From the Newtown Pentacle, Feb. 14, 2019
In addition to my original comment on the post.
The new BQX trolley line will be nothing more than a very expensive boondoggle of a real estate advertising gimmick and crony capitalist feeding frenzy. And all because suburban transplants to NYC consider riding on a bus to be beneath their dignity. Suburbanites view the bus as transportation for lowest classes of people as well as people of color. No SWPL would be caught dead on a bus. So there are no good reasons for this BQX trolley line.
A waste of time and money but a project we plebs have no power to put a stop to.
There's a reason the trolleys were abandoned in the late 1940s through early 1950s and no, it wasn't a conspiracy involving GM, Firestone, National City Lines (which never operated in NY). All that is nonsense. As something of a rail fan, I like the old trolleys, have and read a number of books on the subject, and they're my favorite subject for colorizing old black and white photos. But I'm not a foamer or 'trolley jolly' and I understand that there were real reasons the trolleys were replaced with buses. Bear with me as I explain.
Among other things, it was cheaper to run buses than trolleys which required power houses to supply the voltage and current necessary. Trolley tracks required constant inspection, especially curves and switch tracks, and needed replacement after a while. Overhead catenary wires sag over time and need to be tightened or replaced as well as their insulators. Trolleys occasionally derailed or split switch tracks requiring cranes to set them back on track. In addition to derailments and split switches, accidents would shut down that part of the line. Other trolleys would then be stuck until the problems are resolved. Buses, however, had none of the infrastructure needs and not being limited to rails can be re-routed on the fly when there's some kind of obstruction on the route.
And accidents? There's a reason why the city banned ground level subway cars and street grade railroad crossings around 1920.
Trolleys are in fact railroad cars, much heavier than buses and with the increased mass comes increased kinetic energy in the event of an accident. Even at slow speeds, a trolley cannot swerve and cannot stop on a dime and will completely demolish whatever vehicle they hit. Even trucks. Good luck to the vehicle occupants surviving the collision. Forget what those heavy steel flanged wheels can do to human flesh. All in all, think about the liability issues.
Just as electric trolleys replaced horse drawn streetcars because they were more efficient and cost effective, the bus replaced the trolley for the same reason.
I have to wonder at this progressive liberal obsession with old, obsolete technologies.
Folks, some technologies became obsolete for good reasons such as they were inadequate to changing needs, were replaced by more efficient technologies or they didn't work as well as had been hoped. As any honest mortician or grave digger would tell you- if it's dead, then leave it buried to rest in peace.
Shared bus and bicycle lanes isn't a good idea as it presupposes people will generally use common sense and exercise due caution. These qualities are in woefully short supply in the general population so this idea won't work. If implemented, this would promote natural selection by imbeciles eliminating themselves and earning Darwin awards in the process. Think of it as a kind of participation trophy. So maybe this cloud would have a silver lining after all in cleaning out the shallow end of the gene pool. Perhaps our Humble Narrator is in fact thinking along these lines?
This whole vision zero thing is ridiculous. If people are not obeying the first set of laws, then why would they be any more inclined to obey even more laws added. The problem is first, people are not perfect and will make mistakes. You cannot legislate perfect humans. The second problem is a general decline in manners and courtesy. Blaming one group, say motorists, and demonizing them isn't helping. Marginalizing and antagonizing other people never helps in a situation where mutual cooperation is necessary. It's the human element at fault here, motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians all acting like pompous, entitled, assholes. Not a dearth of laws, dedicated bicycle and bus lanes or such.
In summary, the real problem is with progressive liberals who simply cannot understand human beings. They cannot see the forest for the trees because they have their heads shoved too far up their ideological asses and try to ram the square peg of human nature into the round hole of their cult-like beliefs.
Donald Cavaioli
Thursday, February 14, 2019
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Another Propositional Nation/Nation of Immigrants Fail
From the Times Ledger
Meng reintroduces Lunar New Year resolution to be recognized in the House, Feb. 10 2019
There are certain common traits and behaviors that people from anywhere on earth will exhibit. Among these are tribalism, a preference to live among others who share a common bond of history and culture and a preference to live in a traditional social and political system like that they have lived in for generations that works best for them.
Man has a transcendent nature of sentience and moral agency but likewise, Man's physical nature shaped through millions of years of natural selection and adaptive evolution must also be acknowledged.
No narrative can alter the hard facts of physical reality nor make them disappear on command as much as we may wish it. Nature does not care what we think, feel or what we want it to be because nature cannot think or feel. Nature is what it is and what we lack the power to alter to our own design, we can only accept as it is.
That being said, I do not blame or even condemn Congresswoman Meng for advancing this Lunar New Year resolution in congress. Even though it is a conscious attempt by a group of unassimilated immigrants, who having reached a large enough population size, will attempt to alter the political and cultural landscape of their new country to better suit themselves as I have pointed out in a previous post. Congresswoman Meng is just doing her job by representing and advancing the interests of her constituents who are largely Asians even if it a display of colonialism and imperialism.
Neither Congresswoman Meng nor the Asian residents of Flushing can be blamed here as this is simply human nature at work. The fault can only be laid at the feet of our ruling class of elected politicians, their advisors and managerial bureaucrats who have embarked on this mad policy of multiculturalism in which American culture abdicates its position of primacy and leaves a cultural vacuum that another culture will inevitably rush in to fill. By extension, the blame must also be placed upon us today and past generations of Americans who have mistakenly bought into the notion that we are a nation of immigrants and the delusion that in a multicultural society, there will be some kind of egalitarian cooperation between the different cultures living within it. Let this Times Ledger article serve as proof of the lies of multiculturalism and civic nationalism. There is no magic dirt here in New York or anywhere else in the United States or the rest of the world for that matter.
