken about the 'rights' of 'empowered' women but it seems such empowerment has seeped right down to the bottom, especially in our Female-Dominated schools, to the detriment of masculinity and its proper flowering in our boys.

I could speak a lot simply repeating what my customers often speak about. But I prefer to let them speak for themselves. Even the ladies are beginning to speak up, empowered by a few glasses of Grace.

Here is one. Maggie Dent:

Why boys need a boyhood to become good men 

Given the current deep community outpourings of concern for the senseless violence present on Australian streets at night, the disturbing numbers of little boys being suspended and expelled from our schools, and the decreasing numbers of young men attending and graduating university, 
 
something is going wrong in the world of our boys. 
I lay blame on society, which seems to have stolen boyhood in the name of a sanitised, politically correct, gender neutral, bland childhood.
I could add in here that the root cause is Socialism and it's main weapon is Feminism.

IMHO, of course. I am but an 'umble Taverner.
One of the world’s leading writers on boys and men, Michael Gurian, believes the invisible drive at the biological core of manhood is the pursuit to prove self-worth. No one can give a man his self-worth – he has to give this to himself. The guidance of good men, of course, helps. 

To find this place, however, boys and men seek external ways to demonstrate potency, victory and independence – and this is what helps shape their search for meaning and purpose in life from a very early age.  
It is the warrior unfolding from within. 
There have been several shifts in society that have undermined our children and particularly impacted on our boy warriors.

Our little warriors are being smothered at birth. Those that get past being aborted, that is.

In days gone by, boys had the freedom to roam unsupervised on adventures that allowed them to be massively engaged in pursuits that helped them to learn and grow using life’s greatest teacher – experience. 
Our modern-day phobia that our world is unsafe, especially for our boys, is creating an environment where they are finding it ever more difficult to find that place of self-worth through external moments of potency and success 
We now run the risk of creating a generation of frustrated and angry young men. 
Again, IMHO, we have already arrived there.
The dominant male hormone testosterone is associated with sex and aggression and the search for social power, ambition and independence. Another key influencer (alongside cultural conditioning of course) may be that men have more receptors for the hormone vasopressin – which some researchers have associated with territoriality, hierarchy, competition and persistence, as well as the capacity to bond. 
Generally, boys are soft wired to be competitive and active, and are constantly in search of moments to prove their worth and value (in girls and women, oestrogen and oxytocin influence us in different ways, along with their cultural conditioning). 

The playground provides an early opportunity for boys to demonstrate worth but the safe, ‘fantastic plastic’ playgrounds of today are emasculating boyhood. 
We’ve removed the traditional monkey bars, seesaws and maypoles which were all wonderful opportunities to stretch oneself, hurt oneself when a poor decision was made and learn how to play well with other children – this is where we learnt healthy risk management. 
When it is said, "We have..", 'we' have done nothing of the sort.

THEY have. The feminists, the cultural Marxists, the Government dictators who constantly nag, cajole, threaten and force their creeds onto 'society' denigrating anyone who dares to speak otherwise.
Today’s playgrounds are less engaging and statistics show that children are injured more in modern playgrounds than in the scary old playgrounds because they no longer know how to cope with and manage risk. And keeping kids indoors certainly hasn’t made them any safer either. 
The demise of vigorous play as a valid and accepted part of the school playground has also had an impact. Not only did it allow for boys to discharge energy, it was another way children learnt the code of good play versus bad play. 
As boys tend to be less efficient at using language to resolve conflict, this is where they learnt non-verbal cues telling them it was time to leave and walk away. 
Leading play expert Dr Stuart Brown argues that we only develop an understanding of ‘play code’ in our childhood from playing endlessly with other children. 
Without a play code we can badly misread social situations and interpret a threat incorrectly and, without the ability to defuse the situation, this can turn into violence quickly, especially with a bellyful of alcohol. 

Other trends that are sucking the healthy warrior spirit from our young lads include the ban on keeping score in junior sports competitions so nobody under 14 loses (or wins!). This must be so exasperating for lads, another stolen validation. 
Some early years’ centres have banned superhero play so children are not allowed to dress in capes and masks to lead the fight of good versus bad – this actually needs to be encouraged rather than shamed as this courage settles deep within a boy’s psyche. 
We’ve also seen bans on tree climbing, playing chasey and even removing sandpits to be replaced by more mat time, phonics in isolation, more desk work, less free play and homework for 4 year olds. 
If I was a 5 year old today I would be angry too.
THIS is how our misandric society want boys to be like.

