Category Archives: Individualism Vs. Collectivism

The Left’s Creed: Live In A Herd Or Die, Baby Bison (Or Anyone Else)

Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Parrots

The Left’s creed carries over into its “management” of wildlife: Live in a herd or we’ll kill you.

The details are sketchy because written by left-liberal, state-adulating outlets, like The Washington Post. The same short-on-details storyline is echoed by ALL other news outlets and by the droning clones on social media.

Translated: The official say-so is the only say-so.

A baby bison is found at Yellowstone National Park by two good samaritans. The official account fails to provide inconvenient details because it has a distinct angle. However, logic tells me tourists would not remove a baby bison from its mom and herd. This likely was a solitary newborn. And, indeed, buried at the end of the malicious depiction of the do-goobers is this:

… the tourists found the bison in the middle of a road and tried, unsuccessfully, to make it move.
“Out of desperation,” said a Yellowstone spokeswoman, they took it to rangers. “They were just concerned about the well-being of the animal.”

Before that clarification, the “reporter” at WaPo had asserted the tourists simply “saw a baby bison, … decided it looked cold and needed to be rescued. So they loaded it in the trunk of their car and drove it to a ranger station.”

(Media deserve to die-out if they hire reporters who can’t write sans a personal angle. As an editor, I’m running a red marker through phrases such as “decided it looked cold,” to be replaced with neutral descriptions: “The tourists report/claim the baby was … in the middle of the road, unable to … “)

These “stupid tourists,” whom none of the still stupider journalists and followers of officialdom seemed to have interviewed, are alleged to have absconded with the baby bison because he looked cold.

Naturally, the fanatic rangers who’ll not tolerate deviation from nature euthanized the baby.

“We don’t manage for individuals; we manage for ecosystems.”

Resorting to symbolism, namely “attributing symbolic meanings or significance to objects, events, or relationships,” is not a practice I like. So do forgive me, but I can’t help seeing some symbolism here; some glaring parallels to how the Left treats humankind:

Conform or we’ll make you wish you were dead.

(Not to stray even further, but the convergence of Left and Right is almost complete on most issues, likely on this one too.)

Private Property Solves THE POTTY Problem

Gender, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, libertarianism, Private Property

First, one would hope that even creepy Ted Cruz would, like Donald Trump, open his home to Caitlyn Jenner, “reality-TV star and gold-medal-winning Olympian who competed as Bruce Jenner.”

Trump was right to rely on libertarian sensibilities when he said, on “The Today Show,” that in his Trump Tower, “Caitlyn Jenner would be free to use any bathroom she wanted.”

Trump Tower belongs to Trump.

Of course, the North Carolina bathroom law, that “bans people from using bathrooms that don’t match the sex indicated on their birth certificate,” demonstrates why government should not own any property and should certainly not have a say as to how private property is managed.

It ought to be up to private property proprietors to decide what kind of bathrooms they wish to offer at their establishments.

Myself, I’d avoid establishments that don’t offer strict, separate, “ladies” and “gents” loos. I don’t think it’s safe. Women-only bathrooms have worked quite well for women. You never have to think, “It’s late at night, I hope there’s no scary or creepy looking man in there and I am not allowed to carry.”

Scenes from “Dressed To Kill”:

UPDATE V (4/8/016): Continuum Of Propaganda: Yale, Mizzou & Your Child’s School

Education, Family, Founding Fathers, Free Speech, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Political Correctness, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Reason

Leave a reply

“Continuum Of Propaganda: Yale, Mizzou & Your Child’s School” is the current, weekly column, now on WND. An excerpt:

… On the University of Missouri campus, atavistic youth have joined against hurtful words, symbols and unsettling, unorthodox ideas, and for “safe spaces,” where these brave hearts can hideout from “racial microaggression.” Examples of “microaggression” are asking a black student for lessons in twerking, complimenting her weave, or simply being white.

But mostly, these minorities and their propagandized white patsies are campaigning for the unanimous acceptance of the following destructive, dangerous, often deadly, dictum:

“White racism is everywhere. White racism is permanent. White racism explains everything.”

The “systemic racism” meme you hear repeated by media, across the American campus, and preached from the White House is a function of “Critical Race Theory,” the sub-intelligent, purely theoretical, and logically fallacious construct, now creeping into American schools at every level.

As detailed in WND colleague Colin Flaherty’s “Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry,” America’s children, black, white and brown, are being taught, starting at a tender age, about “racial hostility and resentment.”

This racial hostility is said to be endemic and always and everywhere a white on black affair.

Ask your state representative and your school board about Glenn Singleton and his Pacific Educational Group’s curriculum, deceptively titled “Courageous Conversations.” The PEG poisonous program has been adopted by “hundreds of school districts across the US,” and foisted on millions of pupils, very possibly your child.

Beware; propaganda is process oriented, and an insidious one at that.

ITEM: Your cherub’s project receives an A. His work the teacher praises before the classroom. Yet, oddly, the child’s identity she will studiously conceal. This is in furtherance of the egalitarian idea, implemented, whereby no individual student is to be identified as having produced superior work to that of the collective.