We must reconsider our immigration policy and ensure new Americans will assimilate otherwise we no longer have a nation, but an empire. Recall what history teaches us about the fate of empires.
Donald Cavaioli
Meng reintroduces Lunar New Year resolution to be recognized in the House, Feb. 10 2019
There are certain common traits and behaviors that people from anywhere on earth will exhibit. Among these are tribalism, a preference to live among others who share a common bond of history and culture and a preference to live in a traditional social and political system like that they have lived in for generations that works best for them.
Man has a transcendent nature of sentience and moral agency but likewise, Man's physical nature shaped through millions of years of natural selection and adaptive evolution must also be acknowledged.
No narrative can alter the hard facts of physical reality nor make them disappear on command as much as we may wish it. Nature does not care what we think, feel or what we want it to be because nature cannot think or feel. Nature is what it is and what we lack the power to alter to our own design, we can only accept as it is.
That being said, I do not blame or even condemn Congresswoman Meng for advancing this Lunar New Year resolution in congress. Even though it is a conscious attempt by a group of unassimilated immigrants, who having reached a large enough population size, will attempt to alter the political and cultural landscape of their new country to better suit themselves as I have pointed out in a previous post. Congresswoman Meng is just doing her job by representing and advancing the interests of her constituents who are largely Asians even if it a display of colonialism and imperialism.
Neither Congresswoman Meng nor the Asian residents of Flushing can be blamed here as this is simply human nature at work. The fault can only be laid at the feet of our ruling class of elected politicians, their advisors and managerial bureaucrats who have embarked on this mad policy of multiculturalism in which American culture abdicates its position of primacy and leaves a cultural vacuum that another culture will inevitably rush in to fill. By extension, the blame must also be placed upon us today and past generations of Americans who have mistakenly bought into the notion that we are a nation of immigrants and the delusion that in a multicultural society, there will be some kind of egalitarian cooperation between the different cultures living within it. Let this Times Ledger article serve as proof of the lies of multiculturalism and civic nationalism. There is no magic dirt here in New York or anywhere else in the United States or the rest of the world for that matter.
We must reconsider our immigration policy and ensure new Americans will assimilate otherwise we no longer have a nation, but an empire. Recall what history teaches us about the fate of empires.
Donald Cavaioli
Monday, February 11, 2019
Look Who Ventured into Woodhaven!
Pictured above is the inestimable Mitch Waxman, the learned Humble Narrator of the Newtown Pentacle blog at Nier's Tavern. It is indeed a rare event for the Wizard of the Pentacle to venture outside the environs of his beloved creek and Astoria but recent news of the possible demise of the oldest continuously operating bar in New York brought him hence to show his support.
The pose struck, as he is cunningly photographed here by this author, is Mitch's reaction to the news of my completion of the above infernal devices that he bade me construct to his specifications. Such devices are to be used when the stars align right for the purposes of subduing that impossible thing which dwells in the cupola of the sapphire tower and those nameless, blasphemous, eldritch horrors that slumber beneath the Newtown creek. Do be careful with the portable black box disintegration ray device and the unspeakable green eye of horror machine.
And before I forget, Mitch, I recently ran into an acquaintance of yours with an unusual skin condition of the hands, Gilman, he said his name was, who asked me to say hi to you for him.
Donald Cavaioli
Friday, February 8, 2019
The Five Borough Homeless Crisis Summit or How to Convince Yourself It's Possible to Lose With Grace and Beauty
Edit: I originally hadn't given the title too much thought as I wrote it and looking at the original, it inadvertently gave a more negative, personal tone than I had intended. The revised title more accurately reflects the main idea of the post. Again, I meant only to critique the methods and rhetoric used, not to cast aspersions on any individual or group.
From the Times Ledger article: Ozone Park civic group hosting five borough civic summit on homeless crisis, February 8, 2018
This post should not be taken as personal criticism of any individual or group but rather an analysis of the strategy and the effectiveness of the rhetoric used. No aspersions are being cast and any humor used is to illustrate the point. Good people may be trying to do good work but sometimes, they just go about it wrong.
It is, however, my opinion that even with a good strategy and persuasive rhetoric, the issue of increasing number of homeless shelters built and where they will be located is too far along, as the concept and belief in its necessity is entrenched too deep in the public psyche and is therefore a lost cause.
Now that the homeless shelter protests have failed as predicted, the borough civics and sundry community leaders have moved on to the negotiating the terms of surrender phase. They may or may not see it this way but there can be no other outcome from this latest series of proposed meetings. What exactly is the goal of these meetings is not made clear. That this meeting referenced in the article is closed to the public and only one leader from each community group, community board and civic is invited is somewhat troubling. Why can we, the residents that this issue affects, not be present at this meeting? No clear reason is given and this is a bad look as it looks like there may be something to hide with perhaps some shady business afoot.
In summary, this can only be a situation of either failure or surrender involves using the New York City premise of a "homeless crisis", read: Feeding a stray cat crisis as ever more and more strays show up for a free meal and they're eating us out of house and home. But we won't stop feeding them even when more strays show up come hell or high water. Accept the morality and necessity of your opponent's premises and you've lost before you've even started because you've already kneecapped yourself. Game over, man, game over!
