The US Democrats are still pushing ahead to impeach Trump, because, well, anyone they don’t like must be destroyed by any means necessary. The Russians stole the election from Hillary has become an article of cultish religious faith, held regardless of the lack of evidence produced by their side. But reflecting on this, talk show host rush Limbaugh has said that it is Hillary who should be roasted over the political-legal coals:
  https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/04/23/rush-limbaugh-hillary-clinton-needs-to-be-investigated-indicted-and-in-jail/

“This is the irony: Hillary Clinton is who tried to rig a presidential election, Martha,” Limbaugh said. “Hillary Clinton and her pals in the Obama Department of Justice and their pals in the FBI — they are the ones who colluded with the Russians. They are the ones that gave us this entirely bogus Steele dossier. You want to talk about irony — for Hillary Clinton to be talking about impeaching Donald Trump. Hillary needs to be investigated, she needs to be indicted, and she needs to be in jail, and any of her co-conspirators in this whole sordid affair, which amounted to nothing more than a silent coup to overturn the election results of 2016. Hillary Clinton talking about Trump — you talk about sour grapes. This is a woman who has been rejected by the American people twice, rejected by her party in 2008, she had to rig the primaries against crazy Bernie in 2016 to get the nomination. She is the last person who ought to be listened to about what ought to happen to Donald Trump.”

     It is the usual; an academic saying the right things that the establishment wants. Can any of them ever oppose anything? They are so predictable, embracing globalism, always, even the analytic logical types. The philosopher in question is Oxford’s Nick Bostrom, who once wrote a famous paper arguing that the universe could be a computer simulation. Now he really gets weird:
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-25/global-government-and-mass-surveillance-needed-save-humanity-expert-says

“Last Wednesday, Bostrom took the stage at a TED conference in Vancouver, Canada, to share some of the insights from his latest work, “The Vulnerable World Hypothesis.” While speaking to head of the conference, Chris Anderson, Bostrom argued that mass surveillance could be one of the only ways to save humanity – from a technology of our own creation. His theory starts with a metaphor of humans standing in front of a giant urn filled with balls that represent ideas. There are white balls (beneficial ideas), grey balls (moderately harmful ideas), and black balls (ideas that destroy civilization). The creation of the atomic bomb, for instance, was akin to a grey ball — a dangerous idea that didn’t result in our demise. Bostrom posits that there may be only one black ball in the urn, but, once it is selected, it cannot be put back. (Humanity would be annihilated, after all.) According to Bostrom, the only reason that we haven’t selected a black ball yet is because we’ve been “lucky.” (source) In his paper, Bostrom writes, If scientific and technological research continues, we will eventually reach it and pull it out. Our civilization has a considerable ability to pick up balls, but no ability to put them back into the urn. We can invent but we cannot un-invent. Our strategy is to hope that there is no black ball.

They told us to stop eating meat
Or the skies would soon overheat.
But the weather started snowing
And the blizzards started blowing
And soon there was no meat to eat.

  Viv Forbes, Washpool, Qld

     In the brave new zero-emissions world, oil-powered aircraft carriers and diesel-powered subs are taboo. Will the Australian navy go nuclear or back to sails?

  Viv Forbes, Washpool, Qld

Authorised by K. W. Grundy
13 Carsten Court, Happy Valley, SA.

     Greens worship trees. Our food is produced from grasslands and cultivation. What do we eat in the brave new world of trees? Pine chips?

  Viv Forbes, Washpool, Qld

Authorised by K. W. Grundy
13 Carsten Court, Happy Valley, SA.

     I stumbled onto the article below, could not find the author’s name but some good points are made about the way violence does not go away from human society, because human nature is human nature. Of course, the Leftists deny this, being sociological determinists, but they are dead wrong, and one could end up dead and wrong, believing their rhetoric:
  https://www.theburningplatform.com/2019/04/16/dancing-on-the-crumbling-precipice/

“Human nature never changes. We aren’t better or worse than the billions of people who have proceeded us on this earth. We are all susceptible to the vices which have plagued mankind for eternity: pride, greed, anger, envy, lust, gluttony and laziness. We are also capable of elevating our society through exercising displays of courage, applying justice fairly, prudently managing our affairs, treating others with respect, and acting charitably towards mankind. As Solzhenitsyn noted in his masterpiece, Gulag Archipelago, “the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being”. The violence in our nature is ingrained in our makeup as human beings. The Bible details our violent nature in the Garden of Eden, with the murder of Abel by Cain, his brother.

