Day: March 5, 2018

Is There a Link Between Progressivism and Depression?


The basic philosophy of progressivism is that both man and society are perfectible. Conservatism has been distorted and smeared over the years, but at its most elemental it is a philosophy of “small is better” and is reflected in politics when one hears calls for limited government and less taxes. Edmund Burke, political philosopher and theorist, and the ‘father’ of conservatism said the primary characteristics for a well-functioning society are tradition and obligation.

Because progressivism believes in unbridled individual freedom, that means whether the left realizes it or not, it requires the destruction of limitations because limits put the brakes on behavior that knows no boundaries and therefore crosses over into the boundaries of other people. This will usually require state intervention to enforce the maintenance of boundaries that have been violated, a vicious circle if there ever was one and pinpoints how progressivism inevitably leads to statism and authoritarianism.

Progressivism has led to today’s postmodernism that in turn leads people to think that life is unlimited (who knows how many self-help books use that word over and over again) and is aptly described in the following from a recent essay in The Imaginative Conservative, “Orestes Brownson and the Limits of Freedom:”

Postmodern man — especially in the United States, where issues such as transgender, transsexuality, and transhumanism are popular topics in mainstream society — has constructed for himself a hell of subjectivism that is ultimately as superficial and irrational as calling a dog a cat and then acting as if this designation is legitimate by feeding the dog cat food, offering it catnip, and setting up a scratching post for the dog to sharpen its claws. It is an old problem, one that has its roots in ancient Greece with the sophist Protagoras’ declaration that “Man is the measure of all things.” If man is the measure of all things, there can be no God. Man cannot measure the infinite.

Essentially Progressivism calls for never-ending change, another area where it differs with conservativism in a big way. Conservatism, as its name implies, means to conserve, as in saving what is true, beautiful and unchanging over time. In a word, tradition, as first articulated by Edmund Burke. Progressivism is inherently never satisfied with the status quo. It is always demanding change and pointing to even the most trivial things in the life that are either unfair or offensive or both. It is the philosophy of perpetual grievance that needs to keep people angry in order to keep them in line and not distracted so people won’t consider any alternative points of view. Daniel Greenfield on his blog Sultan Knish described it perfectly with one sentence: 

“To be a progressive is to be committed to perpetual reform in the name of perpetual grievance for perpetual power.”

At the end of 2016, it was reported that around 16% of the population is taking anti-depressants and other psychiatric drugs and another report says that “More Americans suffering from stress, anxiety and depression, study finds”. 

So what is going on in American society and why is there an epidemic of depression and anxiety? To extrapolate on Daniel Greenfield’s quote, what’s going on is that progressivism leads to perpetual discontent. And what happens at a personal level is when the primary values of hyperindividualism are more money, more fun, more things, more vacations, how can one possibly be content? And in the constant and exhausting search for personal peace and acceptance, one inevitably becomes either depressed or stressed out or both. It also leads to isolation and loneliness, usually significant contributors to depression. These are the unintended consequences of unrestrained radical individualism of the left.

The perpetual grievance machine of Progressivism at the political macro level is just reflecting what’s going on at the individual micro level: FOMO, the Fear Of Missing Out, also known as envy. Remove grievance and identity politics from the agenda of the Democrats and what do they have left? Absolutely nothing — and the party would collapse. But in the meantime, tens of millions of Americans are hearing from liberal politicians, celebrities and the mainstream media how nothing is ever good enough and so and so is responsible. No wonder everyone is depressed.

The basic philosophy of progressivism is that both man and society are perfectible. Conservatism has been distorted and smeared over the years, but at its most elemental it is a philosophy of “small is better” and is reflected in politics when one hears calls for limited government and less taxes. Edmund Burke, political philosopher and theorist, and the ‘father’ of conservatism said the primary characteristics for a well-functioning society are tradition and obligation.

Because progressivism believes in unbridled individual freedom, that means whether the left realizes it or not, it requires the destruction of limitations because limits put the brakes on behavior that knows no boundaries and therefore crosses over into the boundaries of other people. This will usually require state intervention to enforce the maintenance of boundaries that have been violated, a vicious circle if there ever was one and pinpoints how progressivism inevitably leads to statism and authoritarianism.

Progressivism has led to today’s postmodernism that in turn leads people to think that life is unlimited (who knows how many self-help books use that word over and over again) and is aptly described in the following from a recent essay in The Imaginative Conservative, “Orestes Brownson and the Limits of Freedom:”

Postmodern man — especially in the United States, where issues such as transgender, transsexuality, and transhumanism are popular topics in mainstream society — has constructed for himself a hell of subjectivism that is ultimately as superficial and irrational as calling a dog a cat and then acting as if this designation is legitimate by feeding the dog cat food, offering it catnip, and setting up a scratching post for the dog to sharpen its claws. It is an old problem, one that has its roots in ancient Greece with the sophist Protagoras’ declaration that “Man is the measure of all things.” If man is the measure of all things, there can be no God. Man cannot measure the infinite.

