The Culture of Transgression: Our antinomian elite’s war against tradition has become a war against the working class
I generally agree with MICHAEL LIND but think he is being too polite below. There are both Leftists and Rightists in elite positions but it is the Leftist elite that gets the press and does the damage. Their chronic anger at the world around them is the motive. And any target will do as an outlet for their need to condemn -- even the absurd "gender" campaign. A completely overlooked group suddenly becomes a major object for Leftist concern
Everywhere we see our political, cultural, and financial elites bankrolling activists to dismantle traditions. While flags and slogans celebrating racial or sexual identity are proudly displayed by Western governments and corporations, overt displays of national patriotism are regarded by establishmentarians on both sides of the Atlantic as vulgar and distasteful. Religions tend to be viewed with distrust and contempt by the trans-Atlantic elite, unless their premodern teachings have been modified into alignment with the views of the campus left. The Western canon, instead of being enlarged to include unjustly excluded authors, has been jettisoned, and liberal education has been replaced by ideological indoctrination in the name of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI).
Iconoclasm is nothing new in history. The term was coined to describe the controversy over icons in medieval Byzantium, and has come to mean any attack on cherished traditions and familiar imagery. Radical Protestant reformers broke the stained glass and smashed the statues of Mary and the saints. The Taliban dynamited Buddhist statues in Afghanistan in 2001, and later ISIS destroyed many ancient Mesopotamian monuments and statues.
In most historic cases, programmatic iconoclasm has been temporary and accompanied or followed by the fabrication of new traditions and the imposition of new orthodoxies. In communist Russia, the statues of the czars went down and statues of Lenin and Stalin went up.
Some on the Western right fear that the wave of statue-toppling which began with Confederate statues and spread to practically any historic statue in North America and Europe will lead to the rule of a woke Taliban. But the cancellation of the Great Books curriculum has not led to a new consensus canon featuring minority, female, and nonbinary authors along with a smaller number of “dead white males” who are deemed acceptable. Instead, much of the energy of woke jihadists goes into purging or censoring existing works of art and thought—rewriting the novels of Roald Dahl, for example—or randomly parachuting nonwhite or “queer” characters into movie remakes instead of creating something new.
The cultural ferment in contemporary North America and Europe does not feel like an interregnum between one cultural regime and a stable successor. It feels like a permanent revolution.
Put another way, the Western elite culture of transgression is an example of antinomianism, not iconoclasm. Unlike iconoclasm, antinomianism is not a temporary campaign of destruction of older iconography and traditions to clear the way for the imposition of new canons and orthodoxies. Derived from the Greek words meaning “against” and “law” or “norm,” the term antinomianism refers to the view that all laws and norms are oppressive always and everywhere, and that the act of transgression in itself is virtuous, if not holy.
Antinomian sects have popped up in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, usually to be repudiated and sometimes violently suppressed by the orthodox. Luther and his Catholic opponents could agree that Christian antinomians were heretics. In the early years of political or religious revolutions, antinomians sometimes flourish, only to be crushed by other revolutionaries whose goal is to create a new order, not permanent disorder.
At the moment, the fashionable justifications invoked by the elite antinomian vandals attacking Western society from within are climate change, anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-homophobia, and “anti-fascism” as a catchall category. Upper-middle-class young men and women who throw paint at artistic masterpieces or glue themselves to trains claim they are defending the earth’s environment, but they could just as well say they are fighting white supremacy or patriarchy. They are acting out the ethos of a Western elite culture that believes the act of transgression itself is virtuous; the alleged goal of the transgression is merely an excuse.
Call it “the culture of transgression” of the dominant overclass in North Atlantic democracies. The three saints of transgression are the illegal immigrant, the transsexual, and the woman who proudly celebrates abortion. All three are idealized by our revolutionary ruling class precisely because they violate traditional norms—the traditional norm of patriotism, based on the legitimacy of the city-state or nation-state or kingdom and its laws and borders; traditional gender norms; and traditional family norms, which celebrate the capacity of women to give birth and to nurture their infants and of men to provide for them. Most of what is called “progressivism” today is really transgressivism.
The cultural ferment in North America and Europe does not feel like an interregnum between one cultural regime and a stable successor. It feels like a permanent revolution.
By now the antinomians in Western nations have won their war against tradition in every realm. The members of the credentialed corporate-government-nonprofit-academic-media oligarchy, along with billionaire entrepreneurs and bankers who themselves are usually born into managerial-professional families, are almost all modernist in their aesthetics, libertine in their views of sex and recreational drug use, and dismissive of nationalism and patriotism and religion, which they regard as mental diseases of the lower classes. They work in offices designed by trendy “starchitects” decorated with abstract art, and often live in postmodern homes designed to be sterile, off-putting, and the very opposite of petty bourgeois comfort.