“[U]nder the Singleton influence,” explains Flaherty, “the Seattle schools [have] defined individualism as a form of cultural racism and said that only whites can be racist.” Moreover, “emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology is a form of racism,” too.

The progressive educational project carries its anti-white bias into teaching about the Orient (East) versus the Occident (West).

ITEM: A Christian boy, placed in an academically advanced study program, is tasked with submitting a project about one of three ancient civilizations: Egypt, India and Rome.

Ancient Egypt, a big hit apparently, is spoken for. The teacher, generally “white, female, liberal,” advises the boy: “Choose India. Rome is … BORING.”

What is it that this colossal ignoramus has conveyed to her student with the words “Rome is boring”? Let us unpack the meta-message (with reference to History.org): …

… Read the rest. “Continuum Of Propaganda: Yale, Mizzou & Your Child’s School” is the current column, now on WND.

UPDATE I: “Campuses across country updating ‘insensitive’ mascots, mottos…”

UPDATE II (11/20): At The Unz Review David says:

November 20, 2015 at 12:14 pm GMT

Did anyone beside the author say, “Choose India. Rome is … BORING?” It appears she made it up so she could get really worked up about it, like the Ask-a-Mexican guy.

ilana mercer says:
@David

Both ITEMS in the essay are true. “Kid” in question is like family to this writer. Enough said. The article was prompted, in part, by this “close encounter.” Saying Rome is boring is so weird; too peculiar to make up. Even more peculiar is suggesting someone unknown to you is a liar. Nice.

UPDATE III (11/21): The manner of subversion is so subtle, a busy parent can’t hope to stay on top the propaganda underway in schools. If you are able to detect the programming, deprogram daily using Socratic questioning. So talk to the brats (unpleasant notion, I know). When my daughter used to return from school, and declare something preposterous, I would begin the deprogramming through questioning. Having a child in the public school system comes with the added responsibility to know your child is being programmed—not to doubt it or defend against it—and to be prepared to deprogram or access resources to so do. (Examples of resources are the Homeschool Courses of historian Tom Woods and Ron Paul, or this writer’s columns on economics and the Constitution (and all others focusing on proper reasoning), to be found in the Articles Archive (http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_search.php?Search+by+Category=Search+by+Category). A list of books is a good idea (a short one is here: http://barelyablog.com/classical-liberalism/. Literature is here: http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=796). Send your suggestions. Kids can begin with Ayn Rand. We all do. Please post resources parents can access, under this thread.

UPDATE IV (11/22): In reply to David Davis’ heroic efforts (thread at the Libertarian Alliance):

Inculcating proper reasoning in a child is vital in the deprogramming effort. My columns are anchored in argument and reason (as best I can). For example, and in context of David’s comment, my “Reincarnation of the Reds” brings up the concept of “the theory that can’t be falsified.” (This is not to say one can’t be, as I am, a private property conservationist.)

David Gordon, Ph.D, is magnificent on the reasoning front; he has written a kid compatible “Introduction to Economic Reasoning.”

UPDATE V (4/8/016):

UPDATED: Medics WRONG, As They Often Are, On One-Size-Fits-All Mammography

Healthcare, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Intelligence, Science, Technology

Years back, paleo warrior Karen De Coster was fired by her doctor for questioning the wisdom of the prescribed annual mammogram and refusing to submit to it. Uncoordinated, and in the same month, I was given my marching orders by my medic for a related infraction.

Just the other day, at the (new) doctor’s office, I was treated as an alien for suggesting that an ultrasound be performed for an additional data point, to alternate with the mammogram the provider kept pressing for. Be a daredevil, I suggested (not in those words, of course); get a different angle on the breast tissue! The providers’ response–from doctor to radiographer: “OMG! Nooooo … there’s a heretic among us. Reach for the smelling salts. Should we call security????!!! This could escalate.”

Pretty much.

Now the data suggest that mammography belongs not as an annual rule, but, rather, in the context of a personalized, individualized healthcare strategy, tailored to a woman’s genetic and general risk profile—the kind of holistic healthcare less likely under the trillion-dollar burden of ObamaCare.

From “American Cancer Society eases mammogram recommendations”:

In a major shift, the American Cancer Society is recommending that women at average risk of breast cancer get annual mammograms starting at age 45 rather than at age 40, and that women 55 and older scale back screening to every other year.

The new guidelines, published on Tuesday in JAMA, fall more closely in line with guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a government-backed panel of experts that recommend biennial breast cancer screening starting at age 50 for most women.

The Task Force’s 2009 recommendations to reduce the frequency and delay the start of mammogram screening were based on studies suggesting the benefits of detecting cancers earlier did not outweigh the risk of false positive results, which needlessly expose women to additional testing, including a possible biopsy. …

… The differences between the two sets of guidelines shows there is no single or correct answer for when and how often women should be screened for breast cancer, said Dr. Nancy Keating of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

Dr. Keating, who co-wrote a commentary accompanying the new guidelines, said the differences between the two groups emphasize the need to talk to patients and understand their preferences about breast cancer screening. …

UPDATE: There are risk in radiation and in the exploration of false positives (biopsies or further interventions that cause disease). Overall, the data show that the annual mammogram doesn’t reduce mortality from breast cancer.