Essentially Progressivism calls for never-ending change, another area where it differs with conservativism in a big way. Conservatism, as its name implies, means to conserve, as in saving what is true, beautiful and unchanging over time. In a word, tradition, as first articulated by Edmund Burke. Progressivism is inherently never satisfied with the status quo. It is always demanding change and pointing to even the most trivial things in the life that are either unfair or offensive or both. It is the philosophy of perpetual grievance that needs to keep people angry in order to keep them in line and not distracted so people won’t consider any alternative points of view. Daniel Greenfield on his blog Sultan Knish described it perfectly with one sentence: 

“To be a progressive is to be committed to perpetual reform in the name of perpetual grievance for perpetual power.”

At the end of 2016, it was reported that around 16% of the population is taking anti-depressants and other psychiatric drugs and another report says that “More Americans suffering from stress, anxiety and depression, study finds”. 

So what is going on in American society and why is there an epidemic of depression and anxiety? To extrapolate on Daniel Greenfield’s quote, what’s going on is that progressivism leads to perpetual discontent. And what happens at a personal level is when the primary values of hyperindividualism are more money, more fun, more things, more vacations, how can one possibly be content? And in the constant and exhausting search for personal peace and acceptance, one inevitably becomes either depressed or stressed out or both. It also leads to isolation and loneliness, usually significant contributors to depression. These are the unintended consequences of unrestrained radical individualism of the left.

The perpetual grievance machine of Progressivism at the political macro level is just reflecting what’s going on at the individual micro level: FOMO, the Fear Of Missing Out, also known as envy. Remove grievance and identity politics from the agenda of the Democrats and what do they have left? Absolutely nothing — and the party would collapse. But in the meantime, tens of millions of Americans are hearing from liberal politicians, celebrities and the mainstream media how nothing is ever good enough and so and so is responsible. No wonder everyone is depressed.



Source link

Jeff Sessions — Ninja or Nincompoop?


Conventional wisdom, as shaped by the mainstream media, is becoming more and more schizophrenic. President Trump is a Russian stooge, doing Putin’s bidding, yet he is reigniting the cold war via new Russian sanctions. His White House is in chaos, yet the left is apoplectic over his barrage of policy initiatives. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is shooting blanks and at the same time is circling the Oval Office, ready to pounce and indict.

Then there is Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Lurking in the weeds, moving with stealth and deception like a ninja. Or playing Rip Van Winkle, taking a nap, ignoring the waves of corruption engulfing the DOJ and FBI. Which is it?

Let’s look at the latter scenario first. That Jeff Sessions, in the view of his boss, is Mr. Magoo. Trump also described Sessions as “beleaguered.” Now almost 14 months into the Trump presidency, the evidence of massive corruption in the Obama DOJ and FBI is piling up. As outlined on these and other pages, the Obama administration attempted to prevent Trump’s election. Having failed, it began a new effort to undermine and destroy his presidency via illegal wiretaps, leaks, misleading the FISA court, and pushing the bogus Russian collusion narrative.

Trump tweeted his displeasure with his AG and the OIG, publicly criticizing their lack of action and political bias.

Each week reveals new revelations. The latest being FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe leaking investigation details to journalists, all without consequence or accountability, while Michael Flynn is indicted for misstating a minor detail to the FBI.

It’s not only Trump noticing Session’s ineptitude. Fox Business host Lou Dobbs tweeted, “Sessions has fallen ill, he’s incapacitated in some fashion, or he’s been coopted or captured: to preserve any dignity, for the good of the country he needs to resign.” This after when Sessions was questioned by House investigators, he constantly deferred to his deputy, Rod Rosenstein. The same Rosenstein who approved FISA warrant requests to spy on Carter Page, and by extension, the Trump campaign.

GOP Rep Matt Gaetz, in the thick of the House investigation also weighed in, saying, “If Jeff Sessions does not appoint a second special counsel, then we need a new Attorney General.” Gaetz is concerned that even if the OIG or Congress finds evidence of wrongdoing, it’s the DOJ that will need to do the prosecuting. Congress does not have that power and all evidence points to sleepy Jeff Sessions oblivious to the corruption in his own agency.

Other members of Congress, such as Trump supporters Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows have called on Sessions to resign, saying that, “By recusing himself from the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the United States election, Sessions has lost control, allowing for a leaky and unnecessarily overdrawn, partisan investigation.”

All painting the picture of an inept Mr. Magoo as Attorney General, letting the lunatics run the asylum, doing a grave disservice to his president and the country.