Having vandalized every premodern tradition, the elite antinomians of the modern West now don’t know what to do next. What should rebels against the bourgeoisie rebel against when the bourgeoisie has fallen?
The answer, it is increasingly apparent, is to rebel against the proletariat. Instead of shocking the bourgeoisie, our post-bourgeois managerial overclass now delights in shocking the working class. Most working class people in the U.S. and Europe of all races and classes live in suburbs or exurbs—therefore our elite pundits and academics constantly denounce suburban “sprawl,” idealize life in high-style micro-apartments and expensive designer tiny houses, and call for the replacement of cars by mass transit. Many working class people like to cook with natural gas, so naturally our elite seeks to ban gas stoves. Gasoline-powered lawn mowers and leaf blowers? Forget it. California will ban gasoline-powered lawn equipment in 2024. Rising incomes that accompany development allow the masses to eat meat; therefore meat is redefined by the oligarchy as unhealthy and harmful to “the planet.”
Whatever working-class “normies” believe and enjoy, the most influential tastemakers of the trans-Atlantic ruling class denounce and seek to ban, using one of their three or four specious all-purpose justifications. If non-college-educated Americans were to take up square dancing as a fad, the powers that be in the media and academia would solemnly inform us that square dancing is problematically racist or sexist or worsens climate change.
To add insult to injury, when the multiracial working class rebels at the ballot box against this unrelenting and unprovoked bullying by the overclass and casts protest votes for demagogic and usually ineffectual anti-establishment politicians like Silvio Berlusconi or Donald Trump or Boris Johnson, the elite denounces the protest voters as irrational and bigoted cretins who threaten to overthrow democracy, liberalism, and the rule of law. By declaring the democratic preferences of the working class a danger to society, the West’s oligarchs justify subjecting their enemies to pervasive surveillance and other counterextremism measures originally designed for foreign terrorist groups.
We are hostages, then, of a trans-Atlantic ruling class which in turn is the prisoner of its own culture of perpetual antinomianism, of ceaseless rebellion, of never-ending transgression. The question is whether the state and capitalism, on which the overclass depends for its power and wealth, can maintain their legitimacy, now that Western elite antinomians—often through government agencies or corporations or banks they control—wage campaigns to wipe out the last autonomous institutions and inherited traditions in civil society.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/culture-of-transgression
**********************************************Canadian 'Transsexual' Requests Assisted Suicide Due to Post-Operation Pain and Suffering
Lois Cardinal, a self-described “sterilized First Nations post-op transsexual” in Alberta, Canada, has sought medical assistance in dying (MAiD) through the country’s progressive socialized healthcare system.
Cardinal, who underwent gender-affirming surgery in 2009 to create a “neo-vagina,” expressed profound regret over the procedure, citing constant pain and discomfort.
The surgery often results in the “neo-vagina” being akin to an open wound, necessitating daily dilation to prevent closure.
Cardinal, speaking to the Daily Mail, stated, “I’m in constant discomfort and pain… It’s taking this psychological burden on me. If I’m not able to access proper medical care, I don’t want to continue to do this.”
Despite Canada’s liberal approach to assisted suicide, Cardinal’s request was initially denied because she did not meet the current MAiD criteria.
The program is typically open to those suffering from incurable diseases or disabilities, but the doctor’s evaluation concluded that Cardinal’s pain from the sex change surgery could potentially be mitigated through other means.
The case has sparked concerns among opponents of transgender surgery and the recent liberalization of euthanasia laws in Canada.
They worry that the increase in state-backed suicides, reaching a record of 13,500 in the previous year, up from 10,064 in 2021, might be driven by individuals seeking euthanasia instead of traditional terminally ill patients.
Cardinal argued that euthanasia seemed like the only remaining option, as the prescribed numbing cream failed to alleviate the pain caused by the surgically constructed “vagina.”
However, some critics believe that the case highlights the potential dangers of not only transgender surgery but also the broader implications of the liberalization of euthanasia laws.
Cardinal, once an active supporter of the radical LGBT ideology, has now become a vocal critic, warning that vulnerable groups, including children and her native community, could be influenced by a medicalized trend.
She expressed disagreement with the current rhetoric within the trans community and emphasized the importance of honest and open conversations.
A recent study by researchers from the University of Florida and Brooks Rehabilitation found that 81 percent of people who underwent sex change genital surgery in the past five years experienced long-lasting pain following the procedure.
