1. Never mind! Elon Musk isn’t a trillionaire any more. Does that mean that all of the vile characterizations of him don’t apply any more? If you base your attacks on him on that label, aren’t you obligated to retract them when it no longer applies? If not, doesn’t that prove that the alleged basis for your attacks was a dishonest pretense?
2. So all of the New York communists won in last night’s primaries. New York City is doomed, and the only question is whether the evidence will be out there in time for Independents and non-brain-dead Democrats to smell the smoke. Based on some frightening polls, however, it seems like the last few decades of leftist indoctrination in the public schools and universities have yielded this metaphorical poison fruit. Lazy and complacent conservatives, Republicans and parents allowed this to happen right in front of them. They were all irresponsible citizens, and whether it is too late to reverse the disastrous trend is open to debate.
3. Wait, what? Did those headline like the New York Times “40 People Drown in France Amid Scorching Temperatures” puzzle you? They puzzled me. There’s a basic causation fallacy here. It wasn’t the heat that caused those deaths, it was people being foolish and jumping into rivers when they should have taken a cold shower or just endured the discomfort. “Among the fatalities was a 13-year-old girl who had gone for a dip with her family in the River Seine at Fontaine-La Port on Sunday evening, although she did not know how to swim” is one of the tales.
Ethics Alarms 
Perhaps too much freedom has led to all of this. The Founders didn’t believe in pure democracy for good reasons. Mamdani is spreading. I think Trump may be an aberration, and NY is a sign of the future.
Wash your mouth out with soap.
Everyday!
Lazy and complacent conservatives, Republicans and parents allowed this to happen right in front of them. They were all irresponsible citizens, and whether it is too late to reverse the disastrous trend is open to debate.
This is what the Dissident Right has been saying for many years now, and they examine causes and offer some fairly startling conclusions about what “lazy and complacent Republicans” should have done, but did not do, and will not do (and cannot do). So, all that can be done is to sit on the sideline and watch.
The Times: “Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene Say They Are Done With the G.O.P.” The mainstream media is playing this up as some kind of blow to the party and President Trump. This confirms the bias against both Trump and his party. The fact that either of these two awful people can’t tolerate the GOP is only evidence that there are some levels of human offal this party won’t accommodate.
6. Speaking of anti-Semites …
I have tried to understand why you have such distain for Carlson. I think I do understand: he is a dirty rhetorician in his monologues, inserting unwarranted innuendo at times. (His cackling laughter is also disgusting).
However, that is only a part of what he does or what he offers. He is also saying things and presenting outlines for understanding that could well be sone part of rectifying what “lazy and complacent Republicans” have allowed to occur.
There was what I thought to be an amazing piece of journalism when he examined Paul Singer of Elliot Management and the destructive effect of this sort of “vulture capitalism”. But, it does involve a critique of these operations and this does contribute to the popular belief that “people are being screwed”. And this contributes to the present mood that some sort of activism is necessary so that average, working people get a better deal.
Can Carlson be fairly described as antiSemitic? I do not think so myself. That term is really not much more than a smear and the (necessary and moral) opposition to Israeli policies and the (obvious) “dual loyalty” question of American Jewish Zionists can be examined with an open and fair mindedness.
Tucker approvingly had a Holocaust denier, Daryl Cooper, as a guest on the show, who posited Churchill as the real villain of World War II. That’s signature significance: no non-anti-Semite would give such a person a platform. It’s not a smear. He also hosted White Supremacist Nick Fuentes.
You may think I am an advocate for those (or any) views, but I am more truly an observer of what people believe and how standard views are changing (either rightly or wrongly). Personally, I would have to read what Daryl Cooper has said before I would get on the wagon of condemnation.
The issue of “villany” is very complex. How that war was brought about has all sorts of differing aspects. And many parts have been examined — and reexamined. But the way you are setting this up is that simply by me saying this, that your next step will be to condemn me because I (might) see things differently.
I do not agree with you that “platforms” should be withheld (you imply this). I think that platforms should all be opened up.
