As a symbolic representation of the existential homelessness of modern Western man, I am always on the lookout for material to tell you about that affirms my raison d’etre, a word which I found on-line, but don’t know the meaning of, having no meaning or point for my existence.

     Anyway, I am getting off topic, which for me is remarkable. But, what was my topic? Think, Len, think. Your fans expect a lot from you, like coherence and all that. Now I remember, I have re-read my title….high tech homelessness. You see the high tech elite at Silicon Valley, which is, I suppose, an entire valley full of silicon, are living in their cars because of the high cost of living. HA! HA, again. Why don’t they just clean up all the silicon and make homes for people? Or, bring in more migrants, who through their economic magic will make even more homes?

     mThe political class have really wanted a national ID card, as it is just the thing which any fashionable authoritarian anti-freedom government has. This card was defeated in the past, but now it is coming back, like a zombie, to eat the flesh of our freedom:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/id-card-back-on-agenda-in-national-security-overhaul/news-story/68b6a39817cf4b59c6fed03c7129f058
     This time round terrorism is being used to scare us into adopting this most un-Australian of documents, and Pauline Hanson has fallen for the need for it, because of her knee-jerk fear of terrorism and welfare fraud:
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/one-nations-pauline-hanson-pushing-for-national-id-card-to-combat-welfare-fraud/news-story/518510e317397482ab904bdf07a89fad
     It will do nothing of the sort, and is useless against home-grown terrorism. They will just commit terrorism, with their ID card in their back pocket.
    Contact Pauline and tell her to wake up to the loss of freedom which this ID card is going to bring. We will join the family of Islamic and Middle Eastern countries in having this, and where it does nothing to stop terrorism.

     Forget about knife and car attacks, Sweden, a once Nordic country, now has embraced further diversity and  pluralism, with an increase in – yes, you guessed it – grenade attacks! Here is a reliable true news source on this one:

“The number of hand grenade attacks in Sweden has risen by 550 per cent in just three years, with police describing the situation as “completely unacceptable”.
Police data shows that in 2014 the Swedish force investigated eight grenade incidents, none of which involved a detonation.  But last year this figure inflated by a massive 550 per cent, as officers saw a total of 52 grenade-related incidents, 27 of which involved detonations.
At first, the grenade attacks were mostly directed at cars and homes linked to criminals and their relatives  — but from two years ago perpetrators began to target the nation’s “society and state”, an expert at Sweden’s National Police Department told SVT.”
At: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/08/06/hand-grenade-attacks-sevenfold-sweden/
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/halland/handgranatsattacker-har-okat-markant

to THE AUSTRALIAN
     Noel Pearson is at best only half right in claiming (‘Memo Richo: Facts count, not lazy fictions’, 8/8) that ‘constitutional conservatives’ are ‘passionate advocates’ for the proposed ‘indigenous voice in Parliament’. What about the real conservatives on this issue: Keith Windschuttle, Andrew Bolt, John Roskam, Frank Salter and Greg Sheridan? Moreover, on this particular matter Julian Leeser cannot validly be described as a ‘hardcore constitutional conservative’. He has long been supporting constitutional recognition.
     The true conservative position is warm and respectful recognition of Aboriginal history and culture, but not by misuse of the Constitution. It would set a bad precedent, too, for future ideological meddling with what at present is a proven national treasure.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     Although this issue has been discussed before here, the context has been about the decline of the sperm quality of Western men, which a recent study concluded has fallen by more than 50 percent in 40 years, and is not slowing down:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/sperm-count-western-men-plunges-10869887
https://oup.silverchair-cdn.com/oup/backfile/Content_public/Journal/humupd/PAP/10.1093_humupd_dmx022/1/dmx022.pdf?Expires=1502157474&Signature=GSLOxjiYvEeR2vHpfJE2lWd07FFGb7z~rdM5M~mT9e~bjjAdj7y7w1zRoaCd525~Cu~VfcpZb7T6nzMylHuBhtoqAZLasinFLvhIwPis71rD9jdcz43IJcX74vnyBuF0JkYPFAC7UgpUWGiZQcn7urmm5Wq4xZwV-i1shR9Ek318A7-TM9ezRBhcsQnmQFNhM6b~xcqr1j83A2SikXAm4DU-0uxZV2SK7muSY918WFZiVDm1oF1C-5Z1QTwHyyY8~lY9JxMW1jGmMSxRJHc027XOqGCCgRdQ9T3tJanbLrxh5JEj9AtI0ZRJnydAEmmcEWlftnIiZmkPnImSjBDCIw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIUCZBIA4LVPAVW3Q.
How is that for a URL reference – somewhat self-defeating I think. Here is the old-fashioned reference:
H. Levine (et al.), “Temporal Trends in Sperm Count: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis,” Human Reproduction Update, 2017, pp. 1-14.