So there's nothing else left to do but to beg our managerial overlords for mercy and try to pretend it's a calm, reasoned, summit to work towards some kind of win-win solution with the homeless shelters going where DHS designates as to where they ought to be rather than commands as to where they ought to be. Most likely a change of verbiage or flowery legerdemain without change of policy. At best the shelter site will be moved a few blocks away.
Or maybe our civics and self-appointed community leaders are negotiating a deal with the city to benefit their own interests behind closed doors and away from public view. NO NO NO! I take that back! I apologize! I will not fall prey to conspiracy theories!
I've noted a certain mistrust hereabouts regarding the Queens civics for some reason. Well, not that any of the borough civics were ever know for a strong, independent defense of their neighborhoods' interests. Or known for their vigor in protecting the character of their neighborhoods from predatory developers building Soviet bloc style worker barracks or gargantuan ugly buildings. Nor are they known for protecting old, historic buildings either. Not to mention currying favor with local politicians in return for funding... I'd rather not dabble in dark conspiracy theories but can't help from wondering that even an utter incompetent will occasionally err in favor of success. STOP! So sorry for the conspiracy thinking. Won't happen again, I promise.
Let's now have a look at the article.
"The Ozone Park Residents Block Association (OPRBA) is calling on every leader of a community group in the city to join the forum on Feb. 8 and help find a solution to the city’s plan to place 90 shelters in residential communities and discuss legal action, such as a class action suit, to stop the process."
City officials: Oh, noes! Not the class action lawsuit! Uh, so on what grounds? What are the damages being claimed?
Yeah, okay. One thing I learned over the years with city apparatchiks is if you have a weapon to use against them, don't threaten, use it. Offering not to use it if they give a concession in return won't work as the apparatchik will either think you're bluffing or sense weakness. They'll simply press their advantage and make you give the concessions. The only solution that will be offered, if we're lucky, is that we can specify which part of the neighborhood the shelter will be located. An evil whisper comes unbidden: I'm sure that it will be as far as possible from the homes of the civic leaders. Hold on, no conspiracy theories here. I'm sure shelter locations will be purely coincidental and based on the best location available. Seriously. Just kidding.
"Sam Esposito, the OPRBA president, said the meeting is not open to the public. They are asking for one representative from every civic, organization, block association and community boards to come to the meeting at the DESHI Center at 83-10 Rockaway Blvd. in Ozone Park on Friday at 6 p.m. Interested leaders are asked to register online at ozpkb
Closed to the public. Makes sense after all we just live here and we can't have the great unwashed masses being irksome to their managerial betters. Seriously, this is a bad look as it looks too high-handed and will foster mistrust in the process and promote unnecessary conspiracy theories
“Please be respectful as our Ozone Park elected officials, as week as others, who have supported us from the start will be present at the meeting,” the OPRBA said in an email. “We will not allow for disrespect or bashing. This is strictly to discuss two things and that is it. Please be ready and prepared to … fight together for a better NYC.”
Specially invited Plebs shall not put on insufferable airs deeming themselves above their station nor show such unseemly hubris in the presence of their betters. So by "fight together for a better NYC" beyond being meaningless rhetoric and an empty gesture when contrasted to the previous exhortation to respect before our electeds can be translated as slaves will politely moan and gently rattle their chains for an extra teaspoon of gruel in their iron rice bowl or beg for a favor.
However, criticism has a point where it can go too far being unnecessarily loud and vulgar but the organizers should let those limits be known beforehand and enforce those limits by ejecting anyone who goes too far,
After the call for a kinder gentler meeting next comes the ready and prepared to fight threat.
Pick a tone and stick with it. If we start off with the meek, polite respectful groveling to our betters (and yes this is a tacit acknowledgement of electeds being our betters) then the threat to fight afterwards can't be taken seriously. We've positioned ourselves as subordinates and supplicants so talk of fighting comes off as weak sauce.
"The organization will also provide pizza and bottled water."
Gosh, bottled water too? My cup runneth over (or would if I were worthy of attending).
Okay, maybe that was a cheap shot but I couldn't pass it by.
“We will discuss having this summit in each of the other boroughs and moving around the city as we are welcomed but in order to change the narrative, we need to show the administration, the City Council and the elected officials we can and will mobilize our people if we are not treated with the respect we deserve,” the email continued."
Change the narrative from what to what? What is the narrative in the first place? If we've accepted the premise of a "homeless crisis" and do not dispute the necessity of the program (wouldn't want to tarnish our good liberal street cred) then there can be no narrative to change. Besides, the word "narrative' used in a similar context by media people and government apparatchiks is typically little more than a fancy word for whatever lie they are trying to promulgate. We should avoid using this term for that reason.
But no matter, we've placed ourselves in the position of explaining why a homeless shelter shouldn't be located in a specific place. This is a supplicant asking a favor of one in undisputed authority over us. "...we can and will mobilize our people if we are not treated with the respect we deserve,..." And when mobilized, what are we going to do? Stand around holding placards decrying how unfair this is? Maybe go to the rough stuff of saying rude things to politicians at meetings? Supplicants cannot make any credible threat. Respect is earned, not given, and supplicants are more objects of pity than respect. Once again we cannot start off with a milquetoast nice guy opening than try to end it breathing fire. We've shown our hand, ready to talk nice, negotiate, so more empty fight talk will not impress in the least any city official or any reader with an IQ above room temperature.