There is much more to be gained by understanding Nick Fuentes and his views (they have coherent aspects) then in ‘blanket condemnation’. He was treated brutally simply by holding controversial (sometimes juvenile!) opinions.
Tucker approvingly had a Holocaust denier, Daryl Cooper, as a guest on the show, who posited Churchill as the real villain of World War II. That’s signature significance: no non-anti-Semite would give such a person a platform. It’s not a smear. He also hosted White Supremacist Nick Fuentes.
Why, I ask myself, do I experience fear and guilt when I resolve to oppose your extremely wrong-headed opinions? Is what you want here a place of no opposition, no talk back? Since that cannot be true (I know that you wish that so many who have LEFT Ethics Alarms would choose to return, but it seems that readership is shrinking, overall). Anyway, I will trybto proceed …
I do not think you have the right to propose that either Daryl Cooper or Nick Fuentes be ostracized from the cultural and civil conversation. Both Carlson and Fuentes have as much rights as you because they are citizens. How is it, I wish to know, that you believe you have a moral tight to decide if Cooper or Fuentes get a ‘platform’ or if they are excluded for reasons of political prejudice?!
Fuentes in fact was de-platformed and de-banked because he had audacious views that bothered the mainstream. And Fuentes managed to survive and to prosper and to build an audience of citizens who do not see nir think like you do: pseudo-conservatively. Weak conservatism. Cuckservatism. That there is his intolerable crime! Because he tells a version of what’s true. Who has sold out America? is his question. True, very true, that he brings up the “JQ” but so do other Jews. And certainly the perverse relationship between Israel and the US has OBVIOUSLY influenced and possibly determined US policy in the Middle East! So, on what basis could it ever be wrong to TALK about these things?
Things are going on, Jack, that seem beyond your capability to assess and to judge so harshly. I do not get the reasons why all of this cannot cone out in the open and be discussed.
Well, in any case, that IS what is happening! Despite the rigid opinions of an Old Guard… 💂
I do not think you have the right to propose that either Daryl Cooper or Nick Fuentes be ostracized from the cultural and civil conversation. Both Carlson and Fuentes have as much rights as you because they are citizens. How is it, I wish to know, that you believe you have a moral tight to decide if Cooper or Fuentes get a ‘platform’ or if they are excluded for reasons of political prejudice?!
Both have a right to say whatever stupid things they care to. Tucker Carlson has every right to use his absurdly inflated influence and reputation to give them credibility they do not warrant and to makes stupid, ignorant, hateful people moreso. And I have a right, nay, an obligation to point out how unethical it is on the parts of all three of them. This is First Amendment 101. Any platform for those two clowns should be shamed, shunned, and driven into obscurity, because they are doing measurable harm. Such lies are legal, but unethical. If they aren’t lies but delusions, then it is unethical and irresponsible to spread delusions.
Unusually silly comment, Alizia.
I would like to demand that we require all public employees and those employed by private pos-secondary institutions of higher learning be paid in a manner that is equitable – meaning everyone makes the same. We should eliminate longevity increases as well as any and all pay differentials. These are the people pushing the socialist agenda. If it is wrong for Elon to have more than everyone else it is logical that pay differentials among those who espouse the idea of equity and inclusion then it will be necessary to make all things once available only to the highly paid elite be accessible to even the least valuable member of the organization.
Obviously, we cannot pay everyone employed at a university the same as the highest paid employee the only solution is to budget a fixed amount and divide that by the number of those employed. To deal with part time employees just create an hourly rate and pay everyone at that rate for the hours worked. That creates some finite cap on costs.
When the costs of creating “equitable fairness” of socialism impact higher income people who make up the majority of the electorate then the push for socialism will stall. The idea that we use government to strip the assets of a small demographic group. Based on the belief that that wealth was stolen from the favored masses is reminiscent of a time in the 1930’s.
Tucker Carlson has every right to use his absurdly inflated influence and reputation to give them credibility they do not warrant and to makes stupid, ignorant, hateful people moreso. And I have a right, nay, an obligation to point out how unethical it is on the parts of all three of them. This is First Amendment 101. Any platform for those two clowns should be shamed, shunned, and driven into obscurity, because they are doing measurable harm.