Additionally, 57 percent reported painful sexual experiences after the surgery.
************************************************
Dad fights to save his 3-year-old son from 'NON-BINARY' life forced upon him by mother
Harrison Tinsley was so excited when he found out he was going to be a dad. His story started in the same way many do – he met a girl, they fell in love, and a baby was soon on the way.
But a nightmare was waiting around the corner.
A few months into pregnancy, the mother of Harrison’s child became hostile toward him when he wouldn’t bend to her political ideology. The two had always been on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but until pregnancy, it had never been an issue.
“I was constantly getting threatened that I wouldn’t see my son if I wasn’t exactly who she wanted me to be, particularly in a political sense,” Harrison tells Allie Beth Stuckey.
“I’m not changing who I am; I’m going to love my son no matter what, and there’s no reason that we have to agree on everything to have a beautiful family,” he continues.
Their relationship ended, a cease-and-desist letter was issued to Harrison, all communication was cut off, and he was effectively barred from seeing his son.
Shortly after his son’s birth, however, he went to court to establish paternity, visitation, and custody, but the process took months, and by the time Harrison met his son, the boy was fifteen months old.
Fortunately, however, Harrison was able to win half custody and begin making up for lost time with his son.
But then another nightmare reared its ugly head.
Harrison is now fighting for full custody of his son for a number of reasons, the main one being that the child’s mother is raising him as non-binary.
“She would post pictures of him in dresses and makeup,” he says.
But that’s just the beginning.
“There’s defamation of me on social media,” says Harrison – specifically claims that he was abusive during their relationship.
“Which was completely untrue, and I’ve proven that to be untrue in court,” he says.
Then Harrison discovered that his son’s mother was placed on a 5150, which is an involuntary psychiatric hold, for an incident involving head trauma.
“There’s the defamation of me, there’s the gender stuff,” and then “mom was arrested for child endangerment.”
“It was extremely, extremely scary,” he tells Allie.
A trial was held, and to Harrison’s dismay, the court ruled to keep custody the same.
“My son had to continue to see the doctor that the mom preferred, which is a doctor” who believes “it’s okay to treat kids as non-binary,” he explains.
But Harrison isn’t one to give up without a fight.
“If they’re not gonna’ protect my son, I am,” he says, “so I decided I’m gonna scream it from the rooftops and tell as many people … what’s going on and try to get support that way, and I’m appealing the court’s decision to a higher court.”
“That’s where I’m at now. … I’m just speaking out, and it’s now become more than just protecting Sawyer; it’s also about protecting all kids.”
**************************************
ACT’s system of justice hangs in the balance over crooked prosecutor
There is a dark cloud hanging over the proper administration of justice in the Australian Capital Territory. The Sofronoff report, handed to the ACT Chief Minister on Monday, will go some way to lifting that cloud. But only a series of resolute responses to that report can reset justice in the nation’s capital territory.
One of the most serious issues aired during the May public hearings concerned evidence that ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold instructed a very junior solicitor to draft an affidavit asserting that legal professional privilege attached to police documents known as the Investigative Review Documents.
These documents, sought by Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyers but withheld by Drumgold, revealed inconsistencies in evidence provided by Brittany Higgins about her allegation of rape and questions about her credibility.
When Lehrmann’s legal team made an application to the court for disclosure, Drumgold instructed solicitors in his office to draft an affidavit to support nondisclosure on the basis that the documents were protected by legal professional privilege. Drumgold gave evidence that it was for the Australian Federal Police, not him, to assert legal privilege over the documents.
Therefore, an affidavit would need to cite the AFP was the source of information about privilege. Drumgold emailed two solicitors in his office about drafting the affidavit. The more senior of the two solicitors asked Drumgold, by return email, what the source of the information about legal privilege would be.
Drumgold did not respond to that question. Instead, he told the more senior solicitor that he would instruct the junior solicitor to deal with this part of the affidavit. Drumgold sent the young solicitor suggested wording for the critical part of the affidavit that claimed the police documents sought by the defence were privileged.
That wording was included in the affidavit sworn by the junior solicitor at the DPP’s direction. It created a falsehood, when presented to the court and to the ACT Chief Justice, that police had claimed privilege over the investigation documents. In fact, the AFP had not claimed privilege over these internal investigation documents. Evidence presented to the inquiry revealed that police believed these documents should have been disclosed to defence.
