“Extraordinary Hypocrisy” Is a Synonym For “Ordinary Selfishness”

2 04 2018

Palo Alto, California

“‘It’s ironic that Zuckerberg will go to such extraordinary lengths to protect his own privacy – when the privacy of millions of people doesn’t appear to have been high on his priority list, Nick told DailyMail.com.”

Well color me shocked.

You mean to tell me the same Zuckerberg that opposes border walls for “his” country but has walls around the borders of his own estates would also be a hypocrite when it comes to privacy?

None of this is “extraordinary hypocrisy” at all.

Consider:

His personal privacy is good for Mark Zuckerberg.

The lack of personal privacy for Facebook users is good for Mark Zuckerberg.

Walls around his estates are good for Mark Zuckerberg.

The lack of real border security and immigration enforcement is good for Mark Zuckerberg.

What’s the common denominator?

What ever is good for Mark Zuckerberg.

Advertisements




Jersey Salute To You Too, Dear

16 01 2018

San Francisco

Melinda Byerley be like:

ZOMG FLYOVER KUNTREE LOL~!!!!!1

Then there’s this:

The MBA claims that “we,” the educated people, like herself, “would like to live a more rural lifestyle,” but they “won’t sacrifice tolerance or diversity to do so.” Especially, these folks do not want to live in “states where the majority of residents are voting for things against their own interests,” solely, because these voters “don’t want brown people to thrive.”

That’s Thomas Frank’s basic contention in What’s the Matter With Kansas? — A contention that Thomas Frank doesn’t buy anymore.  In the long run, Kansas is less a credible political analysis than it is a screed which justifies and provides comfort to the classist bigotry and virtue signaling of white elitist “progressives.”  You know, I’m better than all these icky sticky yucky ducky white people who live in shitholes.

It should be noted that San Francisco is certainly not getting more diverse, especially not the kind of diversity that nobody, not even these kinds of diverse peoples themselves, want to live around.  For example, the black population has been plummeting fast in recent decades.

More:

She declares that if middle American towns can begin fixing their schools, and, essentially, “clean up their act,” then people like Byerley will “want to live there.”

“Fixing their schools?”  Byerley’s political party, wielding Byerley’s elitist gentry neoliberal mentality, and governing in the best interests of people of her ilk, already think that these schools which she claims need to be “fixed” are already so good that the sure fire silver bullet way to fix the black-white everything gap is to give ghetto black undertow women AFFH/Section 8 vouchers to live in those school districts.

LATE NOTE:  It was obvious, and I missed it at first.  She wants “middle American towns” to be more diverse NOT because she wants them to be more attractive to people like her, but because she wants places where people like her want to live, i.e. San Francisco, to be less diverse.





Do As We Say (Don’t Notice What We Do)

7 05 2017

Manhattan

Et tu, Samantha Bee?

From the original article:

The mayor has expressed support for school diversity, but he also has said the city must respect parents’ real-estate investments (a statement that at least one P.S. 452 parent repeated this week), while Chancellor Carmen Fariña has warned against forcing integration “down people’s throats.”

You might be scratching your head, wondering where this concern was when you were in the line of fire.  But you have to remember that elitist hypocrisy is a feature and not a bug when you’re part of the elite.  The list of things that the Gotham elite can get away with that they won’t allow anyone else to is pretty long.  Along with this, two I can think of off top are police use of SQF, and extensive IQ testing for public school slotting and admissions.





It’s Not Healthy to Be So Wrong So Early in the Morning

6 04 2017

Manhattan

It sets a bad tone for the rest of the day.

From a blog called Every Joe:

Civic Nationalism, Part I: Magic Dirt Theory

Interestingly enough, no one – or, at least, no one entitled to an opinion – actually believes in Magic Dirt Theory.

Ah, but what, in fact, is the theory?