     Now this research has been quoted in the media as allegedly showing that Western sperm quality is undergoing decline. Gloating non-Whites, primarily Muslims have ground it in. Yet as Mike Adams has noted
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-06-depopulation-assault-is-working-sperm-viability-plunges-among-men.html   there is still evidence that the decline in sperm quality is worldwide, and not exclusively due to factors such as diet, although that may be a contributing factor. The analysis had some indication that the decline in sperm quality was worldwide, including in still developing countries.

     An interesting article at https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10754/europe-sharia-law, details how Europe is adopting sharia law. In particular, the area which this is occurring is centred around women. Here is a key extract:

“Within days after the Islamic State conquered the city of Sirte in Libya two years ago, enormous billboards appeared in the Islamist stronghold warning women they must wear baggy robes that cover their entire bodies, and no perfume. These “sharia stipulations for hijab” included wearing dense material and a robe that does not “resemble the attire of unbelievers”.
Two years later, Europe’s three most important cities -- London, Paris and Berlin -- are adopting the same sharia trend.
Paris has said au revoir to “sexist” ads on public billboards. The Paris city council announced its ban after the Socialist Mayor Anne Hidalgo said the move meant that Paris was “leading the way” in the fight against sexism.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan also banned advertisements that promote “unrealistic expectations of women’s body image and health”.
Now Berlin is planning to ban images in which women are portrayed as “beautiful but weak, hysterical, dumb, crazy, naive, or ruled by their emotions”. Der Tagesspiegel’s Harald Martenstein said the policy “could have been adopted from the Taliban manifesto”.
The irony is that this wave of morality and “virtue” is coming from cities governed by uninhibited leftist politicians, who for years campaigned for sexual liberation.
There is a reason for this grotesque campaign banning these images. These cities host significant Muslim populations; and politicians -- the same who frantically are enacting mandatory multiculturalism -- want to please “Islam”. It is now a “feminist” talking point to advocate sharia policy, as does Linda Sarsour. The result is that, today, few feminists dare to criticize Islam.
It is happening everywhere. Dutch municipalities are “advising” their employees to not wear mini-skirts. There are women-only hours at Swedish swimming pools. German schools are sending letters to parents asking children to avoid wearing “revealing clothes”.
The first to suggest calling for a ban on posters or advertisements that “reduce women or men to sexual objects” was German Justice Minister Heiko Maas, a Social Democrat.”

to THE AGE
     Lyn Mitchell asks why Malcolm Turnbull is ‘taking on nearly all of Tony Abbott’s policies’ (8/8). Perhaps because they are wise and he is bowing, albeit reluctantly, to reality.  ‘Stopping the boats’ is a vital first step in curbing immigration into this continent and maintaining a reasonable quality of life here. A plebiscite on marriage gives all Australian citizens a chance to indicate their wishes. Climate change is a reality, but whether and to what degree it is caused by humankind is a question still being debated.
     On one issue the PM will be wise not to follow in Abbott’s footsteps: constitutional recognition. The Constitution should not be tampered with to favour one small group at the expense of the great majority. Recognition, yes, of course; it already happens in many ways; but not by unjust and destabilising change to our book of rules which has long protected our free way of life and largely civil society.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

to SUNDAY AGE
     No better example of political gobbledegook could be found than the promise of the Leader of the Opposition to make the constitution ‘better, more equal, more Australian’ (‘Shorten backs Indigenous “voice”’, 6/8). Equality does not permit of degree. To what does he intend to ‘equalise’ our constitution, which is already completely Australian?
     It is chilling to see the ALP leader backing a ‘truth-telling commission’. Shades of Stalinism and Maoism! His language (‘the right-wing rump’ of the Liberal Party) is also coarse and uncivil. As for his support of a ‘treaty’, the Australian people are currently one; and a people does not enter into a treaty with itself. He says that Aboriginal Australians do not need a ‘lecture about the difficulty of changing the constitution,’ but he evidently does.
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

