Category Archives: Morality

UPDATED (12/31/021): On Being A Man

Culture, Ethics, Gender, Morality, Relationships, The State

It suddenly struck me, as I was compiling old column material for a recap of Julian Assange’s travails, that most men are cowards. (The “man” noun here is used in the traditional, generic sense, as in mankind. As a woman, I am part of mankind.)  Perhaps I ought to use the word menschit means “a person of integrity and honor”—and ask: How many men have the courage and character to step up and honor the highest principles or the best of humanity when they encounter these? Too few.

Most live defensively or ignorantly, betraying the good for the bad or the mediocre, and justifying their ennui. That’s why men like Assange are impressive and important and true. They show us the principled way, at least in the political realm.

While most men live in-thrall to miserable entities or manipulative people and the bonds these impose; Assange has shown us the right way to live within our own orbits; dangerously, if you must, never on your knees; bravely seeking that which is the best and the finest, in principles and people.

Julian Assange, no doubt, was just cocky and young when he launched WikiLeaks—so confident in the liberal, tolerant polities that gave rise to his libertarian sensibility. Suddenly he found himself being martyred in a cause he thought he would simply win. Was he not sired in the Free World, a son of freedom?

That “Free World,” alas, has placed Assange in a position of giving his life in the cause of exposing global state and corporate corruption and the collusion betwixt. He should be thanked for his service, for Assange did not enlist to do The State’s bidding in futile, wicked wars in faraway lands, or in the corridors of power. Rather, he went-up against the Administrative, Warfare, Surveillance Supra-State and for The People.

An honest man asked on Twitter how to become courageous. I am hardly an authority. I try my best, in writing and in person—having never betrayed my first principles for popularity or pelf.

I have, however, known people who never step up, who live mired in cowardice, wasting their considerable mentation and manhood in a state of fear, and in the quest for equilibrium. Or, gulling themselves into believing that when they slavishly serve the unworthy, at the expense of the worthy and to the exclusion of higher quests; they are being principled—and ever-so good. Ignominy is theirs, brought on by fear and cowardice.

My humble reply, then, to the honest man aforementioned: “Within our orbits we can all try to stand up for the principles and people that are true and need our energies most. (And if you think that these people live in think tanks and political parties; appear on Fox News, work for Prager U, or have the material wherewithal to hold a conference—you are a follower; there is no hope for you.)

Oh, and brave men can FIGHT. But a man who picks fights—and feuds—with friends is never brave.

* Image credit

UPDATED (12/24) On Being A Man*: NEW COLUMN: Extradited! Why Assange Fears Being ‘Epsteined’

Ethics, Free Speech, Globalism, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Law, libertarianism, Liberty, Morality, Political Philosophy, The Establishment, The State, War

NEW COLUMN: It suddenly struck me: Most men are cowards. How many men have the courage and character to step up and honor the highest principles or the best of humanity when they encounter these? Too few. Most live defensively or ignorantly, betraying the good for the bad. That’s why men like Assange are so impressive and important and true. They show us the way. While most men live in-thrall to miserable entities or people and the bonds they impose; Assange has shown us the right way to live within our own orbits; dangerously, if you must, never on your knees; bravely seeking that which is the best and the finest—be they principles or people.

Julian Assange has given his life in the cause of exposing global state and corporate corruption and the collusion betwixt. He should be thanked for his service, for Assange did not enlist to do The State’s bidding in futile, wicked wars in faraway lands. Rather, he went-up against the Administrative, Warfare, Surveillance State for The People.

Therefore, all state agents—media-military-congressional complex; local and global—want this, the greatest libertarian alive (if barely) to disappear. Never mind that First-Amendment jurisprudence is clear-cut with respect to the guerrilla journalism of WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks operators have committed no crime in publishing what is undeniably true, newsworthy information, with probative value. Besides, why has America any jurisdiction over a foreign entity (WikiLeaks) and a foreign national (Julian Assange)?

Well, America has jurisdiction over Assange because it has simply asserted it based on trumped-up charges equating his journalism with espionage. Which is why Assange now fears being “Epsteined.”

THE NEW COLUMN is “Extradited! Why Assange Fears Being ‘Epsteined’”. Read it on WND.COM, Townhall.com and the Unz Review.

UPDATE (12/24): An honest man asks on Twitter how to become courageous. Am I an authority? No! I just try my best, in writing—having never betrayed my first principles for popularity or pelf—and in living, in charity and in loving and helping those who see me.

I have, however,  known people who never step up and are mired in cowardice, wasting their considerable mentation and manhood on being frightened in the quest for equilibrium (personally and politically); or  gulling themselves into believing that when they serve the wrong people and principles—they are ever-so good. Contempt is what they deserve. When encountering good people, fighting the good fight, doing good work—every person can honor that and help, rather than hinder.

My humble reply to Sean: “Within our orbits we can all try to stand up for the principles and people that matter and make a difference and need our energies most. So, I thank YOU for joining me here.”

* The “man” noun here is used in the traditional sense, as mankind. I include myself, a woman, as part of mankind. Your fucking sexual or gender orientation matters not. Quit the pronoun crap. That is another first principle: never dignify nonsense, including linguistic bafflegab. I write and think in English. So should you.