That is, unless this is just tough talk as cover for any behind closed door deals made at this secret, members only meeting. Uh-oh, sorry, I apologize, gotta stop this conspiracy theory thinking.
But seriously, not to put too fine point on this, openness in this situation is a good thing to allay any fears anyone else might have about being sold out. There's enough negative talk about borough civics and community councils and these should be more open and responsive to their neighbors. In opaque places and in the shadows are where mistrust and conspiracy theories are born. It would be a shame if good people doing good work were to have this hanging over their heads.
Donald Cavaioli
From the Times Ledger article: Ozone Park civic group hosting five borough civic summit on homeless crisis, February 8, 2018
This post should not be taken as personal criticism of any individual or group but rather an analysis of the strategy and the effectiveness of the rhetoric used. No aspersions are being cast and any humor used is to illustrate the point. Good people may be trying to do good work but sometimes, they just go about it wrong.
It is, however, my opinion that even with a good strategy and persuasive rhetoric, the issue of increasing number of homeless shelters built and where they will be located is too far along, as the concept and belief in its necessity is entrenched too deep in the public psyche and is therefore a lost cause.
Now that the homeless shelter protests have failed as predicted, the borough civics and sundry community leaders have moved on to the negotiating the terms of surrender phase. They may or may not see it this way but there can be no other outcome from this latest series of proposed meetings. What exactly is the goal of these meetings is not made clear. That this meeting referenced in the article is closed to the public and only one leader from each community group, community board and civic is invited is somewhat troubling. Why can we, the residents that this issue affects, not be present at this meeting? No clear reason is given and this is a bad look as it looks like there may be something to hide with perhaps some shady business afoot.
In summary, this can only be a situation of either failure or surrender involves using the New York City premise of a "homeless crisis", read: Feeding a stray cat crisis as ever more and more strays show up for a free meal and they're eating us out of house and home. But we won't stop feeding them even when more strays show up come hell or high water. Accept the morality and necessity of your opponent's premises and you've lost before you've even started because you've already kneecapped yourself. Game over, man, game over!
So there's nothing else left to do but to beg our managerial overlords for mercy and try to pretend it's a calm, reasoned, summit to work towards some kind of win-win solution with the homeless shelters going where DHS designates as to where they ought to be rather than commands as to where they ought to be. Most likely a change of verbiage or flowery legerdemain without change of policy. At best the shelter site will be moved a few blocks away.
Or maybe our civics and self-appointed community leaders are negotiating a deal with the city to benefit their own interests behind closed doors and away from public view. NO NO NO! I take that back! I apologize! I will not fall prey to conspiracy theories!
I've noted a certain mistrust hereabouts regarding the Queens civics for some reason. Well, not that any of the borough civics were ever know for a strong, independent defense of their neighborhoods' interests. Or known for their vigor in protecting the character of their neighborhoods from predatory developers building Soviet bloc style worker barracks or gargantuan ugly buildings. Nor are they known for protecting old, historic buildings either. Not to mention currying favor with local politicians in return for funding... I'd rather not dabble in dark conspiracy theories but can't help from wondering that even an utter incompetent will occasionally err in favor of success. STOP! So sorry for the conspiracy thinking. Won't happen again, I promise.
Let's now have a look at the article.
"The Ozone Park Residents Block Association (OPRBA) is calling on every leader of a community group in the city to join the forum on Feb. 8 and help find a solution to the city’s plan to place 90 shelters in residential communities and discuss legal action, such as a class action suit, to stop the process."
City officials: Oh, noes! Not the class action lawsuit! Uh, so on what grounds? What are the damages being claimed?
Yeah, okay. One thing I learned over the years with city apparatchiks is if you have a weapon to use against them, don't threaten, use it. Offering not to use it if they give a concession in return won't work as the apparatchik will either think you're bluffing or sense weakness. They'll simply press their advantage and make you give the concessions. The only solution that will be offered, if we're lucky, is that we can specify which part of the neighborhood the shelter will be located. An evil whisper comes unbidden: I'm sure that it will be as far as possible from the homes of the civic leaders. Hold on, no conspiracy theories here. I'm sure shelter locations will be purely coincidental and based on the best location available. Seriously. Just kidding.
"Sam Esposito, the OPRBA president, said the meeting is not open to the public. They are asking for one representative from every civic, organization, block association and community boards to come to the meeting at the DESHI Center at 83-10 Rockaway Blvd. in Ozone Park on Friday at 6 p.m. Interested leaders are asked to register online at ozpkb
Closed to the public. Makes sense after all we just live here and we can't have the great unwashed masses being irksome to their managerial betters. Seriously, this is a bad look as it looks too high-handed and will foster mistrust in the process and promote unnecessary conspiracy theories
“Please be respectful as our Ozone Park elected officials, as week as others, who have supported us from the start will be present at the meeting,” the OPRBA said in an email. “We will not allow for disrespect or bashing. This is strictly to discuss two things and that is it. Please be ready and prepared to … fight together for a better NYC.”
Specially invited Plebs shall not put on insufferable airs deeming themselves above their station nor show such unseemly hubris in the presence of their betters. So by "fight together for a better NYC" beyond being meaningless rhetoric and an empty gesture when contrasted to the previous exhortation to respect before our electeds can be translated as slaves will politely moan and gently rattle their chains for an extra teaspoon of gruel in their iron rice bowl or beg for a favor.