     If it is true that diversity is a strength, and homogeneous societies therefore inferior to them, then South Africa would be a superpower, and China and Japan, backwaters. Not so:
  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-17/south-africa-s-decline-worst-of-nations-not-at-war-model-shows

“South Africa’s performance on a range of social, economic and governance measures deteriorated more in the past 12 years than any other nation not at war, according to Eunomix Business & Economics Ltd. The decline is likely to continue as the country wrestles with the consequences of nine years of worsening corruption and policy paralysis under former President Jacob Zuma, the Johannesburg-based political-risk advisory company said. The fragility of the economy may also limit the tenure of his successor Cyril Ramaphosa, who faces his first national election on May 8, it said. “There is the strongest likelihood of him being a one-term president,” Claude Baissac, the head of a Eunomix, said in an interview. “He is starting with a very weak economy, the weakest of any president since Mandela. He is also starting with a fairly weak hand from a political standpoint.” An index of security, governance, prosperity and welfare indicators shows South Africa slumped to 88th out of 178 nations in 2018 from 31st in 2006, according to an analysis of the country’s prospects by Eunomix. The company advises some of the biggest mining companies operating in the country. South Africa’s decline in ranking is only been superseded by conflict-riven countries such as Mali, Ukraine and Venezuela and its peers now include Colombia, Jamaica, Latvia and the Philippines, compared with Portugal and Slovenia in 2008.”

     If it is true that diversity is a strength, and homogeneous societies therefore inferior to them, then South Africa would be a superpower, and China and Japan, backwaters. Not so:
  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-17/south-africa-s-decline-worst-of-nations-not-at-war-model-shows

“South Africa’s performance on a range of social, economic and governance measures deteriorated more in the past 12 years than any other nation not at war, according to Eunomix Business & Economics Ltd. The decline is likely to continue as the country wrestles with the consequences of nine years of worsening corruption and policy paralysis under former President Jacob Zuma, the Johannesburg-based political-risk advisory company said. The fragility of the economy may also limit the tenure of his successor Cyril Ramaphosa, who faces his first national election on May 8, it said. “There is the strongest likelihood of him being a one-term president,” Claude Baissac, the head of a Eunomix, said in an interview. “He is starting with a very weak economy, the weakest of any president since Mandela. He is also starting with a fairly weak hand from a political standpoint.” An index of security, governance, prosperity and welfare indicators shows South Africa slumped to 88th out of 178 nations in 2018 from 31st in 2006, according to an analysis of the country’s prospects by Eunomix. The company advises some of the biggest mining companies operating in the country. South Africa’s decline in ranking is only been superseded by conflict-riven countries such as Mali, Ukraine and Venezuela and its peers now include Colombia, Jamaica, Latvia and the Philippines, compared with Portugal and Slovenia in 2008.”

     Ok, we are sorry; there will be no further criticisms of George Soros from any of us; we have been intimidated into silence. We have read the memo, which apparently the philosopher
Roger Scruton did not get, or did not read:
  https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/04/15/the-right-to-criticise-george-soros/
  https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/04/11/the-real-roger-scruton-scandal/

“There was a time when criticism of Soros was not automatically condemned as a form of secular heresy. Some in the media were more than willing to draw attention to Soros’s parasitic behaviour as a ruthless speculator who seemed indifferent to the destructive impact of his actions on other people’s lives. Even the New Statesman was prepared to question Soros’s imperial ambitions and to question this oligarch’s motives. Indeed, Scruton’s reference to a ‘Soros Empire’ in Hungary comes across as positively restrained in comparison with the wording in a 2003 New Statesman profile of Soros. That profile drew attention to the who’s who of the American military-industrial complex who made up the boards of the numerous NGOs funded by Soros. It pointed out that Soros’s International Crisis Group included such ‘non-governmental’ personalities as former US national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and General Wesley Clark, a former NATO supreme allied commander for Europe. The NS profile said it ‘cannot be seriously’ doubted that Soros’s ‘companies and NGOs are closely wrapped up in US expansionism’. ‘For years’, it continued, ‘Soros and his NGOs have gone about their work extending the boundaries of the “free world”’.