to THE AGE
     The Prime Minister is right (‘Hate mail - Fears of malicious campaign’, 10/8) that, during the run-up to the marriage postal vote, ‘the views of all sides should not be censored, even if offensive and extreme.’ That is an essential aspect of free speech. On this question there are obviously powerful arguments on both sides: it is not a simple black-and-white matter. Views which one commentator sincerely believes to be truthful and relevant may well appear to an ideological opponent as ‘misleading and deceptive’.
     Is a compromise possible? Defenders of traditional marriage are unlikely to object, for example, to gay partners having ‘rights such as next of kin or being named on a partner’s death certificate’ (Letters).
NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     Previously I have reported on the trend of the financial elites seeking bug out locations in places like New Zealand, as well as building expensive underground security fortifications at their homes:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/29/silicon-valley-new-zealand-apocalypse-escape

    It seems now that elites lower down the food chain are starting to move in the same direction; a recent story is of http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-09-why-a-former-facebook-executive-quit-the-tech-industry-moved-to-the-woods-and-bought-guns-and-ammo-collapse-is-coming.html.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4761458/Ex-Facebook-exec-says-society-collapse-30-years.html

     As pointed out in a recent article by Judith Sloan, “We’re Squeezing the Life Out of Our Cities,” http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/judith-sloan/were-squeezing-the-life-out-of-our-cities/news-story/c9ef0c2c59ec79a12ec983247e2eba20, immigration is making once liveable cities, unliveable:

“So what are the undesirable features of the galloping rate of growth of Melbourne’s population?
For starters, the new infrastructure projects that would normally be associated with such strong population growth have struggled to keep up. Think schools, hospitals, additional public transport and roads, particularly those linking different parts of the city — the list goes on.
The congestion on the roads and public transport at certain times of the day and week is something to behold. If I take the train to the city during peak times, the experience is akin to travelling in a sardine can. Even though we are not many stops from the beginning of the line, there is no hope of getting a seat or even finding a secure standing spot.
Driving is equally unbearable. Consider also the developments that have been allowed to occur in our precinct. On the arterial roads, the big houses have been sold, pulled down and replaced mostly by tacky-looking, albeit expensive, apartment blocks.
Nothing else has changed in terms of the local schools, local transport, local shops and other local amenities. There are many more people living in the area, but none of the supporting facilities has been altered. Evidently, we locals are being unreasonable trying to block this sort of development; we are guilty of selfish nimbyism and we just need to get with the program.
And that program is medium and high-density living, whether the longstanding incumbents like it or not. I used to think that it was our democratic right to express opinions about how our local suburb should develop, but apparently I was mistaken.”

     There are now many different immigration initiatives from a variety of sources which ALL need our support ALL the time. Come election time/s the "Reduce Immigration Write-On" is also one to consider. The idea was mentioned to us by Denis McCormack, a long-time fighter of the immigration/multiculturalism/Asianisation madness, and involves the “Reduce Immigration” write-on to ballot papers. All perfectly legal and it will not invalidate your vote. It is an easy way of sending a message to the ruling elites that the people care, and are watching. To find out more visit the great site:  https://reduceimmigration.wordpress.com/

“Australia’s annual immigration numbers have more than doubled between 1999 and 2016. Net overseas migration in 2016 contributed the majority (56%) of our annual population growth rate of 1.6%, one of the highest in the developed world.
Bipartisanship across the major political parties has kept the idea of a lower immigration policy from becoming a real electoral issue, let alone the political reality. Both major parties are committed to high immigration. The REDUCE IMMIGRATION campaign does not oppose all immigration, but believes that policy change is needed because high immigration adversely affects our environmental and economic sustainability, social cohesion and cultural integrity.
Around 70% of Australians are concerned about increased immigration into Australia and our high rate of population growth.
This write-on campaign encourages Australian voters to express their objection to excessive immigration and to influence our immigration policy by adding a message to ballot papers in local, state and federal elections. Such write-on activity does not invalidate the ballot, does not make the vote informal, and does not contravene any laws.”

     Imagine a sausage factory – the luckiest, most profitable sausage factory in the world. Its machines crank out their sausages, and lorries carry them to supermarkets. So far, so normal.