I mean it's not like our elected politicians are people we hire in elections and pay with our taxes to represent us. It would be wrong and utterly unconscionable to view elected politicians or bureaucrats whom we also pay, as our employees and somehow answerable to us. Or to speak to them as adults with grievances or to criticize them for not being responsive to our wishes.
We should not have to walk on eggshells around our electeds. They're adults and public servants so if they can't take the heat for policies we do not want, then maybe they should find some other, more genteel form of employment better suited to their delicate natures.
However, criticism has a point where it can go too far being unnecessarily loud and vulgar but the organizers should let those limits be known beforehand and enforce those limits by ejecting anyone who goes too far,
After the call for a kinder gentler meeting next comes the ready and prepared to fight threat.
Pick a tone and stick with it. If we start off with the meek, polite respectful groveling to our betters (and yes this is a tacit acknowledgement of electeds being our betters) then the threat to fight afterwards can't be taken seriously. We've positioned ourselves as subordinates and supplicants so talk of fighting comes off as weak sauce.
"The organization will also provide pizza and bottled water."
Gosh, bottled water too? My cup runneth over (or would if I were worthy of attending).
Okay, maybe that was a cheap shot but I couldn't pass it by.
“We will discuss having this summit in each of the other boroughs and moving around the city as we are welcomed but in order to change the narrative, we need to show the administration, the City Council and the elected officials we can and will mobilize our people if we are not treated with the respect we deserve,” the email continued."
Change the narrative from what to what? What is the narrative in the first place? If we've accepted the premise of a "homeless crisis" and do not dispute the necessity of the program (wouldn't want to tarnish our good liberal street cred) then there can be no narrative to change. Besides, the word "narrative' used in a similar context by media people and government apparatchiks is typically little more than a fancy word for whatever lie they are trying to promulgate. We should avoid using this term for that reason.
But no matter, we've placed ourselves in the position of explaining why a homeless shelter shouldn't be located in a specific place. This is a supplicant asking a favor of one in undisputed authority over us. "...we can and will mobilize our people if we are not treated with the respect we deserve,..." And when mobilized, what are we going to do? Stand around holding placards decrying how unfair this is? Maybe go to the rough stuff of saying rude things to politicians at meetings? Supplicants cannot make any credible threat. Respect is earned, not given, and supplicants are more objects of pity than respect. Once again we cannot start off with a milquetoast nice guy opening than try to end it breathing fire. We've shown our hand, ready to talk nice, negotiate, so more empty fight talk will not impress in the least any city official or any reader with an IQ above room temperature.
That is, unless this is just tough talk as cover for any behind closed door deals made at this secret, members only meeting. Uh-oh, sorry, I apologize, gotta stop this conspiracy theory thinking.
But seriously, not to put too fine point on this, openness in this situation is a good thing to allay any fears anyone else might have about being sold out. There's enough negative talk about borough civics and community councils and these should be more open and responsive to their neighbors. In opaque places and in the shadows are where mistrust and conspiracy theories are born. It would be a shame if good people doing good work were to have this hanging over their heads.
Donald Cavaioli
Thursday, February 7, 2019
New York City Magic Dirt Failure
I had previously written about the fallacy of civic nationalism and the propositional nation of immigrants here. In short there is no such thing as a melting pot in a multicultural society and never really was. There's no magic dirt here to make this happen. And I touched on the topic of politicians who, in this situation, would attempt to jump out in front of the multicult parade and try to lead it here.
Well, here's this article in the Times Ledger and gosh, I think I might be a psychic with a HD crystal ball running on 5G or something! Hogwarts should be dropping me an acceptance letter any minute now.
Alas, I have no psychic powers otherwise I wouldn't be wasting my time writing here when I could be breaking the bank at Monte Carlo, cleaning up at the track, making football picks and hitting the lottery. Really, it's all down to determining true basic premises, recognizing patterns and correctly predicting the proceeding steps. It doesn't always work perfectly but if I can average 75% or better then I'm doing well enough to lay money on.
Back to the Times Ledger article. First of all, how is the Korean community being held down or held back from assimilating? It's contradictory to intimate that the Korean community is isolated and hint at it being somehow marginalized then to talk about how they "make incredible contributions to our city both economically and culturally". Two opposites cannot be true at the same time. What exactly are these contributions and what makes Korean culture so indispensable to this city? What's wrong with our own homegrown culture and are we so economically inept that we must have these people otherwise this city would whither and die?
From my own observations, the Korean community appears to keep to themselves both economically and culturally in what could be best described as a self-contained colony with apparently little or no use for outsiders. And from the statements made by Councilman Paul Vallone and Council Speaker Corey Johnson would confirm this observation with no mention of integrating them into the native city culture.
Really, how stupid does Vallone and Johnson think we are as to not recognize the verbal fellatio they gave the Korean community as mere, pandering for votes and the $11.5 million as a vulgar bribe It's all pretty lies as a thin veneer over shabby political machination and gross troughing.
I don't blame the Korean community for any of this as it's human nature to prefer the company of your own people when living among people foreign to yourselves. Nor do I blame the Korean community for acting in their own best, self interests as again, it's human nature to do so. Past generations of immigrants from various European countries have done, and their descendants still do, the exact same thing. I have no quarrel with any immigrant group past or present as none of our policies are their fault. It is our collective fault as Americans for allowing these policies. I do not blame any ethnic or racial group for gaming a system intentionally set up by the powers that be to be gamed as bribery for their support. I blame us for not putting a stop to it. My quarrel is with the ruling class and their self-centered, misguided and short-sighted policies that may end badly for all of us and the mainstream media people who will lie or unthinkingly write political nonsense to carry the water for the ruling class for their own benefit. But if we take no action, if we do not even try, we, ultimately, are to blame.