Now the opposite scenario, that AG Sessions is indeed a ninja, working behind the scenes to drain the swamp, but doing it, out of necessity, quietly yet methodically.

What is Sessions’résumé? 12 years as a U.S. Attorney, two years as Alabama AG, three terms as a conservative U.S. senator, one of the earliest supporters of candidate Trump. Nearly 30 years navigating the swamp through a solid conservative lens. To say that he doesn’t understand current events or the significance of his role in all of this is hard to fathom.

Trump is no fool. And he doesn’t suffer fools either. Watch speeches or interviews from decades ago and Trump’s core beliefs have changed little. He has spoken constantly of the swamp, fighting the establishment of the media, Democrats, and even his own party. Why would Trump tolerate an inept AG, rather than uttering his famous, “You’re fired!”

 

Jeff Sessions offered to resign in September of last year, and before that in June. If Trump was so displeased, he could have accepted Sessions’ resignation. But he didn’t. What if this is all a grand charade? A deception to keep his enemies off guard?

As Thomas Lifson at American Thinker and Vachel Lindsay on Twitter have outlined, Trump and Sessions may be staging their own reality show, keeping the media and members of Congress barking up the wrong tree. A grand but necessary deception in order for the swamp to be drained effectively.

Trump may well be dispelling any conception that Sessions or OIG Horowitz are Trump stooges by publicly berating them. Repeatedly. So when the OIG report comes out, Sessions has no political restraints against unleashing the DOJ on the DOJ/FBI corruptocrats.

Trump understands what he is up against. As the old saying goes, when you try to kill the king, you had better not miss. In this case the king is the deep state, powerful, well entrenched, tentacles everywhere. Picking off one bad actor at a time may not work, as the beast can regrow its tentacles. Cutting off the head is the only way to kill the beast.

Rep. Devin Nunes, at the cutting edge of this investigation, perhaps gave a hint at the grand strategy. Unlike his colleagues, piling on Sessions and calling for his resignation, Nunes, “Broke with President Trump and said he welcomes Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ announcement that the Justice Department’s inspector general would investigate alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

Nunes has been a pit bull investigating deep state abuses. Has he suddenly gone soft by giving Sessions and the OIG his full support? Or is he lifting the curtain on Trump and Sessions’ grand deception?

So, which is it? Is Jeff Sessions a doddering dolt, oblivious to the fact that his own agency is on fire, burning with the flames of corruption? A nincompoop?

Or is this a grand deception, Trump and one of his earliest supporters, working stealthily beyond the public eye, getting their ducks in a row before unleashing The Storm? A ninja?

When Trump secured the GOP nomination, he told supporters, “I understand the responsibility of carrying the mantle and I will never ever let you down.” He hasn’t broken his promise yet.

Readers will have to form their own opinions. As Qanon likes to say, “Expand your thinking.” Are the talking heads on CNN and Fox News thoughtful analysts or are they pushing a preconceived agenda for ratings and acclaim within their beltway echo chamber? Is President Trump another vacuous politician or is he a brilliant strategist, following through on his promises, always several steps ahead of his detractors?

This should play out over the coming weeks and months. Boom or bust.

Brian C Joondeph, MD, MPS, a Denver based physician and writer. Follow him on Facebook,  LinkedIn and Twitter.

Conventional wisdom, as shaped by the mainstream media, is becoming more and more schizophrenic. President Trump is a Russian stooge, doing Putin’s bidding, yet he is reigniting the cold war via new Russian sanctions. His White House is in chaos, yet the left is apoplectic over his barrage of policy initiatives. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is shooting blanks and at the same time is circling the Oval Office, ready to pounce and indict.

Then there is Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Lurking in the weeds, moving with stealth and deception like a ninja. Or playing Rip Van Winkle, taking a nap, ignoring the waves of corruption engulfing the DOJ and FBI. Which is it?

Let’s look at the latter scenario first. That Jeff Sessions, in the view of his boss, is Mr. Magoo. Trump also described Sessions as “beleaguered.” Now almost 14 months into the Trump presidency, the evidence of massive corruption in the Obama DOJ and FBI is piling up. As outlined on these and other pages, the Obama administration attempted to prevent Trump’s election. Having failed, it began a new effort to undermine and destroy his presidency via illegal wiretaps, leaks, misleading the FISA court, and pushing the bogus Russian collusion narrative.

Trump tweeted his displeasure with his AG and the OIG, publicly criticizing their lack of action and political bias.

Each week reveals new revelations. The latest being FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe leaking investigation details to journalists, all without consequence or accountability, while Michael Flynn is indicted for misstating a minor detail to the FBI.