Magic Dirt Theory appears to be a coinage of the right, or the alt-right. It is a rhetorical construct designed to disparage that kind of liberalism, progressivism, or cosmopolitanism which would seem to hold that everyone born to some place is and should automatically be a citizen of that place, fully equal, indeed, indistinguishable from the pre-existing native population, no matter what culture the newborn is later raised in, and irrespective of any other attachment or inheritance, or lack thereof, he or she may have to the place.

I have some bad news for those on the alt-right who have pegged a good deal of their overall political philosophy to sneering at Magic Dirt Theory. In this regard; few lefties, if any, even if they say explicitly that they believe in it, do, in fact, believe it. What they do believe, in this particular, seems to come, at least for the most part, from one of two related threads. One is the cosmopolitan thread, which holds national boundaries, or any boundaries between peoples, as artificial, preposterous, and evil. In this view, the citizen of Kenya is already as American as anyone native born, because any kind of exclusive Americanism is, itself, a concept both wicked and false. That’s not Magic Dirt Theory; that’s saying the dirt doesn’t matter at all. Of course, it’s a fantastically silly position to take.

This starts with a whiff (incorrectly defining the Magic Dirt Theory) and gets worse (accusing us of “pegging a good deal of [our] political philosophy to sneering at Magic Dirt Theory”).

(1) The first fifteen words of the second sentence of the second paragraph are correct.

(2) But this writer seems to think that the purpose of our snark about Magic Dirt has everything to do with immigration.  While it certainly can and has been applied to immigration, that’s not its only use.  Closer to home, we use the Magic Dirt rhetorical construct/snark to prove the folly of efforts like AFFH.

(3) We have not thrown all our eggs into the basket of the Magic Dirt snarky meme.

(4) We are very much aware that there is a severe disconnect between what the Masters of the Universe say slash promulgate slash want us to believe in and what they do slash how they behave slash their revealed preferences.  Elitist hypocrisy isn’t hypocrisy when you’re elite.  We know that the purpose of such hypocrisy is almost always the empowerment of said “hypocritical” Masters of the Universe.  If I tell you to kill yourself but don’t act like I want to kill myself, you shouldn’t worry about my hypocrisy, you should be thinking about my conspiracy to steal all your stuff from you after you’re dead.

We know the MotU don’t literally believe in Magic Dirt.  We know they want us to believe in it while they don’t.

 





Proven Track Record

22 03 2017

Sacramento

California’s state legislature is mulling BDS of any contractors that win contracts to help build the Great Wall of Trump.

There are actually many California contractors that have a lot of experience in building walls.  Especially around the Zuckerberg joint.

You don’t think I’m making a point about two-faced elitist hypocrisy on the slick, do you?





President Obama Is Opposed to Walls

6 01 2017

Washington, D.C

So is Mark Zuckerberg.





Tales from the Social Justice Crypt

16 08 2016

Manhattan

Megan McArdle, writing in Bloomberg:

In Applebee’s and Waffle Houses, we swap stories of the affordable housing activists who spent their free time lobbying against building high rises in our neighborhoods, ostensibly because it would change the character but really because it would destroy the light in the fourth-floor apartment they’d purchased in 1972; of the people who proclaimed their commitment to diversity and tolerance while doing their best to get any conservative socially ostracized or fired; of the outrageously bigoted way our neighbors would talk about “those people” (some combination of white, lower-middle class, religious, Southern, conservative); of the laboriously hypocritical indignities we were subject to, like complicated building-wide recycling schemes promoted by “environmentalists” who flew to Europe four times a year; of the white liberals who shook their heads at all those horrid racists, while trying to mask, with code words, their determination to isolate their own children from minority peers, except for a token handful who were solidly upper middle class.

So she’s trying to tell us that the progressive social justice agenda is nothing more than internalized rationalized selfishness and virtue signaling?

Naw, get out of town.  (No pun intended.)  Next thing you know, they’ll be telling us that social justice warrorism is a front for and a diversion from plutocratic, billionaire and corporate greed.