Now I shall gaze back into my HD crystal ball to see the future for Paul Vallone. Fear not, Paul, I shan't ask you to cross my palm with silver first as there isn't enough bleach on the planet to clean off the political sliminess. Dark clouds in the future and I foresee that sometime in the near future, the Korean community reaching a critical mass will run their own people for elected offices. As it's human nature to prefer their own people and culture who will better look after the interests of their colony than some white guy and secure for themselves more than a paltry $11.5 million from the public trough for their own benefit. People dislike being ruled over by foreigners and they shall one day succeed. Tis the way of identity politics and pretty lies and bribes change not your race or ethnicity. Do not count on the continued support of the white millennials or gen Z as they have a pronounced generational dislike of boomers and shall support people of color for goodthinker brownie points or one their own age group candidates. Don't get too comfortable in that council seat or suffer the fate of Joe Crowley you will.
And to Jenna Bagcal who wrote this piece, learn to code.
Donald Cavaioli
Well, here's this article in the Times Ledger and gosh, I think I might be a psychic with a HD crystal ball running on 5G or something! Hogwarts should be dropping me an acceptance letter any minute now.
Alas, I have no psychic powers otherwise I wouldn't be wasting my time writing here when I could be breaking the bank at Monte Carlo, cleaning up at the track, making football picks and hitting the lottery. Really, it's all down to determining true basic premises, recognizing patterns and correctly predicting the proceeding steps. It doesn't always work perfectly but if I can average 75% or better then I'm doing well enough to lay money on.
Back to the Times Ledger article. First of all, how is the Korean community being held down or held back from assimilating? It's contradictory to intimate that the Korean community is isolated and hint at it being somehow marginalized then to talk about how they "make incredible contributions to our city both economically and culturally". Two opposites cannot be true at the same time. What exactly are these contributions and what makes Korean culture so indispensable to this city? What's wrong with our own homegrown culture and are we so economically inept that we must have these people otherwise this city would whither and die?
From my own observations, the Korean community appears to keep to themselves both economically and culturally in what could be best described as a self-contained colony with apparently little or no use for outsiders. And from the statements made by Councilman Paul Vallone and Council Speaker Corey Johnson would confirm this observation with no mention of integrating them into the native city culture.
Really, how stupid does Vallone and Johnson think we are as to not recognize the verbal fellatio they gave the Korean community as mere, pandering for votes and the $11.5 million as a vulgar bribe It's all pretty lies as a thin veneer over shabby political machination and gross troughing.
I don't blame the Korean community for any of this as it's human nature to prefer the company of your own people when living among people foreign to yourselves. Nor do I blame the Korean community for acting in their own best, self interests as again, it's human nature to do so. Past generations of immigrants from various European countries have done, and their descendants still do, the exact same thing. I have no quarrel with any immigrant group past or present as none of our policies are their fault. It is our collective fault as Americans for allowing these policies. I do not blame any ethnic or racial group for gaming a system intentionally set up by the powers that be to be gamed as bribery for their support. I blame us for not putting a stop to it. My quarrel is with the ruling class and their self-centered, misguided and short-sighted policies that may end badly for all of us and the mainstream media people who will lie or unthinkingly write political nonsense to carry the water for the ruling class for their own benefit. But if we take no action, if we do not even try, we, ultimately, are to blame.
Now I shall gaze back into my HD crystal ball to see the future for Paul Vallone. Fear not, Paul, I shan't ask you to cross my palm with silver first as there isn't enough bleach on the planet to clean off the political sliminess. Dark clouds in the future and I foresee that sometime in the near future, the Korean community reaching a critical mass will run their own people for elected offices. As it's human nature to prefer their own people and culture who will better look after the interests of their colony than some white guy and secure for themselves more than a paltry $11.5 million from the public trough for their own benefit. People dislike being ruled over by foreigners and they shall one day succeed. Tis the way of identity politics and pretty lies and bribes change not your race or ethnicity. Do not count on the continued support of the white millennials or gen Z as they have a pronounced generational dislike of boomers and shall support people of color for goodthinker brownie points or one their own age group candidates. Don't get too comfortable in that council seat or suffer the fate of Joe Crowley you will.
And to Jenna Bagcal who wrote this piece, learn to code.
Donald Cavaioli
Tuesday, February 5, 2019
The Bi-Factional Big Government Party: Why the Government Does Not Change Part II
Another reason for why policy does not change in addition to what was posted in The Rule of the Managerial State and Why the Government Does Not Change. Now a look at the political parties and elected politicians and what part they play in the managerial state. Understand that the solution to this problem remains the same as in the previous post.
If you're honest about it, no matter who you vote for from either the Democrats or Republicans, over all, the direction of government policy never seems to change. From George H.W. Bush 39 through Bill Clinton, George W. Bush 41 to Barack Obama, it was the same globalist economic policy of off-shoring manufacturing jobs, importing cheap immigrant labor while turning a blind eye to illegal immigration and wars of intervention in Bosnia, the middle east among other places. The names change, the party affiliation changes, the rhetoric on the surface sounds different but the policies stay the same. I still can't find a dime's worth of difference between Mario Cuomo and George Pataki. Just the verbiage was different consisting largely of "I'm not the other guy". Whatever differences they do have in actual governance amounted to little more than changing the color of the curtains.