It’s not only Trump noticing Session’s ineptitude. Fox Business host Lou Dobbs tweeted, “Sessions has fallen ill, he’s incapacitated in some fashion, or he’s been coopted or captured: to preserve any dignity, for the good of the country he needs to resign.” This after when Sessions was questioned by House investigators, he constantly deferred to his deputy, Rod Rosenstein. The same Rosenstein who approved FISA warrant requests to spy on Carter Page, and by extension, the Trump campaign.

GOP Rep Matt Gaetz, in the thick of the House investigation also weighed in, saying, “If Jeff Sessions does not appoint a second special counsel, then we need a new Attorney General.” Gaetz is concerned that even if the OIG or Congress finds evidence of wrongdoing, it’s the DOJ that will need to do the prosecuting. Congress does not have that power and all evidence points to sleepy Jeff Sessions oblivious to the corruption in his own agency.

Other members of Congress, such as Trump supporters Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows have called on Sessions to resign, saying that, “By recusing himself from the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the United States election, Sessions has lost control, allowing for a leaky and unnecessarily overdrawn, partisan investigation.”

All painting the picture of an inept Mr. Magoo as Attorney General, letting the lunatics run the asylum, doing a grave disservice to his president and the country.

Now the opposite scenario, that AG Sessions is indeed a ninja, working behind the scenes to drain the swamp, but doing it, out of necessity, quietly yet methodically.

What is Sessions’résumé? 12 years as a U.S. Attorney, two years as Alabama AG, three terms as a conservative U.S. senator, one of the earliest supporters of candidate Trump. Nearly 30 years navigating the swamp through a solid conservative lens. To say that he doesn’t understand current events or the significance of his role in all of this is hard to fathom.

Trump is no fool. And he doesn’t suffer fools either. Watch speeches or interviews from decades ago and Trump’s core beliefs have changed little. He has spoken constantly of the swamp, fighting the establishment of the media, Democrats, and even his own party. Why would Trump tolerate an inept AG, rather than uttering his famous, “You’re fired!”

 

Jeff Sessions offered to resign in September of last year, and before that in June. If Trump was so displeased, he could have accepted Sessions’ resignation. But he didn’t. What if this is all a grand charade? A deception to keep his enemies off guard?

As Thomas Lifson at American Thinker and Vachel Lindsay on Twitter have outlined, Trump and Sessions may be staging their own reality show, keeping the media and members of Congress barking up the wrong tree. A grand but necessary deception in order for the swamp to be drained effectively.

Trump may well be dispelling any conception that Sessions or OIG Horowitz are Trump stooges by publicly berating them. Repeatedly. So when the OIG report comes out, Sessions has no political restraints against unleashing the DOJ on the DOJ/FBI corruptocrats.

Trump understands what he is up against. As the old saying goes, when you try to kill the king, you had better not miss. In this case the king is the deep state, powerful, well entrenched, tentacles everywhere. Picking off one bad actor at a time may not work, as the beast can regrow its tentacles. Cutting off the head is the only way to kill the beast.

Rep. Devin Nunes, at the cutting edge of this investigation, perhaps gave a hint at the grand strategy. Unlike his colleagues, piling on Sessions and calling for his resignation, Nunes, “Broke with President Trump and said he welcomes Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ announcement that the Justice Department’s inspector general would investigate alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

Nunes has been a pit bull investigating deep state abuses. Has he suddenly gone soft by giving Sessions and the OIG his full support? Or is he lifting the curtain on Trump and Sessions’ grand deception?

So, which is it? Is Jeff Sessions a doddering dolt, oblivious to the fact that his own agency is on fire, burning with the flames of corruption? A nincompoop?

Or is this a grand deception, Trump and one of his earliest supporters, working stealthily beyond the public eye, getting their ducks in a row before unleashing The Storm? A ninja?

When Trump secured the GOP nomination, he told supporters, “I understand the responsibility of carrying the mantle and I will never ever let you down.” He hasn’t broken his promise yet.

Readers will have to form their own opinions. As Qanon likes to say, “Expand your thinking.” Are the talking heads on CNN and Fox News thoughtful analysts or are they pushing a preconceived agenda for ratings and acclaim within their beltway echo chamber? Is President Trump another vacuous politician or is he a brilliant strategist, following through on his promises, always several steps ahead of his detractors?

This should play out over the coming weeks and months. Boom or bust.

Brian C Joondeph, MD, MPS, a Denver based physician and writer. Follow him on Facebook,  LinkedIn and Twitter.



Source link

Two-Year-Old Parker and Michelle Obama's Portrait


Didn’t a significant figure in Black history instruct Americans to judge each other on the “content of their  character, not the color of our skin?” Shouldn’t character, rather than skin color, be the primary focus for everyone who lives in this country? 

Unfortunately, that’s not the case.