‘Democrats Are The Real Racists’: An Original, 2013 Mercer Meme

Argument, Communism, Democrats, Ethics, Ilana Mercer, IlanaMercer.com, Morality, Old Right, Race

In my experience over two decades, our side, the Right, often flouts the traditional, honor system of citing sources and crediting originators. Especially when it comes to marginalized, utterly-independent originators: Who’s gonna defend Mercer if I borrow those shiny ideas of hers?

Well, as the great sage Rabbi Hillel said,

If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, then when?

There are ways less elegant to express how I feel about weak men without honor or a backbone. But do yourself a favor: Don’t mess with me. I’m done with those who do.

In any event, this tendency was documented in painful, but necessary, detail in “The Moral Writer’s First Commandment: Cite Your Sources!“, and in “Citing Sources: Jewish Morality (‘Mussar & Middot’) Demands Acknowledging Those Who Went Before, Intellectually.”

When every other American commentator was kibitzing about Critical Race Theory as Marxism—including the voluble writers on Darren Beattie’s site, Revolver News—yours truly, as is her wont, had dug in her heels since 2019, insisting that CRT was ALL anti-whiteness, and nothing more, not Marxism. But the anti-whiteness of American politics has been a theme that has informed my work  since 2011.

In the latter post, I chronicle Darren Beattie’s contempt-oozing snark of a tweet about myself—this woman, as he put it—daring to assert that she was an originator of the anti-white impetus of Critical race Theory; that I was indeed first to this take on Critical Race Theory as unadulterated anti-whiteness, and that any other claims were lies.

But in our immoral politics and anti-intellectual life, Beattie, a popular young cub (who worked for Trump) trumps an unaffiliated, tenured paleolibertarian thinker and theorist with little influence. (That’s why I will no longer vote for these envenomed, disrespectful assholes. When all is said and done, they don’t give a damn about us little guys and gals.)

2. “Democrats Are The Real Racists” is a meme that originated in Mercer and is now popular across the Internet.

In “GOP Tit-For-Tat Twits,” (08.02.13 @ 10:52 pm) I wrote:

But Republicans are as dazed and confused as the rival gang, reducing wrong-doing to these PC “isms,” and partaking in the silly tit-for-tat: “No, you’re a sexist, I’m not. No, Democrats are racists; we’re the party of Lincoln.” Blah-blah. Pathetic.

The meme or idea was further fleshed out in a column, “Fee-Fi-Fo-Fem, I Smell The Blood Of A Racist” (May 16, 2014):

Why have serious libertarians succumbed to a tit-for-tat spat? Are libertarians as dazed and confused as Republicans? The latter have certainly dignified the rival gang’s Stalinist show-trial tactics, with more holier-than-thou racial one-upmanship: “Democrats are the real racists; Republicans are the party of Lincoln, the liberator of blacks. We’re against abortion and welfare because we love blacks. … Blah, blah, blah.”

SOURCES:

The Moral Writer’s First Commandment: Cite Your Sources!

Citing Sources: Jewish Morality (‘Mussar & Middot’) Demands Acknowledging Those Who Went Before, Intellectually

“GOP Tit-For-Tat Twits”

Fee-Fi-Fo-Fem, I Smell The Blood Of A Racist

 

In Praise Of The Whip: To Whip Or To Rein Is Not The Question

Argument, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Israel, Law, Left-Liberalism, Morality, Nationhood, Reason, Republicans

©2021 ILANA MERCER

What on earth is wrong with the whip? The reference is, as CNN put it, to “recent images that appear to show US Border Patrol agents on horseback confronting migrants along the Rio Grande.” So far so good.

Videos taken by Al Jazeera and Reuters appear to show law enforcement officers on horseback using aggressive tactics when confronting migrants, who are largely Haitian, to prevent them from crossing into the US.

Wonderful.

“The Biden administration is expressing horror,” promising to proceed aggressively against these poor horseback officers, who work in near-impossible conditions, without institutional support and for meager wages.

How does the Right respond? Is it a whip or is it a rein, they kibitz. Look, if it’s not a whip, it ought to have been one, and if the border patrol agent used a rein as whip—then hooray for him. The End.

That’s the Right’s problem. The anatomy of every single left-manufactured national scandal sees our side always conceding to the legitimacy of the left’s case, and then going on the defensive, instead of attacking.

In short: asinine. stupid. defeatist.

The anatomy of a good response is never, but never, to apologize and equivocate about a principled behavior, in this instance, the right of self- and national defense.

The right response: “What if US Border Patrol agents on horseback were wielding whips? Got a problem with repelling and whipping outlaws, who are charging you, your horse and into your country?”

Vice President Kamala Harris called the images “horrible” and said she supports an investigation into the matter.

Heroic, not horrible. Part of the job of the law is to round up the likes of the Haitian invaders and turn them back. If the law is not doing this—it’s because natural morality has been inverted. Good is bad and bad is good. Right is wrong and wrong is right.

What a moral inversion it is that forces US law enforcement to process and pander to outlaws; instead of arresting and expelling them IN JUST THIS MANNER.

* Image via Tracey Ann Whitehill on LinkedIn