The reason for this is quite simple: Both parties fundamentally agree on the concept of the big government managerial state. Both parties are advised by people who were educated at the same Ivy, members of the same round table groups and did stints in the same tax exempt foundations and NGOs. Members of both parties pass their respective gatekeepers and adhere to the agendas formulated by the aforementioned foundations and NGOs. The only point of disagreement they have is how fast government should grow and how much should be spent on it. They are a de facto single party consisting of a blue faction and a slightly more moderate red faction.
In this bit of Kabuki theater, the blue faction Democrats play to their fans the role of the "good guys" who are all big warmhearted friends of the oppressed and "the little guy" against the "mean and coldhearted" red faction Republicans who are on the side of "evil, ruthless corporations" and "angry white supremacists". The red faction Republicans, on the other hand, play the part of the "good guys" friend of the middle class, low taxes and "free enterprise" to their fans against the insane "commie" Democrats who want to tax everyone to death and redistribute the money to their pet constituencies.
But it's all as theatrical and as rigged pro wrestling. The fans cheer their heroes and boo their villains then after the elections, wonder why their elected failed to deliver on their promises. Lame excuses are offered or the other party is blamed for blocking changes. It's all a game for the benefit of the party fan boys, fan girls and assorted rage heads who then get all fired up for the next election cycle, rinse and repeat. And they never learn.
The only real competition between the two factions is over who has more seats in the legislature or have the executive in order to have their hands on the levers of power as to benefit themselves and their friends. Like the upper level bureaucrats, the elected political class are members of the ruling class and are increasingly socially isolated from the people over which they govern as they move up from local offices through state and federal offices. What we the people want are of no concern to them as they, our rulers, know what's best for us and will implement their agenda whether we like it or not.
Samuel Francis wrote that in the managerial state, the citizens may have a vote but they have no power. Francis only got it half right as today we don't even have a real vote after all. Something that would appear to be understood well enough by my fellow New Yorkers considering the overwhelming percentage of voters who stayed home during the last two Mayoral elections.
Donald Cavaioli
If you're honest about it, no matter who you vote for from either the Democrats or Republicans, over all, the direction of government policy never seems to change. From George H.W. Bush 39 through Bill Clinton, George W. Bush 41 to Barack Obama, it was the same globalist economic policy of off-shoring manufacturing jobs, importing cheap immigrant labor while turning a blind eye to illegal immigration and wars of intervention in Bosnia, the middle east among other places. The names change, the party affiliation changes, the rhetoric on the surface sounds different but the policies stay the same. I still can't find a dime's worth of difference between Mario Cuomo and George Pataki. Just the verbiage was different consisting largely of "I'm not the other guy". Whatever differences they do have in actual governance amounted to little more than changing the color of the curtains.
The reason for this is quite simple: Both parties fundamentally agree on the concept of the big government managerial state. Both parties are advised by people who were educated at the same Ivy, members of the same round table groups and did stints in the same tax exempt foundations and NGOs. Members of both parties pass their respective gatekeepers and adhere to the agendas formulated by the aforementioned foundations and NGOs. The only point of disagreement they have is how fast government should grow and how much should be spent on it. They are a de facto single party consisting of a blue faction and a slightly more moderate red faction.
In this bit of Kabuki theater, the blue faction Democrats play to their fans the role of the "good guys" who are all big warmhearted friends of the oppressed and "the little guy" against the "mean and coldhearted" red faction Republicans who are on the side of "evil, ruthless corporations" and "angry white supremacists". The red faction Republicans, on the other hand, play the part of the "good guys" friend of the middle class, low taxes and "free enterprise" to their fans against the insane "commie" Democrats who want to tax everyone to death and redistribute the money to their pet constituencies.
But it's all as theatrical and as rigged pro wrestling. The fans cheer their heroes and boo their villains then after the elections, wonder why their elected failed to deliver on their promises. Lame excuses are offered or the other party is blamed for blocking changes. It's all a game for the benefit of the party fan boys, fan girls and assorted rage heads who then get all fired up for the next election cycle, rinse and repeat. And they never learn.
The only real competition between the two factions is over who has more seats in the legislature or have the executive in order to have their hands on the levers of power as to benefit themselves and their friends. Like the upper level bureaucrats, the elected political class are members of the ruling class and are increasingly socially isolated from the people over which they govern as they move up from local offices through state and federal offices. What we the people want are of no concern to them as they, our rulers, know what's best for us and will implement their agenda whether we like it or not.
Samuel Francis wrote that in the managerial state, the citizens may have a vote but they have no power. Francis only got it half right as today we don't even have a real vote after all. Something that would appear to be understood well enough by my fellow New Yorkers considering the overwhelming percentage of voters who stayed home during the last two Mayoral elections.
Donald Cavaioli
Friday, February 1, 2019
The Rule of the Managerial State and Why the Government Does Not Change
You can vote for a Democrat or Republican, switching between the parties even and find that no matter what the candidate promises, those promises are seldom fulfilled or at best only partially delivered. You may notice that promises that appear to be fulfilled have so many loopholes and exceptions that they are in effect void. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
There a couple of reasons for this but here I will discuss one of the reasons.
If you've ever wondered why government policy on a city, state or federal level never seems to actually change no matter who you vote for and what they've promised to do, the reason is that elected politicians, no matter whether legislative or executive do not actually operate government functions on a day to day basis. The real work of this sort is carried out by the people who work in the managerial bureaucracies (see the 8 Laws of Bureaucracy).