Boys need to learn at a young age what happens when they make poor choices in the pursuit of conquering the world. 
Our modern-day warriors need to become accountable for their own actions before they hit the party scenes of late adolescence and make a mistake that may be life-changing. 
We need to celebrate the bruises, the occasional stitches and the rare broken arm because boys learn deeply from real experience and seldom from lectures, especially from well-meaning mums. These wounds are external signs that you are a warrior. 
Our children’s lives tend to be micromanaged, over-supervised and planned, and there is very little freedom and autonomy. 
I believe the impact on boys is particularly negative and increasing levels of depression and mental illness in adolescence may be telling us that there are some very deep instinctual drives that need to be nurtured in a healthy way, rather than denied and crushed. 
As Michael Gurian explains,  
the strong drive for self worth and value is a profound and sacred journey that is the core to a healthy manhood and it starts at a boy’s birth: 
“This core of manhood represents maleness at its best – self sacrificing, devoted to service, loving, wise and powerful and at its worst – brutal, shaming, destructive, dangerous,” Gurian writes. 
We need to seriously consider giving boys back their boyhoods and opportunities for authentic growth in the company of good men, or we are going to continue seeing more and more 'coward-hitting' warriors wreaking havoc in our communities.

Maggie Dent is a parenting author, educator, speaker and mother of four sons. In February, she is releasing a DVD of her popular talk Boys, Boys, Boys: Understanding, Nurturing and Connecting to Today’s Boys, which is already available as streaming media at http://www.maggiedent.com

Maggie is welcome in the Tavern.

Pax


Friday, January 10, 2014

Nazis on Ice

The strong connection between Government and Business which we called Fascism reached it's pinnacle in National Socialist Germany and International Socialist Russia. Odd how Fascism is deemed the opposite of socialism, isn't it.

Of course all that is history. Yes? Nowadays the business aspects have given way to simple rent-seeking from a coterie of academics and NGOs who exist in unholy alliance with Government. At the expense of the taxpayer.

I promised I would get back to the fiasco on ice of the early new year. Things have started to be 'costed' and the taxpayer is once again going to be well out of pocket. Some will be giggling like the loons they are (their entire salary and perks as well as taxes are paid for by real taxpayers) and other more rational folk who work productively to pay taxes with be spitting icicles.


It is close to home in more ways than one. Stand on the Tavern roof and you can see the Capital of Antarctica in Kingston. (Well, on tip toe). The Climate Change wallahs congregate there, mixing with real scientists like crows wandering in a penguin colony.

Jo Nova came by to explain:

http://joannenova.com.au/2014/01/australian-taxpayers-will-pay-400000-cost-for-climate-scientists-ship-stuck-in-ice-total-cost-millions/ 
Australian taxpayers will pay $400,000 cost for climate scientist’s ship stuck in ice. Total cost “millions”.
 
The saga just keeps going. The Chinese Icebreaker  sent to rescue the Russian ship - Remember the Russian ship? It is still there - also became stuck, and has asked for help so the Aurora Australis with 52 extra passengers rescued from the Russian Charter boat had to stay nearby to help.
The Aurora is based in Hobart. A well known sight in the harbour.
Twenty two Russian sailors were trapped on board the Russian boat — the Akademik Sholaskiy.
The other scientists in Antarctica still don’t have their equipment.  
Costs for everyone involved are continuing to rise. Though there is a free-for-all on social media… 
But seriously, from  The Australian by Graham Lloyd: 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/hit-for-ice-rescue-revealed/story-fn59nm2j-1226794662899# 
TAXPAYERS will foot a $400,000 bill for the rescue of a group of climate scientists, tourists and journalists from a stranded Russian research vessel – an operation that has  
blown the contingency budget of Australia’s Antarctic program  
and disrupted its scientific work.  
The Antarctic Division in Hobart said it was revising plans and considering airlifting urgently needed scientific equipment that could not be unloaded from Aurora Australis before the ship was diverted from the Casey base to rescue the novice ice explorers just before Christmas 
The climate scientists and passengers aren’t free yet, their boat is waiting around to help the Chinese icebreaker. 
The rescue bill continued to mount yesterday as the return of the Aurora Australis to Casey base was delayed after the Chinese vessel Xue Long notified rescue authorities it had concerns about its ability to move back into open water due to heavy ice. 
The Australian icebreaker was put on standby and ordered to remain in open water as a precautionary measure. 
As usual, under the Treaty of the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), ships must respond to a distress message, and the costs are a “matter for the ship owners after the event…  These can include fuel costs, crew costs and loss of revenue.” 
Ultimately the costs could be millions: 
In a debriefing on the rescue mission, Australian Maritime Safety Authority general manager John Young said the ships involved in the rescue would each be responsible for their own costs. 
The costs, which would run to millions of dollars, could ultimately result in legal action between the ships’ insurance companies and the owners of the stranded Russian research vessel that sparked the rescue. 
I wonder what the fine print says on the agreement between the Australasian Antarctic Expedition and the Russian Charter boat?
And all this for what, you may wonder.?

We will let the Great Socialist of yesteryear say just what it was all about. The ice was blue and so were some of his words.

The taxpayers' words have not been sought.



There are going to be quite a few chucked off the gravy boat, hopefully.

As for you. Go off the grid.

Seek the Monastery.

Pax