Just up at The Best Schools blog

Brain size unrelated to intelligence, , study finds. (The factors that govern body size may not affect brains.) 

Neanderthals not so dumb after all. True, they never cooperated with their part in the evolution program, but that doesn’t make them dumb.

 Birds can use tools too (but human intelligence is unique).

An astute critic of Darwinism dies at 104

But Barzun's clarity is probably the precise reason his reputation is likely to go into eclipse in a decadent period. In “Jacques Barzun, wide-ranging cultural historian, dies at 104” (Washington Post, October 26, 2012),

Joe Holley offers a conventional view, implying that critiques of anyone but Darwin are acceptable. More here.

 And Scooped! The New York Times is already untelling the story of Barzun ... Actually, if he wanted to be an authentic witness, he could not spare Marx or Darwin what he did not spare others.

 And friends write to remind me of Gertrude Himmelfarb: At 90, still a sharp critic of rant, cant, and credulity about the past, and also a critic of the Darwin cult. She comes in for her share of abuse from the cultists too. Readers who do not care about critiques of Darwin might wish to consider this: In decadent times, cultural historians cannot get a serious discussion going about elite cult figures. And that is precisely the discussion most needed at any time.

The real crime is having an opinion not sponsored by a government-approved source of propaganda.

Excellent friend Franklin Carter at the Book and Periodical Council's Freedom of Expression Committee writes to tell me about this: In “Government crackdown on hatred goes a link too far” ( Kingston Whig-Standard, August 15, 2011), Alan Shanoff asks, “Is the federal government proposing to make hyperlinking a crime?”

That seems to be the case when you read Bill C-51, a federal bill called Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act.

The stated purpose of Bill C-51 is the modernization of certain criminal offences. One of the offences to be modernized is the offence of public promotion of hatred against an identifiable group. ...

The new and improved modernized definition makes it crystal clear that hyperlinking is a form of communication. After all, what better way to make something available than providing a link to it, a link you can access with the click of a mouse?

He asks, “ ... many of these sites contain hurtful language but should anybody linking to such sites for any reason be at risk of prosecution?”

Yes indeed, depending on what one means by “Investigative Powers for the 21st Century.” The real crime is having an opinion not sponsored by a government-approved source of propaganda.

If it passes, here is what can happen to the blogger:

1. Lillian Rose is a garden maven whose blog frequently features links to botanist John Turricle’s wonderful work on mildew-resistant blooms. Retirees, into gardening, love her blog.

Rose doesn’t know it, but Turricle is also an avowed racist, and features his eruptions on race in the “Other” section of his blog - stuff she has never so much as looked at, because she and her readers are totally focused on winning the flower show.

Sorry, Rose. Someone complained, and linkers like you were then eagerly sought, by armies of bureaucrats with nothing better to do. So, GAVEL!! Guilty! of spreading hate, with all the fines, adult reform school, and humiliation that implies. Gardening blog hobby, ... toast.

2. Honest John Deal runs a business catering to amputees. Some of his assisted living devices come from a site whose owner insists, from time to time, on featuring anti-Muslim editorials.

Honest John doesn’t agree with the site owners’s views, but that guy is the one distributor who ships to John’s area with no hassles, and amputees hobble by every single day to see if their life-assisting shipments are safely in.

Sorry, John. Someone complained, and linkers like you were then eagerly sought, by armies of bureaucrats with nothing better to do. So, GAVEL!! Guilty! of spreading hate, with all the fines, adult reform school, and humiliation that implies. Business helping others, ... toast.

3. Annie Sellfridge owns and operates an appliance store in a multicultural area. She puts her inventory on line, and also features a popular site section on Saving on Electricity Bills. She doesn’t know it, but one of the sites she linked to is run by “climate change deniers,” who provide their free opinion on that subject, along with advice about energy-efficient appliances. (All Sellfridge was interested in was the fact that they provide multinational numbers , so new immigrant customers can relate to the numbers they best understand.)

Sorry, Annie. Someone complained, and linkers like you were then eagerly sought, by armies of bureaucrats with nothing better to do. So, GAVEL!! Guilty! of spreading hate, with all the fines, adult reform school, and humiliation that implies. Business providing a needed service, ... toast.

4. Blogger O’Leary was interviewing the author of an anti-eugenics book, and - to clearly demo the fact that antique forms of racism survive to the present day - she links to one of them.

Sorry, O’Leary. Someone complained, and linkers like you were then eagerly sought, by armies of bureaucrats with nothing better to do. So, GAVEL!! Guilty! of ...

Spreading: yuh, whatever.

If government cannot do better than this, let’s just dispense with government. Okay? How much worse off would we be without it? Alternatively, write to your Member of Parliament. Tell them you think the Internet should be free, like the press.

And read Tyranny of Nice, Shakedown, and America Alone. And any book on civil liberties.

Protestors of Muslim prayer in secular public schools - don’t be swayed by this false argument

Those who gather to protest the mosqueterias tonight at the Toronto District School Board offices may hear this: “For many years, Christian prayer - and only Christian prayer - was allowed because you were a majority. You only care now because in some districts, another religious grooup is a majority and wants the same thing.”

The people who might say such a thing are appallingly ignorant, but there is no law against that.

The skinny: When Canada was founded in 1867, it had two strong religious cultures at loggerheads, Protestant vs. Catholic. And churches were largely responsible for education back then.

Disunity could have destroyed the country, so a political compromise created “Protestant” schools vs. “Catholic” schools - each supported by its own taxpayers. No, it ain’t pretty, but religious civil war is uglier, and in any event, it worked.

Over 150 years, the Protestant system gradually morphed into the “public,” secular system, with no religious orientation now preferred - both by law and by general preference.