     Much of our reporting on the theatre of the politically correct absurd in the universities comes from America. But Australian universities are quickly catching up:
  https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/white-students-may-be-seen-but-not-heard/news-story/eae6465ad65876f0c8cb971e6cf90cff
  https://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/ban-on-white-males-speaking-suggested-at-melbourne-university-seminar/news-story/60836a42ac2f18597a27b1ab0ebd9716

“Tensions have flared at the University of Melbourne after a workshop suggested “white males” and those who look like “Liberal voters” be forbidden from speaking during classes in a bid to dismantle privilege. Participating students at the “How privilege manifests in tutorials” workshop held last week were told that “white, male students” and “students resembling Liberal voters” should be discouraged from speaking to provide more space for women and non-binary people to contribute to discussions during tutorials. The workshop was part of the university’s “Radical Education Week”, which is organised by the University of Melbourne Student Union’s Environment ¬Collective. Other workshops included “Why & How to Be Less ¬Employed”, “A School Striker’s Experience” and “Climate vs Capitalism: Eco-socialism as an Alternative”.

     A bit of anti-Christian philosophy from two Muslim brothers who claimed that Australian law did not apply to them:
  https://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2019/04/18/the-cross-belongs-in-the-dustbin-of-history-muslim-brothers-claim-islam-exempt-from-law/

“Two Muslim brothers who claimed Australian law did not apply to them or their religion have been fined for contempt of court. Mustapha and Diaa Kara-Ali reportedly laughed and began abusing the judge as the punishment was handed down in Sydney’s Land and Environment Court, after they were found guilty of felling trees without council permission. The brothers had tried to argue the Islamic organisation they ran, Diwan Al Dawla, was exempt from Australian law on religious grounds and they were free to develop their rural retreat – which included clearing native trees – as they saw fit. In sentencing the two men on Thursday, Justice Terence Sheahan said the pair only engaged in the court process “following my reluctant decision to have you arrested … to address the problems you’ve created”, describing their contempt of the court as “flagrant”. In his published reasons, Justice Sheahan said the brothers’ claim they do not have to comply with Australian law is false.

     In the US politics both the Democrats and the neo-conmen Republicans bait Russia, secretly hoping for war. There is a delusional belief that somehow the US could win such a conflict, and indeed, that this conflict is “winnable” and even makes sense. Paul Craig Roberts has his finger on the pulse of this one:
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-22/paul-craig-roberts-warns-orchestration-russophobia-prelude-war

“The Russian Embassy in Washington has prepared an accurate 121-page report in response to Mueller's report: THE RUSSIAGATE HYSTERIA: A CASE OF SEVERE RUSSOPHOBIA. Everyone should read this report. It documents the fake news, lies, violations of diplomatic standards and international law, and gratuitous aggressive actions taken against Russia during the period beginning May 18, 2016 and continuing through the issuance of the Mueller Report.  Without explicitly saying so, the report shows that neither the US government nor the American media has a nanoparticle of integrity.Both are criminal organizations that are willing to risk war with Russia in their pursuit of narrow policitized agendas. This is important information for Americans and the rest of the world to have. Every person, every government and every private organization that supports Washington’s Russophobic policies is contributing to the growing threat of nuclear war.

     I did not know what a “loonie” was until I read this story, but now I know just what a loonie is:
  https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/loonie-lgbtq-1.5107077

“The Royal Canadian Mint unveiled a commemorative loonie Tuesday to mark what it called a key milestone for lesbian, gay, transgender, queer and two-spirited people, with the government saying the coin symbolized progress while highlighting the work that still needs to be done to advance equality. Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau was amongst a number of dignitaries who gathered in Toronto to unveil the new one-dollar coin that pays tribute to Parliament's passing of legislation that "initiated the decriminalization of homosexuality in Canada" in 1969. The coin, which is now in circulation, combines the words "Equality-Egalite" with the work of Vancouver-based artist Joe Average. "For too long, people didn't listen. They didn't extend compassion or empathy or understanding," Morneau said. "Because of that, years ago, people made it a crime to love in Canada. We made being yourself a punishable offence."