Recently, Michelle Obama’s official portrait was unveiled, but rather than just thank artist Amy Sherald the former first lady couldn’t control the temptation to drag skin color into a historical event.  After taking in the massive portrait of herself, Michelle had this to say about children who would eventually see her image:

I’m also thinking of all the young people…who will see an image of someone who looks like them hanging on the wall in this great American institution. I know the impact that will have on their lives, b/c I was one of those girls.

The premise of Michelle’s statement is that the former first lady spent her childhood wandering around Chicago museums looking for paintings depicting people who look like her but couldn’t find one.

And people believe that balderdash.

Based on her statement, either Michelle shunned museums as a child or thinks she’s the first black woman that black children find relatable

The truth is that throughout the history of art black and brown people have always been the depicted in paintings. In fact,  Alessandro de’ Medici, son of the most powerful and culturally-influential family in Florence, Italy, from the 15th to the mid 18th century, was the half son of a Moorish slave.  Alessandro was about as white as Barack Obama is Irish.

Now, barely two weeks after Michelle’s oh-so-relatable reveal, Americans are supposed to believe that a museum-dweller spontaneously found 2-year-old child mesmerized by Michelle Obama’s gigantic likeness?

Well, that’s the story.

Apparently, Ben Hines from North Carolina said he was touring the Smithsonian looking for “patriots” with his wife when, quite by accident, he happened upon little Parker Curry glaring at the former first lady’s image.

Ben captured the candid photo and posted it on Facebook where it went viral.  Hines told Buzzfeed

It was so touching and uplifting for me to see this beautiful child looking at a beautiful portrait of a powerful woman. I was so delighted to have been in the right place at the right time.

The little girl Parker’s mother, Jessica Curry, said her daughter “just wanted to stare…She was fascinated.” 

After Hines’ photo went viral, Amy Sherald, the creator of Michelle’s portrait chimed in on how touched she was by the photo that depicted a small child, the black first lady in the large white dress, and the hovering Black security guard. 

Amy said the photo brought her back to her first field trip to a museum where she saw an image by white realist artist Bob Bartlett of a “black man standing in front of a house.”

Sherald said:

There was a painting of a black man standing in front of a house. I don’t remember a lot about my childhood, but I do have a few emotional memories etched into my mind forever and seeing that painting of a man that looked like he could be my father stopped me dead in my tracks. This was my first time seeing real paintings that weren’t in a book and also weren’t painted in another century. I didn’t realize that none of them had me in them until I saw that painting of Bo’s.

So, Amy Sherald doesn’t remember her childhood but does remember seeing a painting of a black man because that’s when she realized that Art History books excluded Black people?

Clearly Amy, along with Michelle, visited the wrong museums.

The buzz now is that Parker Curry staring at Michelle’s portrait proves that images are relevant and that 2-year-old minority children, barely out of diapers, notice when they’re not represented equally in art museums.

Back to Parker Curry at the Smithsonian.  For starters, Michelle’s skin color in the Sherald painting is an odd death-pallor gray, not black or brown.  Therefore,  it’s highly unlikely a little girl thought Michelle looked like her. ‘

Moreover, how about we give the child credit for appreciating the colorful geometric shapes, which is what 2-years old do, or acknowledge that the mere size of the portrait stunned the kid.  No, instead, the default reaction for some on the left is to focus on race immediately and to use a toddler’s response to prove something about lack of representation in the art world.

What’s worse is the contrived nature of a photo that uses an innocent child to give validation to Michelle’s bizarre “looks like them” statement on the day her Smithsonian portrait was unveiled at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington, D.C. 

The whole Parker in the Smithsonian photo seems manufactured.  Instead of art, for art’s sake, or a little girl just looking at a painting, now museums, art history and, portraiture have become another pawn in a discussion about race that is tearing this nation apart.

Jeannie hosts a blog at www.jeannie-ology.com

Didn’t a significant figure in Black history instruct Americans to judge each other on the “content of their  character, not the color of our skin?” Shouldn’t character, rather than skin color, be the primary focus for everyone who lives in this country? 

Unfortunately, that’s not the case.

Recently, Michelle Obama’s official portrait was unveiled, but rather than just thank artist Amy Sherald the former first lady couldn’t control the temptation to drag skin color into a historical event.  After taking in the massive portrait of herself, Michelle had this to say about children who would eventually see her image:

I’m also thinking of all the young people…who will see an image of someone who looks like them hanging on the wall in this great American institution. I know the impact that will have on their lives, b/c I was one of those girls.

The premise of Michelle’s statement is that the former first lady spent her childhood wandering around Chicago museums looking for paintings depicting people who look like her but couldn’t find one.

And people believe that balderdash.

Based on her statement, either Michelle shunned museums as a child or thinks she’s the first black woman that black children find relatable

The truth is that throughout the history of art black and brown people have always been the depicted in paintings. In fact,  Alessandro de’ Medici, son of the most powerful and culturally-influential family in Florence, Italy, from the 15th to the mid 18th century, was the half son of a Moorish slave.  Alessandro was about as white as Barack Obama is Irish.

