That’s right, baby!

Part. ONE.

 

The post American Pravda returns with NYT Part I appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – American Pravda returns with NYT Part I

the presumably eventual announcement by the president of Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, of the region’s secession from Spain.

Puigdemont has vowed to press ahead with his independence drive and is due to address the regional Parliament Tuesday. Rajoy, who will address the Spanish parliament on Wednesday, pledged that “national unity will be maintained” by using all instruments available to him. That includes suspending the regional administration and sending in security forces.

While Rajoy’s opening position is not surprising, what has raised the eyebrows of many is the not terribly-veiled threat made by a Popular Party spokesman:

Popular Party spokesman Pablo Casado, the party’s deputy secretary for communications, said during a press conference on Monday that Carles Puigdemont, the current First Minister of Catalonia, could “end up” like former First Minister Lluis Companys, who also declared the independence of the region on October 6, 1934.

Mr. Casado was referring to the 83rd anniversary, which was last Friday.

“Let’s hope that nothing is declared tomorrow because perhaps the person who makes the declaration will end up like the person who made the declaration 83 years ago.”

Casado did not specify if he was referring to what happened in the months following October 6, 1934—when Companys was arrested, tried and sentenced to 30 years in prison for rebellion—or what ultimately happened to the former Catalan leader.

After leaving Spain for exile in France during the Spanish Civil War, Companys was handed over by the Nazis to the Francoist regime, tried before a war council and executed at Montjuic (Barcelona) on October 15, 1940.

Casado’s idiotic remark naturally led to swift condemnation, and indicates that chances for a peaceful resolution remain low.

However, that does not mean that such a resolution should not be sought out. Gerry Adams, president of Sein Féin, provided a refresher on what a framework for a peaceful agreement would look like:

While no two disputes are the same, the broad principles to address and resolve differences are very similar and can be adapted to suit specific needs. These principles have at their heart the centrality of dialogue and mediation: the process must tackle the causes that lie at the core of the dispute. The process must be inclusive, with all parties treated as equals and mandates respected. All issues must be on the agenda, with nothing agreed until everything is agreed. There can be no preconditions and no vetoes. There can be no attempt to predetermine the outcome or preclude any outcome, and there should be a timeframe. This will provide a dynamic. Participants must stay focused and be prepared to take risks and engage in initiatives to advance the process.

The problem with Spain’s Catalonian problem is that Catalonians, in many ways, are very Spanish, particularly in their temperament. As Eric Margolis writes:

The national government in Madrid now threatens to block any further votes, dissolve the Catalan government, the Generalitat, and lock up many independence leaders.  Doing so would be very dangerous.  Spaniards are a courageous, hot-headed people who are not to be bullied.  No one wants to even think again about the awful 1930’s civil war whose echoes still reverberate today.

Margolis also observed that King Felipe IV, who should have stayed above the fray, did not do anyone any favors by “denouncing the Catalan independence-seekers, thus bringing the wrath of the Catalans on his head.”

And while a debate could be had over whether Catalonia’s secession from Spain furthers the cause of liberty, in the end, it is up to the Spanish people to determine how best to resolve this conflict.

I simply pray that, regardless of what happens this week, Spaniards keep their wits about them, and figure out a way to resolve this without violence and bloodshed.

If the Spanish (and American) civil wars have taught us anything, “victory” through violence not only does not resolve any conflicts. Further, they also create new ones, and make previous grudges that much more intractable.

May the Spanish people always act to further peace among themselves and their neighbors.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for Spain!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for Catalonia!

 

The post An anxious Europe awaits appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – An anxious Europe awaits

As Catalonia appears to be preparing to declare independence from Spain early next week, central governments across Europe are feeling increasingly anxious about their ability to control their respective secessionist movements.

Catalonia

The primary argument made by the Spanish government and its alles against Catalonian secession is that the region’s process to secede has been inconsistent with established law.