     We have been publishing material on the threat of China for years, indeed what seems like a lifetime. Here, though, is US Senator Marco Rubio, making the same sorts of warnings:
  https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2019/04/25/exclusive-sen-marco-rubio-at-their-own-peril-countries-embrace-china/

“China is playing a zero-sum game internationally and willing to win at all costs. That certainly won’t be Chinese President Xi Jinping’s message to world leaders at the second Belt and Road Initiative Forum in Beijing this week, but that is the reality. For the last two decades, China fooled the world into believing it would embrace the rules-based international order and become a responsible stakeholder. Instead, China has used its membership in the World Trade Organization as an instrument for its economic advancement aimed directly at the expense of other more developed member states. Moreover, it has tightened its one-party authoritarian rule, increased repression of domestic dissent, and escalated human rights abuses within its borders. And it is building up its military’s might—including new capabilities to menace Taiwan, Japan, and other neighbors to threaten U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific region, and to project power globally.

     It is hard to keep up with all the literature, so I hope readers appreciate the sacrifice my eyes are making to the “cause’! Just joking of course. But to begin … A series of insightful and though-provoking essays have been published at the very interesting American Mind.org site, basically saying the same sort of stuff we say here about the threat of multiculturalism and runaway identity politics. The core paper, with the others being commentaries is by David Azerrad, and it argues that identity politics is in essence the politics of victimology;
  https://americanmind.org/essays/the-promises-and-perils-of-identity-politics/

“Identity politics thus combines a focus on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and any other number of identitarian categories with a politics of victimization. The key to understanding identity politics is to realize that it is primarily a politics of oppression and victimization rather than identity. This is apparent in the first document to use the term, the 1977 Combahee River Collective Statement. As the black lesbian feminists who drafted it explain: “This focusing upon our own oppression is embodied in the concept of identity politics.” The cornerstone of the identitarian worldview is the claim that America, contrary to its egalitarian professions of faith, is at its core a supremacist regime that oppresses certain groups. The oppressed groups vary according to the different identitarian movements—black people, women, Hispanics, homosexuals, transsexuals, etc.—although most recognize the oppression of other groups and proclaim solidarity with them. This struggle between the oppressors and those whom they oppress on the basis of their identity is the most fundamental dimension of reality. Oppression of women and minorities, in this view, does not mark a departure from American republican ideals. Rather, it reveals the repressive nature of the regime.

     Could this be a real case of the so-called 4-dimensional chess that the Dissent Right once thought Donald Trump played? Le Pen seems to want to take over the EU rather than pull France out of it.
  https://www.franceinter.fr/politique/marine-le-pen-renonce-officiellement-au-frexit-dans-son-projet

“The National Gathering publishes this Monday its project for the European elections, accompanied by a long manifesto. For the first time, black and white, Marine Le Pen does not mention the exit of the European Union and the euro zone. She wants to reassure her electorate, appear more credible and more eco-friendly. A revolution that does not look like it. The National Assembly (former National Front), with this European project, the abandonment of Frexit. During the last European elections, in 2014, this remained the cornerstone of the project: the exit of France from the European Union and the euro zone. It was also discussed in the 2017 presidential program.