I am completely in favor of your commitment to what you believe is your “ethical obligation” to oppose them. So everything is quite good there. But what interests me is your use of terms line “stupid, ignorant, hateful”. It resonates like “basket of deplorables” and the NYTs intellectual elite determining that the masses of the flyover country are uneducated brutes and beings of a lower-order. You are, unquestionably, a member of an American intellectual ruling class (a directorate) given your education, but the fact is, Jack, that it is your CLASS that has overseen, even directed, America’s downturn and the path toward ruin. And what I mean is: this is what sone of the younger American generation are thinking and talking about.
You have just bursted out with PURE OPINION that you believe are absolute, incontrovertible truths. But you are (according to my view) simply wrong, and deeply prejudiced. And I have then an obligation to explain WHY you are wrong. Not only have I done this, but I have also referred to resources where you and your readers can educate yourselves (the Bowden talk I linked to is one example).
Oh, so you are the one in the Cat Bird seat who can declare on matters of “harm”!? But what I say back to you is that they have ideas about harm and harm done that definitely challenge your own (which can be described as weak, disempowered, pseudo-conservatism). I assume that is why you wish to de-platform them and anyone who opposes or challenges your mere opinions? Because they make bold assertions that touch on how your views have helped bring about crisis?
I am interested in, we are interested in, ideas and view that are empowering snd strengthening. And you refer to us (I am using generalisms to make the point) as hateful and ignorant.
But I think it is the other way around (not absolutely but partially).
Just as the Dreaded Democrats hate what you say and think, you too express a similar intolerance (and contempt and loathing) for people like me who have transcended your sickly Liberal categories and actually are developing a reasonable, intellectually defensible and morally-based platform through which to view the destructive results that have beeb brought about by your generation.
Put whatever labels you wish on that or them or me, we think see and interpret DIFFERENTLY.
I’m not going to waste time arguing with someone who can’t figure out that espousing a topsy-turvy fantasy history where 6 million murdered Jews are a hoax and Winston Churchill was the villain of World War II is by definition “stupid, ignorant, hateful”. If you believe otherwise, I’ll be kind and designate you as a victim. Get well soon.
If you did waste time with that, it really would be cRaZY since no one has said such a thing. You are (in my excruciatingly humble opinion) doing EXACTLY what the dreaded Progressive Left does: taking perhaps elements of some statement made, and twisting it, embellishing it, into something it is not.
This is one of the reasons I have referred to Democrats and Republicans of sharing similar intellectual dysfunction. I know what Fuentes has said, because I bothered to study him (spend hours listening to what he says). I think you have a limited view of him, and perhaps one you have picked up from others (?)
And if you knew better the views of some revisionists you would know better what they actually say, not what is said about them. But here is the real issue: You have brought up a topic which has been established to be untouchable. Even this little bit I have wrote here can be, will be, taken as “evidence” of some evil, retrogressive, false or wrongly revisionist view allied to intellectual satanism!
You work in a similar territory as the deranged Progressive Leftists that are constantly complained about!
Winston Churchill and many other players have been critiqued in some modern writing on WWll history (it is not my area of interest so I have not looked in to it in depth) and this is completely fair.
You would never ask me what I believe, and of course you choose to rely on what you must imagine I believe. Do you do two things: You dismiss out of hand any value and relevance in what I do think; and two you resort to ridicule.
Your blog, your rules I say! 🙃
There are people doing sober and necessary work in these areas. Again the Bowden talk is relevant here.
Regarding #2: We know how this will play out. New York is on the path to becoming the next Detroit. Detroit lost 2/3 of its population from its peak population. That’s coming here, as we know they will break the system and New York will come crashing down. The real train wreck is coming in several areas.