History doesn’t matter in this situation, because a choice has been made against it. Anyone who brings it up is introducing a red herring that might divide people who should work together.

Toronto District School Board’s plan for peace re sharia-compliant schools

Re the Mosqueterias in sharia-compliant school districts, like the biggest school board in Canada: A proposed

Draft message from the Toronto District School Board to students:

To: students, parents, ratepayers

Date: [tbd]

Subject: Complaints received re sharia schools

--

We feel your pain.

Ever aiming at new levels of balance and diversity, we plan to address the complaints by shortly instituting "Spirituality for gay/lesbian/transgendered/queer/exploring/uncertain teens," proving them with appropriate worship and clergy counselling in previously public space.

[Politician: Good! Balance out the only lobbies that matter.]

We will, of course, continue to suppress observant Christian and Jewish teens who want access to spiritual counselling, lest their harmful culture is propagated. They could end up concluding that some lifestyles are bad for them and that they have the power to decide for themselves.

We want to take this opportunity to reassure our whole community that that goes against everything we believe here at the Board. Fact and rationality are “out the window” now, in favour of diversity studies, post-modernism, deconstruction, victimhood, and plunging IQs.

[Union head: Great! More shight, less fear of an “incompetence” evaluation. Bring it on.]

We pledge to promote any weirdness or hatred whatever, as long as you think you can’t help yourself or your family is forcing you to. We are especially supportive if someone will kill you if you don't go along with the [shight]. We’ll help you adjust to the terror.

[Editor: How did “shight” get in here? We certainly need a better word than that. How about “life affirmation”? Too woo-woo? Wait! Try “peace amid diversity”? Yes, that’s it! Put it in!]

Finally, we promise to continue to shake down the public to support your oppression. Human Rights Commissions have the authority to persecute anyone who thinks you should have a second look before you jump. They've gone after very prominent Canadians, so there is no fear that you will ever get out from under Trudeaupia.

[Recommendation from equity reviewer O’Leary, just before slitting her throat: To drive the point home, make the little serfs study Canadian Icon Margaret Atwood’s horror novel about “Gilead,” a mythical theocracy in the southern United States. We can’t permit the young swine to realize that theocracy is happening here, and not there. For effect, throw in another compulsory Atwood three-loon special, will you? Just to teach them to ALWAYS point the finger abroad, to distract attention from what's happening at home.]

Note: Everything above is fiction except for the facts.

To my school board trustee: On the tax-funded sharia “public” school, in Toronto

On the tax-funded sharia “public” school, featuring compulsory attendance for those who can’t afford private or home schooling:

I used to work with the Toronto District School Board as an equity reviewer. Seeing this, and reading background information, I must ask, Is there some reason that the Board should continue to exist? Couldn’t we have female "uncleanness" and exclusion of those who don’t adhere to the correct religion without a school board?

There are lots of places where nobody goes to school and everybody behaves that way and thinks it is right. What are you trustees adding besides my tax dollars at work?

You, at least, I trust to help put a stop to this.

sincerely,
Denyse O’Leary
(a taxpayer compelled to fund exalting one religion over others and female uncleanness over equality - just think, the City could seize my property if I refused to fund what we all fought all our lives against ... what I was paid by the Board to work against! When did the war that we lost even happen? Where? Memory loss on my part?)

Note: Here are the trustees.

Note 2: Yes,the blog is still on hold, as I got a much-needed extension for the book till November 1, 2012.

A second open letter to Guy Earle

Guyzini, old cat, you might remember me, the Toronto granny who encouraged you in the early stages of what has now become a five-star “human rights tribunal” debacle. Good for you, pursuing it to the Supreme Court and I’ll back you. But couple things first:

First, you may lose the case, which further endangers the civil rights of everyone who does NOT live by the growing monster of government. Still, you might win. But either way, Five Feet of Fury  is doubtless right in thinking that no help can come from the political class itself now. The revolt must begin from below and be fueled by the monstrosities people like yourself endure.

The key hope is, know the territory and its inhabitants. See, you’ve now learned what it really means to be “transgressive.” Your friends thought transgressive is a tee shirt titter, but you were transgressive, and are you laughing now?

No, please listen: Many think they are “transgressive” when they offend people who have no social power. People like that used to be called “snobs” and “bullies.” But times change, and so do values and terminology. Now those people are culture heroes, and you are a villain who must be humiliated, degraded, and rendered penniless, as crowds cheer.

And what did you really do? You transgressed “group rights”, the key Nanny State concept. What are you, compared with an aggrieved group, whose grievances cash out into ever more power over all of our lives for governments that rule by shakedown?

Second, please let’s face real enemies, not pretend ones. Recently, I was listening to someone carry on about growing religious power in politics, and he opined that one couldn’t make a Monte Python “Life of Brian” film today. I hit the remote. Why? Because that’s not true. The Next Big Thing might well be a lavish big screen porno flick on Jesus. And if the producer’s idea of persecution is some fundies helping his box office by picketing on the sidewalk, couldn’t he better understand what persecution really means by walking in your shoes for, oh, ‘bout the decade it’ll take you overall?

Meanwhile, if he tried that with the life of Mohammed, he’d be head-absent, but he’s too much of an oops-on-the-carpet to admit that. Guy, people who can’t say “radical Islam” or “gay fascism” are AWOL, and you can’t afford them right now.

Some claim you made a mistake by trying to reach out to grievance groups. If so, past is past. In general, such groups can’t accept peace offerings; they understand and live by plunder.

We press on, keep me posted. My blog really is on hold till I get a very challenging book off my back, but be sure I will do what I can. And I fear no one but God.

Here are links to key media, and here is American Spectator.
Read more »