     Our noble director sent me the link to the article that I want to tell you about today, but included a note which I found profound, and thought-provoking, so let me quote what Ken said: “Australians are known for their weakness when trade deals are done.  You can imagine China declining to buy, for instance, our beef, because we have done something not within their approval.  It could be un-related like killing kangaroos etc.  BUT we would never use our commodities sold to China as a bargaining point over, say their illegal South-China sea activity. Underneath most problems we find the lack of adequate finance to over-ride most decisions.  We tolerate any negative things like mines threatening underground water, as long as the mine delivers something to export for more dollars!!” And that is so true, indicating that unless a nation strives for financial and economic self-reliance, it is doomed to dependency and being at the mercy of the rest of the world, which is really just another definition of globalism. Here is an extract by Adam Ni, on the challenges of China:
  http://www.visiontimes.com/2019/04/16/its-time-to-rethink-australias-approach-to-china.html

“The truth is, for too long, Australian elites have turned a blind eye to the challenges posed by China’s rise. Many of our political, business, and community leaders have developed cozy and profitable relations with the Chinese party-state. For too long, our elites have benefited from China’s economic rise without properly preparing the Australian public for the long-term challenges posed by an increasingly powerful authoritarian Middle Kingdom. There is no doubt that Australia needs to engage China on trade, investment, connectivity, security, and a raft of regional and international issues. But there is an urgent need to rethink our current modus operandi and recalibrate Australia’s approach to China. Of course, this process has been underway for some time. The bipartisan support for foreign interference laws and the decision to exclude Huawei and ZTE from the building of Australia’s 5G network highlight Australian concerns about China’s influence. However, I would argue that a deeper rethink is needed if we are to prepare Australia for a future in our corner of the world with an increasingly powerful China with vastly different political institutions and values.

To The Australian        How can the Liberal Party regain strength and impetus in our national affairs? Michael Sexton analyses problems ("Liberals face decline amid shifting public priorities", 23/4), but does not provide ideas for reform. The greatest mistake the party can make, as Malcolm Turnbull has helped show, is to turn itself into a second centre-left party. Rather, it must "go right", but this must be done in an intelligent manner. What does that require? Firstly, a new effort must be made to build a narrative of Australia as a great nation with further greatness ahead of it. This means celebration of the British settlement, our roles in two world wars and several minor conflicts, our pioneering history and our construction of a modern free nation based on an outstanding constitution which it is difficult for the left-wing zealots to erode. Secondly the party needs to associate itself strongly with sacred tradition - not just Christian tradition and certainly not "old-fashioned" Christian practice. Leave atheism and rationalism for the ALP and the Greens. Thirdly, and most painfully, the party must detach itself from the "anti-racism" zealotry that has done immense harm to our sense of who we are and where we can go. This, especially, will call for gallantry and honesty; for there are very powerful interests opposed to such necessary reform.     And fourthly the party must not allow its identity to be primarily tied to business and economic issues. These lack glamour and have been over-emphasised in recent decades.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic

*Responsibility for electoral comment authorised by K. W. Grundy 13 Carsten Court, Happy Valley, SA.

To The Australian        The claim by Stuart Andrews ("Court ruling on Ridd raises some questions", 24/4) that there is no "unfettered right to denigrate or offend" in public discourse can be disputed. One person who did so was T. S. Eliot who, in his 1931 essay on Charles Whibley, observed with regret that few people any longer claimed "the free speech to call a knave a knave, or a fool a fool." Eliot noted that "invective is a form of writing which varies at different times and in different countries according to the customs and laws in vogue at the time and in the place." He added that some people deplored the decay of the language of abuse as a literary loss. Perhaps one symptom of a healthy society is its capacity to tolerate language that vilifies and to admire vilification that is also witty. By contrast, a craven kow-towing to limitations imposed on discourse by commissars is then a sign of cultural ill-health.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic

To The Age        I disagree with your editorial claim ("Comedian's Ukraine win a serious matter", 24/4) that "there is not much to inspire young people in Prime Minister Scott Morrison." His Christian profession and impressive work ethic are two factors in his favour. He consistently comes across, rather as Bob Hawke once did, as "a genuine bloke". He also presents as a moderate man, open to discourse from different points of view. Of course, he has a liberal-conservative political creed which will put off left-wing idealists among the young (and old). However the Coalition's traditional emphasis on less rather than more government intervention should appeal to a good number of young people who cherish their independence. Most of all, comparatively speaking, Morrison leads Australia's free speech party, and intellectual freedom is a cause dear to most of the best minds in each new generation.
  Nigel Jackson, Belgrave, Vic

*Responsibility for electoral comment authorised by K. W. Grundy 13 Carsten Court, Happy Valley, SA.