Let's face it, we're all skewed.

In tenth grade, I was a socialist and told my friends I was a socialist. My reasoning was simple: socialists are good people who want the best life for other people and I was just such a person and therefore a socialist.  Meanwhile, all those folks around me who were not socialists meant that much future missionary work remained.

Then one day, while in study hall staring out the window, I had a thought that was potentially detrimental to my socialist beliefs. The thought itself is less important than my reaction to it. I tried to swat it like it was some buzzing, stinging insect that should be quickly crushed. The reaction seemed almost instinctual. A bit surprised, I then had a couple of thoughts about that thought. First, given my strong belief that the entire world should be organized on the principles of Socialism, it might be a good idea to think the matter through. Second, having attended parochial school, I recognized the impulse toward my own thought suppression. Occasionally, I would question the divinity of Christ or the Virgin Birth and suppress these thoughts because there was that whole damnation thing to worry about. Of course, the divinity of Christ deals with questions beyond the material realm.  Socialism, however, is all about the material realm.

So I hopped on the train of thought that eventually undermined my faith in socialism. At the same time, I thought about my reluctance to get on board. I decided my self-identification as a Socialist had a lot to do with it.  This was sixty years ago and at the time my political identification was of only a few months duration so, who knows, with a few more months of self-inoculation against contrary thoughts I might have become Bernie Sanders.

Still, we can't question everything and, given that reality, accepting received wisdom is useful. At the same time, I've noticed over the years that most individuals who are hyper-critical of the status quo treat their ideas for sweeping, transformational change, as a matter of faith. National interest was often equated with imperialism and opposed. True American patriotism, in their telling, demands loyalty to an improved nation that we can build using a blueprint that no one quite has access to. Also, holding distinctly contradictory opinions -- being for hydropower one minute and against that damn dam the next -- is a side-effect. Interestingly, these same individuals were often quite conservative -- imperialist, even -- where their personal life was concerned.

If I asked an awkward question, the topic would suddenly change. During a conversation, I might point out that a failure to act in the national interest will only cause confusion among foreign nations, and make our own actions less predictable. Then I would say (after the topic was changed) that segregation was a government program aimed at social planning (in a "careful about what you wish for" sort of way). The nuclear power industry they now oppose was created by the federal government, using the expertise of government scientists and the output of government labs. Politicians promised energy so abundant that it would no longer need to be metered. Unmentioned was the highly toxic nuclear "waste" plutonium the reactors would produce -- handy for H-bomb building and powering aircraft carrier battle groups. The utility executives The China Syndrome portrayed as endangering the entire planet were basically doing what they were told. So, designing our green energy future using the same approach may produce a result different from the one envisioned. After all, a million windmills draining energy from the atmosphere could also change the climate.

The reluctance to question socially acquired beliefs may be a good thing on an individual basis since we have to take much on faith as a practical matter.  Lately, it's become a strong -- perhaps even dominant -- social force tangled up with politics and used in the allocation of vast sums of government resources. As a result, we shall choose our next future exercising less care than when we chose our last phone.

The unexamined Utopia is not worth pursuing.

Bjorn Lomborg Declares “False Alarm” on Climate Hysteria

Marvel wonders where the marvel went

Many fans of established franchises such as Star Wars and Lord of the Rings are bewildered by the radical change in direction taken by the new owners of these IPs.  They watch a favorite white male heterosexual character reemerge as a black female gay character and wonder: what is the point? It appears that one person's "retconning" is another person's wrecking.

When an aggressive civilization conquers another they will typically take over important cultural sites of the conquered people and put their own important symbols there. The Christians turned the pagan Pantheon in Rome into a Christian cathedral. The Hagia Sophia started as a Christian church in Constantinople and became a Grand Mosque in Istanbul.

These actions show the conquered who's in charge and help identify the remaining objectors for future cancelation. This is what happened when the imperial Romans placed a statue of the Emperor in the Second Temple in Jerusalem and "encouraged" the inhabitants to make offerings. The resulting fuss is best described by that old Latin saying, "They made a desert and called it peace."

So Super Hero fans might complain that those who have conquered Hollywood should create new characters embodying the cultural traits they wish to emerge triumphant and leave the formerly established icons alone (that would make good business sense!). However, that would miss the point. Conquest is not about making money, it is about taking control and rubbing "their" noses in it. The money and prestige come after. So perhaps our new cultural overlords will create a cultural desert and call it peace while forcing the doubters to agree. Or perhaps they will find their actions were premature and those whose noses are now out-of-joint are too formidable to contend with. Stay tuned.

MARVEL "Re-evaluating" After Disastrous Phase 4

The Bible Becomes Bile

According to the New York Post, "pro-transgender activists ate pages from a Bible as they protested an event featuring Matt Walsh and his controversial documentary 'What is a Woman?' at the University of Wisconsin-Madison."

They should take care. If the Bible thus consumed is truly digested, it will get into their bloodstream. This would make a good horror movie for progressives.

The Good Activist eats the family bible at a highly publicized "last supper." That night spiritual beings (demons sent by Donald Trump to torment him -- or so he thinks) appear -- which he puts down to a nightmare caused by acid reflux until they linker into his waking hours. These demons struggle with his angelic system of ordained Marxist Beliefs. He thinks he is becoming delusional as life lessons from the Bible sneak into his thoughts. He begins to feel unfamiliar sensations like happiness, tolerance (as opposed to "tolerance"), and respect for others. He is no longer hostile to the diversity of thought but instead finds encountering other points of view stimulating.