Now, barely two weeks after Michelle’s oh-so-relatable reveal, Americans are supposed to believe that a museum-dweller spontaneously found 2-year-old child mesmerized by Michelle Obama’s gigantic likeness?

Well, that’s the story.

Apparently, Ben Hines from North Carolina said he was touring the Smithsonian looking for “patriots” with his wife when, quite by accident, he happened upon little Parker Curry glaring at the former first lady’s image.

Ben captured the candid photo and posted it on Facebook where it went viral.  Hines told Buzzfeed

It was so touching and uplifting for me to see this beautiful child looking at a beautiful portrait of a powerful woman. I was so delighted to have been in the right place at the right time.

The little girl Parker’s mother, Jessica Curry, said her daughter “just wanted to stare…She was fascinated.” 

After Hines’ photo went viral, Amy Sherald, the creator of Michelle’s portrait chimed in on how touched she was by the photo that depicted a small child, the black first lady in the large white dress, and the hovering Black security guard. 

Amy said the photo brought her back to her first field trip to a museum where she saw an image by white realist artist Bob Bartlett of a “black man standing in front of a house.”

Sherald said:

There was a painting of a black man standing in front of a house. I don’t remember a lot about my childhood, but I do have a few emotional memories etched into my mind forever and seeing that painting of a man that looked like he could be my father stopped me dead in my tracks. This was my first time seeing real paintings that weren’t in a book and also weren’t painted in another century. I didn’t realize that none of them had me in them until I saw that painting of Bo’s.

So, Amy Sherald doesn’t remember her childhood but does remember seeing a painting of a black man because that’s when she realized that Art History books excluded Black people?

Clearly Amy, along with Michelle, visited the wrong museums.

The buzz now is that Parker Curry staring at Michelle’s portrait proves that images are relevant and that 2-year-old minority children, barely out of diapers, notice when they’re not represented equally in art museums.

Back to Parker Curry at the Smithsonian.  For starters, Michelle’s skin color in the Sherald painting is an odd death-pallor gray, not black or brown.  Therefore,  it’s highly unlikely a little girl thought Michelle looked like her. ‘

Moreover, how about we give the child credit for appreciating the colorful geometric shapes, which is what 2-years old do, or acknowledge that the mere size of the portrait stunned the kid.  No, instead, the default reaction for some on the left is to focus on race immediately and to use a toddler’s response to prove something about lack of representation in the art world.

What’s worse is the contrived nature of a photo that uses an innocent child to give validation to Michelle’s bizarre “looks like them” statement on the day her Smithsonian portrait was unveiled at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington, D.C. 

The whole Parker in the Smithsonian photo seems manufactured.  Instead of art, for art’s sake, or a little girl just looking at a painting, now museums, art history and, portraiture have become another pawn in a discussion about race that is tearing this nation apart.

Jeannie hosts a blog at www.jeannie-ology.com



Source link

The Democrats as Russian Dupes, 2018 Edition


No wonder the Russian meddlers are laughing – the Dems are wittingly colluding in sowing discord through sleazy identity politics and by fostering extreme multiculturalism.  Lacking substantive policy ideas, their main hope for electoral success is to divide and conquer.  Russia is a major geopolitical adversary, which makes the Democrats the enemy within.

The thread that binds our great tapestry of cultures was woven by our founding fathers “in order to form a more perfect union.”  Their system of checks and balances ensures that rationality and compromise establish a balance between our contradictory instincts of cooperation and competition.  Their emphasis upon individual liberty – rather than the organic state – helped ensure that a thriving civil society based on shared values would emerge from the nasty and brutish conditions of a state of nature.

Our union was an improvement, but it started imperfectly; nevertheless, we’ve always been guided by our nation’s motto.  Though there have been several iterations of the Great Seal of the United States, the one constant is the inscription “E Pluribus Unum.”  Historically, legal immigrants embraced this ideal and eventually assimilated into America, particularly those processed through Ellis Island.  While proud of their heritage, they were grateful for the bountiful opportunities America bequeaths to those who relish the promise of America and who cherish the ways of the last great hope of Earth.  This makes it even more galling that Democrats endeavor to unravel our legal fabric by flouting federal immigration laws.  They are the enemy within who prioritize illegal aliens over American citizens.

Democrats are also inflaming social disharmony by pursuing identity politics, to the undoubted amusement of Russian trolls.  This tends to be self-perpetuating, for if a constituency is rewarded for being a distinct group, there is little motivation to assimilate.  It is a zero-sum proposition that corrodes the “common good” that underpins a vibrant body politic.  By fostering dependence on government, and divvying up handouts based on ethnicity, the Democrats are making a mockery of JFK’s inaugural address exhortation: “… ask what your country can do for you.”