Bureaucrats are unelected and unaccountable to the citizens, despite legislative oversight and being at least technically beholden to the elected executive. Due to being tenured, it is difficult, if not impossible to fire, a bureaucrat for failing to implement policy changes they disagree with and will serve out careers longer than many electeds, thus outlasting the elected's policies. Government policy can therefore not change unless the managerial bureaucracy permits it or unless the electorate elects to office enough legislators and executives who will actively work to bring accountability to policy and control the bureaucracy.
Bureaucrats, who on the average adhere to a certain political dogma or are of high enough rank, who disagree with policy changes have ways of thwarting these changes ranging from dense, jargon laden testimony before legislators and the media highlighting their unquestionable expertise to dragging their feet in implementing or simply refusing to implement policy changes. Bureaucrats tend to be liberal but civil service also tends to attract leftist social justice warriors looking for a venue through which they may implement their agendas and actively thwart conservative agendas with the protection of tenure and unions.
All bureaucrats, ideological or time serving civil servants, have since the New Deal taken on a vision of themselves as the caretakers of the American people who are but little more than idiot dependents. The bureaucrat therefore believes that he knows what is best for the country and must act against the popular will to protect the people from themselves.
This means that the managerial state must lie to the people to placate them and quiet them down as one would with a noisy child while the technocrats enact policies that in their opinion is the best thing for all concerned. If the American people disagree and want something different done, then tough shit kid. We know best, we are in charge so sit down and shut up when your betters are talking and stay out of your better's way when they're working. As Sam Francis noted, in the managerial state, the American people may have a vote but they do not have any power.
As it stands now, managerial bureaucracy in at least the upper-middle, upper management and like the elected political class have become a de facto ruling class increasingly socially isolated from the average American citizen over which they govern with few newcomers admitted without the proper Ivy League credentials and proof of loyalty to the ruling class agenda. Isolated to the point where they no longer view the average citizen as their fellow countrymen as they now belong to a cosmopolitan ruling class whose only concern is promoting their own class interests.
The solution to this should be to think heuristically. If the only power we have is the vote then we must use that vote to support insurgent candidates who will promise to curb the power of the managerial state even if they are not perfect. If the Overton window is forced further right, away from the ossified collectivism of the left, it will break the stranglehold the social justice warriors have over free and open debate and pave the way to taming the beast. Not to completely kill the beast as some degree of managerialism is necessary to operate a modern government but to compel the managerial bureaucracy and elected politicians to abandon their ruling class pretensions and act in the best interests of our country and her citizens.
Donald Cavaioli
There a couple of reasons for this but here I will discuss one of the reasons.
If you've ever wondered why government policy on a city, state or federal level never seems to actually change no matter who you vote for and what they've promised to do, the reason is that elected politicians, no matter whether legislative or executive do not actually operate government functions on a day to day basis. The real work of this sort is carried out by the people who work in the managerial bureaucracies (see the 8 Laws of Bureaucracy).
Bureaucrats are unelected and unaccountable to the citizens, despite legislative oversight and being at least technically beholden to the elected executive. Due to being tenured, it is difficult, if not impossible to fire, a bureaucrat for failing to implement policy changes they disagree with and will serve out careers longer than many electeds, thus outlasting the elected's policies. Government policy can therefore not change unless the managerial bureaucracy permits it or unless the electorate elects to office enough legislators and executives who will actively work to bring accountability to policy and control the bureaucracy.
Bureaucrats, who on the average adhere to a certain political dogma or are of high enough rank, who disagree with policy changes have ways of thwarting these changes ranging from dense, jargon laden testimony before legislators and the media highlighting their unquestionable expertise to dragging their feet in implementing or simply refusing to implement policy changes. Bureaucrats tend to be liberal but civil service also tends to attract leftist social justice warriors looking for a venue through which they may implement their agendas and actively thwart conservative agendas with the protection of tenure and unions.
All bureaucrats, ideological or time serving civil servants, have since the New Deal taken on a vision of themselves as the caretakers of the American people who are but little more than idiot dependents. The bureaucrat therefore believes that he knows what is best for the country and must act against the popular will to protect the people from themselves.
This means that the managerial state must lie to the people to placate them and quiet them down as one would with a noisy child while the technocrats enact policies that in their opinion is the best thing for all concerned. If the American people disagree and want something different done, then tough shit kid. We know best, we are in charge so sit down and shut up when your betters are talking and stay out of your better's way when they're working. As Sam Francis noted, in the managerial state, the American people may have a vote but they do not have any power.
As it stands now, managerial bureaucracy in at least the upper-middle, upper management and like the elected political class have become a de facto ruling class increasingly socially isolated from the average American citizen over which they govern with few newcomers admitted without the proper Ivy League credentials and proof of loyalty to the ruling class agenda. Isolated to the point where they no longer view the average citizen as their fellow countrymen as they now belong to a cosmopolitan ruling class whose only concern is promoting their own class interests.
The solution to this should be to think heuristically. If the only power we have is the vote then we must use that vote to support insurgent candidates who will promise to curb the power of the managerial state even if they are not perfect. If the Overton window is forced further right, away from the ossified collectivism of the left, it will break the stranglehold the social justice warriors have over free and open debate and pave the way to taming the beast. Not to completely kill the beast as some degree of managerialism is necessary to operate a modern government but to compel the managerial bureaucracy and elected politicians to abandon their ruling class pretensions and act in the best interests of our country and her citizens.
Donald Cavaioli
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)