The boundless evil of socialism

Socialist Hugo Chavez speaks out against breast implants:

Venezuela has one of the highest rates of plastic surgery per capita in the world and in some cases teenage girls have had breast enlargements as birthday presents from their parents. Now Mr Chavez has condemned doctors who “convince some women that if they don’t have some big bosoms, they should feel bad.” Speaking on state television, he said that it was a “monstrous thing” to see that even women from poor backgrounds were now choosing to pay to go under the knife.

Libertarians are in favor of women being free to improve the aesthetic appeal of their bodies if they wish. Socialists call big, beautifully-sculpted breasts “monstrous”.

Any questions?

The cost of post-Christianity

It is foolish to expect logical consistency from government, much less the media. But note the intrinsic contradiction between what influential members of the British public still believe their government to be and what their government actually proclaims that it is:

Item One: The state-sponsored Equality and Human Rights Commission intervened [in the case of the Johns family being denied foster parent status on the grounds of their Christianity] and argued that it was the duty of the state to protect vulnerable children from becoming “infected” with Judeo-Christian values of sexual morality. The rest is history, and in a startling judgment, the High Court held last Monday that the United Kingdom is a secular state and that Christianity as part of the law is “mere rhetoric.”

Item Two: Prof Simms comes down on the side of the latter [the pro-Libyan intervention position], citing Palmerston: “Our duty – our vocation – is not to enslave, but to set free… we stand at the head of moral, social, and political civilisation… when we see people battling against difficulties and struggling against obstacles in the pursuit of their rights, we may be permitted… if occasion require, to lend them a helping hand.”

Lord Palmerston was twice the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the second time from June 1859 to October 1865. At that time, the United Kingdom was an unequivocally Christian monarchy and Christianity was an integral aspect of its moral, social, and political civilization. Now, according to the High Court, the United Kingdom is Christian in rhetorical name only despite the fact that neither the laws nor the unwritten English constitution have changed. So, the only conclusion is that the United Kingdom no longer stands at the head of moral, social, and political civilization, but has been reduced to following the lead of the totalitarian pagan rulers of Continental Europe.

Britain can’t intervene in Libya because it has neither the ability nor the moral justification for doing so. On what basis would they intervene anyhohw, the inability of Libyans to democratically select their government? That would be ludicrous, considering that the British people have been repeatedly denied the referendum on the sacrifice of their national sovereignty to the European Union that they have been repeatedly promised. Political freedom is a predominantly Christian phenomenon and there is no evidence that it can survive paganism, which naturally gravitates towards totalitarian rule.

Consider the warning of one of the counsels involved:

It is important for Americans to understand these developments, so they can learn from the British experience. The first lesson is the speed and success of the secular ideology in replacing Judeo-Christian freedoms. In 1997, the United Kingdom was a more stable country than the United States; an evolving state with a millennium of religious liberty. If someone had told me then that within little more than a decade, stable Christian households would be deemed unsuitable to foster children, or that Crosses would be banned, or that hate-speech laws would be used to crush the very ideas of dissent, I would not have believed it. I would have been labeled an alarmist if I had expressed views to that avail.

The second factor to recognize is that the terms liberal, diversity, and tolerance are descriptors for a political program which logic and law alone cannot explain. Thirdly, the secular movement is but a variant of the utopian ambitions that have inspired man from the beginning of time. However, the endgame of such programs is always the same

Paul Diamond is exactly correct. The endgame of secular utopianism is always the same. It ends in the gulag, the guillotine, and the gas chamber. But the key point to remember is that however it ends, it always ends, because the Gates of Hell cannot and will not prevail.

Responding to a bully

The same brief clip has been uploaded over and over on the Web: A scrawny bully sucker punches a larger chunkier boy multiple times, as other kids look on, some taunting. Then suddenly, with the speed and agility of an alligator, the victim responds, flipping the kid and bodyslamming him. “There’ll be reprisals from other kids in the school and he still has to go to school somewhere,” Casey’s father told the Daily Telegraph. “He’s not a violent kid, it’s the first time he’s lashed out and I don’t want him to be victimized over that.” Casey’s father added, “He’s always been taught never to hit. Apparently other people’s parents don’t teach their kids that.”

There are some lessons worth noting here. First, smaller people can be bullies too, if they believe they can get away with it. This includes girls and women. And such bullies will continue to provoke and attack as long as the larger victim indicates his unwillingness to defend himself. This is why it is important to react strongly enough to inflict real pain on a woman or child the first time they hit you, as it will teach them an important lesson about your unwillingness to accept physical attack without the risk of serious injury. If a man submits to the physical bullying until it reaches the point at which he snaps, he’s a lot more likely to do more damage than he intends. In this case, the little bully was fortunate that he didn’t get his leg broken or his skull cracked on the concrete, not that he wouldn’t have merited it if he had.

And you never know who is going to decide to test you for one reason or another. A boy once inexplicably elected to kick me in the balls because I relayed his mother’s request that he go upstairs for dinner. It didn’t hurt, but I reacted strongly in order to communicate to him that attacking an adult man without provocation was an insanely stupid thing to do. Some people just need to learn life’s lessons in a physical manner. Don’t hesitate to instruct them in a calm, but thorough manner.

Second, I have reluctantly been convinced that people, and perhaps more importantly, the police, are much more accepting of locks and throws utilized in self-defense than they are of punches and kicks, despite the fact that locks and throws are potentially more damaging and lethal. So, if a bully throws a punch, instead of just trying to block it, step forward, grab the wrist, then step back and turn with your other hand placed behind the puncher’s elbow. This will use his momentum to face-plant him on the ground if you’re in the open or smash his head into the wall if you have your back to one and it will happen before anyone realizes what is taking place. If you’re dealing with more than one opponent and need a fast incapacitation, pull the punching arm straight to lock it and smash your forearm through the elbow. Even if you don’t break the arm, the guy isn’t going to be throwing any punches with it for a minute or two.

Third, learn to finish. Don’t step back when your opponent is down but not incapacitated or submissive, kick him in the face or in the sides. Once is sufficient, any more will have people thinking you’re trying to kill the guy and leaping in to stop you.

And finally, refusing to teach your kid to fight, or worse, teaching him to not defend himself, doesn’t mean that he won’t have to do so. In fact, it actually makes it much more likely that he’ll be targeted by bullies. Bullies, of both the physical and psychological varieties, are much more often cowards than real fighters, so they seek soft targets. Make it clear that you are not a soft target and there is a very good chance that you’ll never have a bully or a predator attempt to bother you in any way.