No wonder liberals are not enamored of Western civilization, as this extremely divisive multiculturalism is anathema to the profound teachings of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Enlightenment philosophers like John Locke.  They emphasized a shared set of norms, with social strata acting in concert toward the common good of the republic.  Locke, in particular, provided the philosophical underpinning by which civil society emerges from the “might makes right” chaos of nature.

Perhaps Trump was observant when describing the Democrats’ reactions at his SOTU address as treasonous.  Not chanting “USA, USA,” but cheering when the stock market’s “Trump Bump” temporarily turns into a “Trump Slump” is preposterous, though I’m sure Vladimir delights in their perfidious propaganda.  Let’s face it: most Republicans were against Obama because his polices, as proven, were bad for America; however, Democrats are against Trump out of fear that his polices are generally good for America (pending the extent and outcome of his trade tariffs).  In essence, what’s good for America is bad for Democrats.  They are the enemy within who deride America’s founding principles and ideals.

Meanwhile, the Russians are doing a Cossack Dance and savoring our discord.  Their army of trolls spent a pittance, especially in the “blue wall” states, compared to the billions spent by the presidential campaigns.  Notably, most of their efforts to undermine confidence in American democracy came after the election (56 percent of Facebook ad impressions) and dovetailed with the Democrats’ resistance.  For example, Russian operatives organized the “Trump is not my president” rally, which had the biggest attendance, as Democrats participated wholeheartedly.

The Russian intruders must be thrilled with their puppet, Nancy Pelosi.  Given the extent of her collaboration, perhaps we should assign her a Russian-style last name like Popov; after all, Nancy has been popping off a lot lately.  Debilitated by her liberal disease, she even proselytizes that tax cuts are unpatriotic.  Nancy Popov is like a political commissar shrieking that Trump’s DACA proposal is subterfuge to make America white again.  The Russian trolls couldn’t have scripted this insidious racism any better, as it implies she’s trying to make America browner.  Certainly, she has the bona fides, having once arranged a photo on the Capitol steps (and then doctored it) to commemorate white men no longer representing a majority of the Democrat caucus.

After popping off about white guys trying to negotiate an immigration deal, she bizarrely claimed that DREAMers – otherwise known as young illegal aliens who commit disproportionately more crime – make America more American.  That just defies logic, since America flourishes when the rule of law is observed, not when illegals are aided and abetted.  Clearly, Nancy Popov’s unwavering determination to institutionalize identity politics aligns with Russia’s exploitation of our social divisions.  They must be laughing their rears off in Moscow…and in the troll farm in St. Petersburg.

I’m sure the Russian operatives would like nothing more than to subvert the sanctity of our cherished “one citizen, one vote” principle.  Once again, Democrats are their allies: the Russian bots have infiltrated the Democrats’ collective consciousness in Nancy’s home state of California, where they plan to automatically register driver’s license recipients to vote, making voter fraud by illegals more likely.  Disconcertingly, there are no penalties for ineligible voters who do vote.  Chicago is just as bad with its new municipal ID cards for illegal aliens (they deviously call them “undocumented immigrants”) being valid to register to vote.  This will likely bolster the ranks of the enemy within.

Perhaps offended by our exceptional nature, Putin believes that our society is imperfect and vulnerable to internal strife rooted in divisive social issues.  That’s why his troll farms are leveraging social media to provoke extreme multiculturalism that rips asunder our social bonds.  Whereas recent European leaders sounded a requiem for multiculturalism, Pelosi and her colleagues are onboard with Vlad: they are determined to turn our nation’s motto upside-down.  “Out of one, many” seems to be their imperative.

To buttress a government framework that ultimately depends upon basic shared principles founded upon a universal understanding of the common good – for citizens – it would certainly be better if Nancy Layov.

Image: Renate Dodell via Flickr.

No wonder the Russian meddlers are laughing – the Dems are wittingly colluding in sowing discord through sleazy identity politics and by fostering extreme multiculturalism.  Lacking substantive policy ideas, their main hope for electoral success is to divide and conquer.  Russia is a major geopolitical adversary, which makes the Democrats the enemy within.

The thread that binds our great tapestry of cultures was woven by our founding fathers “in order to form a more perfect union.”  Their system of checks and balances ensures that rationality and compromise establish a balance between our contradictory instincts of cooperation and competition.  Their emphasis upon individual liberty – rather than the organic state – helped ensure that a thriving civil society based on shared values would emerge from the nasty and brutish conditions of a state of nature.