If Walter Sofronoff KC finds the DPP was knowingly involved in presenting a false affidavit to the ACT Supreme Court for the purposes of withholding information from the defence, Drumgold’s demand for this inquiry last year will rate as the biggest legal own goal since Oscar Wilde brought a defamation suit against the Marquess of Queensberry.
The ACT government’s response will be critical to the administration of justice in the ACT. Consider what was at stake. A young man was on trial for rape. If he was found guilty, he would, in all likelihood, go to jail. If the DPP tried to withhold evidence on false grounds, and if he presented that falsehood to the court, the DPP’s removal from high office is the easy decision. So is his removal from the roll of legal practitioners.
The most important decision will be to investigate whether the DPP knowingly attempted to pervert the course of justice.
The information that the DPP potentially tried to withhold from Lehrmann’s lawyers may have assisted them in formulating their client’s defence. The information may have revealed material that could have given rise to trains of inquiry for Lehrmann’s lawyers to pursue. Any attempt to withhold that information would interfere with those avenues of defence, and potentially it would keep information hidden that should probably have gone to the jury.
As was revealed during the Sofronoff inquiry, even if the material was not admissible in court, it was still material that should have been disclosed to the defence. It is a serious crime if Joe Citizen makes a false statement with the intent to pervert the course of justice. It is another level of seriousness if done by a person charged with upholding the administration of justice.
A prosecutor, entrusted with the enormous powers of the state over citizens, must behave as a minister of justice at all times: searching for the truth in an objective, impartial and fair manner.
Chief Minister Andrew Barr had better start consulting numerous sections of the ACT Criminal Code. First, under section 703(1), a person commits perjury if they make a sworn statement in a legal proceeding that is false and the person making it is reckless about the statement being false.
It becomes aggravated perjury, under section 702, if a person makes a false statement in a legal proceeding with the intention of procuring a person’s conviction for an offence. If the DPP knowingly presented a false affidavit to the ACT Supreme Court for the purposes of withholding information from the defence, section 708(b) is also relevant. It makes it an offence if a person deceives someone else so that this other person gives false or misleading evidence in a legal proceeding.
Consider, too, section 713, which makes it a criminal offence if a person, by his or her conduct, intentionally perverts the course of justice. It won’t matter that the affidavit was sworn by the junior solicitor and not by Drumgold. Under section 46 of the ACT Criminal Code, a person is taken to have committed an offence if they procured someone else to engage in the conduct. That means if the DPP was knowingly involved in presenting a false affidavit to the ACT Supreme Court for the purposes of withholding information from the defence, he could face multiple charges, each charge giving rise to maximum jail terms of seven years.
Let us be emphatic about this: in any criminal prosecution, should it come to that, Drumgold is entitled to the presumption of innocence and a fair trial, just as Lehrmann was, and may have been denied that by Drumgold. The rule of law applies equally to all.
Barr and his Attorney-General, Shane Rattenbury, will need to refresh their memories about Marcus Einfeld, the federal court judge who was sentenced to two years in jail in 2009 for lying about a speeding fine. The judge completed a false statutory declaration that stated he was not driving his car at the time his silver Lexus was clocked for doing 60km/h in 50km/h zone. The potential fine was $75 and the loss of three demerit points. Einfeld claimed his friend, an American academic, Teresa Brennan, was driving his car. This was a gross lie. Brennan had died three years earlier and Einfeld knew it.
When sentencing Einfeld to jail, NSW Supreme Court judge Bruce James said the judge’s lies struck “at the heart of the administration of justice”.
Outside court that day, the head of the police fraud squad, Detective Superintendent Colin Dyson said there were “no winners today but justice has been served”.
If Drumgold is found to have knowingly lied to try to keep police investigation material from a defendant who faced jail if found guilty of rape, it enters a different realm of gravity.
A decision to launch an investigation into a possible attempt to pervert the course of justice will fall squarely on the shoulders of three institutions: first, the ACT Chief Minister, as the first recipient of the Sofronoff report; second, ACT Policing, the unit within the AFP responsible for investigating criminal offences in the ACT; and, third, the ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the body charged with carriage of prosecutions.
This raises obvious challenges. The ACT government appointed Drumgold. The AFP had a fractious relationship with Drumgold, as laid out over many weeks in public during the Sofronoff inquiry. And a new minister of justice who heads up the ODPP in the ACT won’t relish the prospect of having, as one of their first jobs, the prosecution of the previous director.
That said, if any of these powerful institutions of state turn a blind eye to a possible attempt to pervert the course of justice, then they will be responsible for the darkest chapter in this saga, one that will do the most harm to the administration of justice in the nation’s capital territory.
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See
No comments:
Post a Comment