As the fog of depression lifts from his mind, he realizes the spiritual beings are actually his ancestors whose traditional beliefs appeal to the better angles of his nature. For instance, he no longer believes Clarence Thomas is a White Supremacist. He finds that he can now speak obvious truths and even smile as he is canceled and the red carpet leading to a full professorship is yanked from beneath his feet. His former associates are aghast but that's OK because he can now function in the real world and no longer needs the "reality-based community" to feel a weak, uncertain, and fleeting sense of purpose.

Biden's DOJ gets legal-slapdown

Courting the Children on Climate

In their efforts to gain ever more power, the left seems to favor those who either have yet to reach "the age of reason" (Greta Thunberg, the students at Yale Law) or are well beyond it (Joe Biden). Apparently, they find "a little thinking" among their agents a threat to the movement. So now they have created a court case attacking Montana land management while using children as a shield and wielding the aliments of two-year-olds like Galadriel's sword. You see, the world's going to end before they can vote, on account of their living in a climate-controlled home with hot and cold running water where they don't have to take a trip to the outhouse when it's 40 below and their pee freezes before it hits the ground.

I'm thinking this is a left-wing managed and staged court proceeding so the people being sued won't put up much of a defense and the jury will be overwhelmingly "for-the-children" (if the members have recently moved to Bozeman from Berkeley, that would be a plus). In fact, I would argue for a jury of their peers, which would mean mental ages of no more than six years.

Unfortunately for the Left, a stout defense would throw much doubt on the validity of "man-made climate change." It could even examine the considerable damage caused by the power-grabbing (not power-generating) programs the movement champions. Personally, I think the actions of the adults involved (if I may give their court filings a twist) harm the children's physical and psychological health and safety; interfere with family and cultural foundations and integrity; and cause economic deprivations -- not the state of Montana. Therefore, their suit will likely target fellow-traveling bureaucrats who want to lose, and by losing, win.

Children's Climate Trial

Proto Fascist or Moto Democrat?

"What does Giorgia Meloni's Win Mean for Italy?" asks Peter Zeihan, conjuring up the ghost (or is it the Spirit?) of Italian Fascism, on account of her "God, country, family" mantra.

Benito Mussolini, the Godfather of fascism, was a socialist. Back in 1964, I was in tenth grade reading a novel by Upton Sinclair (himself a Socialist) and he introduced a loud-mouthed Socialist agitator named Mussolini. Imagine my surprise. Turns out Mussolini modeled his fascist party on Lenin's Bolshevik Party, which ruthlessly ran the United Soviet Socialist Republics of the day (aka Russia). True, Benito was all about "the country" as long as he and his gang were running everything in the country, but as for God and family -- not so much. The fascists had party members in every organization to enforce the party line, so the people who ran businesses were run by the party.

According to Upton Sinclair, the National Socialist "brownshirt" street brawlers who slugged it out with the communist/socialist Antifa during the Weimar Republic were also Socialists -- so it was kind of an intramural sport. Later Stalin's USSR and Hitler's Third Reich found common ground -- Poland. Given the history, I never agreed with the progressive propensity to label small government conservatives as fascists, at least here in the U.S. After all, what American Conservatives want to conserve are things like the Bill of Rights and local governments with local control.

As for Italy's political future: who knows?

Whither Italy?

International Money Monkey Business

Jeff Snider has a YouTube video where he explains international money flows.

For a long time, just to keep it simple, I've told people that the U.S.A. imports air conditioners and other stuff and exports debt -- mostly government debt -- as well as land (not the dirt, but the ownership of the dirt) and other assets. Wall Street likes this because they market the debt and manage the assets and Washington DC politicians like this because they can spend an extra trillion in the run-up to an election without having to raise taxes (to think they will curb that habit before it's too late is, perhaps, asking too much). Foreign financiers use the dollar in dealings with other nations. They also consider the U.S. a safe haven (even when they are ideologically committed to destroying the U.S. -- see the Chinese Politburo).

I don't think there is a shortage of Eurodollars so much as an increase in moral hazard. In the 1990s there was a belief that China would bolster the world financial system. Unfortunately, that would require the CCP to give up control of their national economy (and they do see it as theirs). It's become apparent the communists will not let that happen and are quite willing to stiff investors -- especially foreign investors -- to keep control. The killing of the Chinese capitalist chicken has scared the Eurodollar money-monkies and caused a tightening of lending standards while increasing the "safe-haven" appeal of the dollar.

Then there's Putin punishing the world and the world punishing Putin...

Is the dollar sluggish or thuggish?

Why, it's either too loud or not loud enough

Apparently, I'm not the only person annoyed by the sound quality of current movies. I'll turn it up to understand what the actors are saying and then turn it down when the music starts blaring or the explosions start exploding.

Mangini says that in the old days, "you could count on an actor's theatricality to deliver a line to the back seats." But acting styles have changed so dramatically over the years that it has become much more difficult to capture great sound on the set. When actors adopt that more naturalistic style, "it's even harder for the production sound mixer to capture really quality sound. Now we get those compromised microphone positions here in post-production, reaching for a dialogue line that is barely intelligible or maybe even mumbled because it's an acting style, and already, we're behind the 8-ball in trying to figure out a way to make all of those words intelligible."

slashfilm.com: here's why movie dialogue is difficult to understand