Our union was an improvement, but it started imperfectly; nevertheless, we’ve always been guided by our nation’s motto.  Though there have been several iterations of the Great Seal of the United States, the one constant is the inscription “E Pluribus Unum.”  Historically, legal immigrants embraced this ideal and eventually assimilated into America, particularly those processed through Ellis Island.  While proud of their heritage, they were grateful for the bountiful opportunities America bequeaths to those who relish the promise of America and who cherish the ways of the last great hope of Earth.  This makes it even more galling that Democrats endeavor to unravel our legal fabric by flouting federal immigration laws.  They are the enemy within who prioritize illegal aliens over American citizens.

Democrats are also inflaming social disharmony by pursuing identity politics, to the undoubted amusement of Russian trolls.  This tends to be self-perpetuating, for if a constituency is rewarded for being a distinct group, there is little motivation to assimilate.  It is a zero-sum proposition that corrodes the “common good” that underpins a vibrant body politic.  By fostering dependence on government, and divvying up handouts based on ethnicity, the Democrats are making a mockery of JFK’s inaugural address exhortation: “… ask what your country can do for you.”

No wonder liberals are not enamored of Western civilization, as this extremely divisive multiculturalism is anathema to the profound teachings of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Enlightenment philosophers like John Locke.  They emphasized a shared set of norms, with social strata acting in concert toward the common good of the republic.  Locke, in particular, provided the philosophical underpinning by which civil society emerges from the “might makes right” chaos of nature.

Perhaps Trump was observant when describing the Democrats’ reactions at his SOTU address as treasonous.  Not chanting “USA, USA,” but cheering when the stock market’s “Trump Bump” temporarily turns into a “Trump Slump” is preposterous, though I’m sure Vladimir delights in their perfidious propaganda.  Let’s face it: most Republicans were against Obama because his polices, as proven, were bad for America; however, Democrats are against Trump out of fear that his polices are generally good for America (pending the extent and outcome of his trade tariffs).  In essence, what’s good for America is bad for Democrats.  They are the enemy within who deride America’s founding principles and ideals.

Meanwhile, the Russians are doing a Cossack Dance and savoring our discord.  Their army of trolls spent a pittance, especially in the “blue wall” states, compared to the billions spent by the presidential campaigns.  Notably, most of their efforts to undermine confidence in American democracy came after the election (56 percent of Facebook ad impressions) and dovetailed with the Democrats’ resistance.  For example, Russian operatives organized the “Trump is not my president” rally, which had the biggest attendance, as Democrats participated wholeheartedly.

The Russian intruders must be thrilled with their puppet, Nancy Pelosi.  Given the extent of her collaboration, perhaps we should assign her a Russian-style last name like Popov; after all, Nancy has been popping off a lot lately.  Debilitated by her liberal disease, she even proselytizes that tax cuts are unpatriotic.  Nancy Popov is like a political commissar shrieking that Trump’s DACA proposal is subterfuge to make America white again.  The Russian trolls couldn’t have scripted this insidious racism any better, as it implies she’s trying to make America browner.  Certainly, she has the bona fides, having once arranged a photo on the Capitol steps (and then doctored it) to commemorate white men no longer representing a majority of the Democrat caucus.

After popping off about white guys trying to negotiate an immigration deal, she bizarrely claimed that DREAMers – otherwise known as young illegal aliens who commit disproportionately more crime – make America more American.  That just defies logic, since America flourishes when the rule of law is observed, not when illegals are aided and abetted.  Clearly, Nancy Popov’s unwavering determination to institutionalize identity politics aligns with Russia’s exploitation of our social divisions.  They must be laughing their rears off in Moscow…and in the troll farm in St. Petersburg.

I’m sure the Russian operatives would like nothing more than to subvert the sanctity of our cherished “one citizen, one vote” principle.  Once again, Democrats are their allies: the Russian bots have infiltrated the Democrats’ collective consciousness in Nancy’s home state of California, where they plan to automatically register driver’s license recipients to vote, making voter fraud by illegals more likely.  Disconcertingly, there are no penalties for ineligible voters who do vote.  Chicago is just as bad with its new municipal ID cards for illegal aliens (they deviously call them “undocumented immigrants”) being valid to register to vote.  This will likely bolster the ranks of the enemy within.

Perhaps offended by our exceptional nature, Putin believes that our society is imperfect and vulnerable to internal strife rooted in divisive social issues.  That’s why his troll farms are leveraging social media to provoke extreme multiculturalism that rips asunder our social bonds.  Whereas recent European leaders sounded a requiem for multiculturalism, Pelosi and her colleagues are onboard with Vlad: they are determined to turn our nation’s motto upside-down.  “Out of one, many” seems to be their imperative.

To buttress a government framework that ultimately depends upon basic shared principles founded upon a universal understanding of the common good – for citizens – it would certainly be better if Nancy Layov.

Image: Renate Dodell via Flickr.



Source link