     But this particular factory makes as many sausages as the management and staff choose. If they feel like taking the day off, the lorries and shelves stay empty. If they want to go a bit wild, they sometimes make so many sausages that there aren’t enough lorries to take them away. Or they carry on cranking out sausages even if the shelves are already full.

     Our economy is static rather than dynamic in the sense that as a society we cannot access what we have already produced until we produce even more—not to purchase what we are producing but to buy goods produced in the previous costing cycle.

      In order to purchase the goods upon which we are currently working when they are completed we must first engage in a whole new and additional round of production.  This is consequent to a price-system that pre-maturely cancels purchasing-power and leaves a deficiency when the final goods come off the production line.  

     I remember a book being around years ago called The Secret Life of Plants (1973), by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird, which argued that plants were sentient, and that agriculture should take this fact into consideration. At the time I was sceptical and believed that if they were right, then probably we would end up eating nothing and starving!

     However, maybe I dismissed this claim too lightly:
http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-18-stunned-scientists-discover-that-plants-learn-like-humans-and-intelligently-adapt-to-their-environments-is-this-proof-of-plant-consciousness.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-05-stunning-discovery-reveals-that-plants-and-parasites-engage-in-social-media-information-sharing-for-self-defense.html.

     The Left newspaper The Guardian, has recently published a cartoon in its unfunny, “first dog on the Moon,” series, claiming that there is “unfortunately” not a plan, “to eradicate white people from the Earth.”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/10/will-even-white-people-die-how-to-explain-nuclear-war-to-your-kids

     The two dogs are discussing the present North Korea crisis, which seems to be blamed on “white supremacists” being in the White House. You have got to be kidding – imagine if there really were white supremacists wouldn’t these leftists melt into a puddle of political correctness then? Anyway, here is the full transcript of the cartoon:

     I have been going through my old books, culling things out, to make it easier for those cleaning up after I die, perhaps in the coming nuclear Armageddon. Oh, wait, a contradiction; there will be no need to clean up, and no-one to do it anyway. But, I digress, perhaps getting on the senility train with Uncle Len.

     Here in my hand is a copy of Jewish intellectual,  Julien Benda, La Trahison des Clercs (The Treason of the Intellectuals) (1927). He argued that 19th and early 20th century intellectuals had departed from the cosmopolitan/universalist path, and had become apologists for nationalism, and what he called “racism,” but what others would call common sense.

     Marxist and extreme political ideologues in general typically do not debate.  Their characteristic strategic behaviour is to misrepresent, condemn and intimidate.  

     Their aim is to create social chaos, leaving an opening for them to seize the reins of political power.

     Each day it is not too difficult to find hundreds of articles from countries across the world supporting the anti-immigration case. To prove my own point, I reach for today’s The Australian, and find: “Refugee Numbers Squeezing Suburb,” (August 5-6, 2017, p. 8) (“Middle-class progressives have no qualms about determining moral values. Yet a fairer approach would surely entail sacrificing comfort for a cause.”)

     Another critical approach is the historical one, of looking at past societies that were brought down by immigration. A case for the fall of Rome being based upon out-of-control immigration was made by Peter Heather, The Fall of The Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, (Pan Books, 2006). The punch line is that Rome did not fall from all those things which conservatives like to think it fell from, such as too much tax, but because the state had been weakened by out-of-control immigration, and finished off by the barbarians.

     Few of us care about synagogues being built: how do they harm us? And, few of us would oppose the construction of a new synagogue, especially in iconic Jewish areas such as Bondi. It is simply part of Australian culture. Yet, as incredible as it sounds, the construction of a new synagogue has been stopped, not because of Nazi protests, but because of the Islamic terrorism threat. Here is a news summary of the key points: http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/bondi-synagogue-ban-over-terrorism-risk-leaves-jewish-community-shocked-and-furious/news-story/6ec6252d613583df7797c7cac2b25de4:

“A LOCAL council has banned the construction of a synagogue in Bondi because it could be a terrorist target, in a shock move that religious leaders say has caved in to Islamic extremism and created a dangerous precedent.  The decision, which has rocked the longstanding Jewish community in the iconic suburb, was upheld in court this week as the nation reeled from the alleged airline terror threat and debate raged over increased security measures at airports and other public places.