Firstly, the problem of leftists is they can’t learn from their past mistakes. Many will flee as the city falls into breakdown. Once the tax base goes, the system will have a harder and harder time financing the freebies. It will be yet another example of “it wasn’t real communism”. At least we will have the US constitution and the courts to stop the most egregious inevitable behavior of communists, but there will be plenty of bad happening. Those refugees will flee, but won’t act like the refugees they are and will instead be missionaries of their failed ideology wherever the locusts land. California already did this to Washington and Oregon. Oregon in particular was a very libertarian place prior to the 1990s. Washington was a little more purple before, but was run by sane people. Now they’re the epicenter of woke idocracy. Nevada and Arizona have turned more purple.
NYC is the financial epicenter of the world. Where this goes is anyone’s guess. I can’t see the financial people staying, as they’re going to be the target to fund the nonsense. They will flee, but to where and how the business moves will be interesting. Where does Wall Street go? Where do the exchanges go? They have to leave or they’ll be burdened to no end. This is NOT a good thing for the United States. Thankfully the US has two very strong points in their favor. We’re the technical innovators in the world. As much as AI is maligned, it is a revolutionary technology. Europe isn’t even playing. It’s the US and China. Europe may malign the US, but it’s not exactly a good idea to trust China and they’ll reluctantly pick US companies… or they’ll ban it and fall even more behind. Further, In addition, while Taiwan is where semiconductors are made, they’re made on US built equipment. There is one European company making one key technology, but US companies are making inroads. The US is working its way to being a monopoly. Secondly, the US is the only place combining a bunch of advantages with cheap energy. Europe is committing energy suicide and they US is benefiting. Thankfully these will keep the US the place where capitalism will be centered… we’re just in for a big disruption on the way.
Lastly, this is such a shame from an infrastructure perspective. As an engineer, I marvel at the men of a century ago. London was the first mover when it came to subways and electrification, but NYC was closely behind. They made a marvelous system that has sadly decayed in the 120 years since. NYC was also the place where the technology of electrification was perfected. There are examples elsewhere, but NYC was the first mass adoption of nearly all of the technologies still used today. NYC is also a decaying mess in this regards.
#3: The real ethics villain is the irrational hatred the French have for air conditioning. My last job put me in France for extended stretches, and when it was hot it was insufferable. My employer’s facility didn’t turn the A/C on until it hit 86°F and then it was set to 82°F. All of those recruited from outside France got A/C at home and worked from home on hot days. One told me that when he had A/C added to his house, the contractor told him all of his business depended on immigrants as none of the French would buy it.
If finally got the lowdown after several trips. The French know they shouldn’t admit anything because they know they’re ridiculed for it, but basically, they believe that any kind of chill is unhealthy. From a young age, they’re told that borderline too warm is healthy and anything cooler is unhealthy. They keep their houses very warm in the winter. The stereotype of “smelly French” comes from the reality that they prefer to be perspiring all the time. Those that were open about it admit that it is illogical, but it is deep psychological programming from a young age that’s hard to overcome. It’s kind of like the German fascination with a good pooping schedule or the Korean fan phobia.
The problem is most acute in France, but all over the world this is a problem with the elderly. Some can’t afford it, but more often it is just stubbornness. As people age and become fragile, heat can kill. We’re seeing places that didn’t used to need A/C transitioning into it becoming more necessary. I live in one of those places. It used to cool down overnight, but often isn’t the case anymore.
That’s sort of like the German belief that all sorts of illnesses are caused by drafts.
The Italians have some similar beliefs as the French about cold air, but not quite as bad. About twice as many of them, %-wise, have AC. We happened to rent a place in Rome during what turned out to be one of those summers where they cull their elders by letting them die of heatstroke. The apartment only had a few fans. At the end of the day, I just soaked my feet in the (clean and unused) bidet.
#3: I thought maybe learning to swim wasn’t as common in Europe as in the US, but it turns out just the reverse is true…swimming lessons are commonly included in regular publics school education there. Maybe boating/rafting/canoeing, etc. & learning to handle lakes and rivers is more of a US thing.
N.B. If you should find yourself in southern France in the summer and want to swim in a river, Pont du Gard is a really cool (in both senses) place to wade or splash around. The river is directly below the huge first century Roman aqueduct. We took some high school kids we were chaperoning on a summer trip there, & they loved it.