Thomas Harrington, professor of Hispanic Studies at Trinity College, calls that argument hogwash:

Do you remember all the procedurally pristine processes that led to the independence (and, in numerous cases, subsequent rapid entry into the EU) of countries like Kosovo, Croatia, Slovenia and a long list of others? I don’t either because they didn’t take place. And I certainly don’t remember any of today’s legion of newborn “proceduralists” raising any objections about it then.

What took place was that EU leadership class led by Germany saw in these countries as a new set of relatively virgin markets that were also filled with low wage labor that would allow them serve, in Emannuel Todd’s words, as Germany’s “Near China”.

Arguably more important that [t]his was NATO’s – which is to say the US’s – desire to surround the former Soviet Union with countries loyal to its geopolitical aims. They knew that by pressuring the Europeans to swiftly acquiesce to the independence of the newly declared independent countries of the east, they could quickly corral those countries into serving as part of the US’s emerging anti-Russian coalition, an absolutely essential element of the American’s long-term geopolitical plans.

In addition to avoiding these realities, the new army [of] oh-so-concerned proceduralists obviate the fact that from the very beginning of the current drive for independence in 2010 it has been precisely the Catalanists who have talked constantly about the need to carry the referendum off in the most transparent way possible, only to be told again and again by the Spanish state that there was nothing to talk about.

To hold up the lack of pristine procedure as a fatal strike against the Catalan cause when their natural interlocutor will not allow talks about proper procedure to even begin, is tantamount to severely penalizing a woman who finally walks out the door of her house after having had her perennial requests for a peaceful, no-contest divorce dismissed out of hand by the man she no longer loves.

Finally, if there is one thing that established states can always do, as we saw on Sunday in a particularly crude way, it is to sabotage the “procedures” of the the incipient states within its borders. To appoint the potential sabotager of democratic procedures, in this case Spain, as the judge of whether proper procedures were followed in the region seeking independence is, in addition to being patently absurd, to hand the established state an effective veto power sine die in the clash of political interests

I don’t remember anyone granting the Serbs or the Russians this absurd privilege in earlier times. Why then are supposedly liberal and democratic people bending over backwards to provide the Spaniards with it now?

Lombardia and Venezia

Meanwhile, Catalonia’s relatively successful attempt at holding a secession vote has given northern Italians an additional impetus to seek further autonomy from the central Italian government:

This month the Lombardy region and the city of Venice will both vote on new powers of autonomy at referendums which are now taking on increasing levels of controversy.

Previously seen as a low-scale vote on local powers, the referendums are now experiencing symbolic overtones following last Sunday’s Catalonian chaos.

Last weekend more than 800 people were injured by police as a referendum on independence for Catalonia was held – against the express wishes of leaders in Madrid and Brussels.

And now Italy is facing similar chaos with two referendums set to be held on October 22, although in these instances the votes are state-approved and will not face violent opposition.

The autonomy referendums for Lombardy, a region which includes Italy’s second-largest city of Milan, and the travel hotspot of Venice will also differ from Catalonia in that they are not binding.

The referendums will ask voters if they want their regional council to invoke the third paragraph of Article 116 of the Italian Constitution.

This allows regions with a balanced budget to ask the Italian government to entrust them with new powers and a greater degree of autonomy.

(h/t Vox Day)

Just the beginning?

Additionally, the Express correctly observed that “the consequences of two yes votes could be shattering for Italy, sparking other separatists movements across the European Union nation.” (By the way, isn’t it interesting that the article calls the EU a “nation”?) For example, in addition to Catalonia, many Basques want to be independence from Spain. Scotland is considering seceding from Britain. Furthermore, Belgium, France, and Denmark have to contend with secession movements of their own.

While EU bureaucrats had been dreaming about creating a European superstate, for now it appears that they’ll have to turn their attention to helping their member states remain in current form.

Whether they will be successful remains to be seen.

 

The post Spain (and Europe) are losing control of the narrative appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Spain (and Europe) are losing control of the narrative

One of the few shows I have enjoyed watching over the past few years has been Black-ish. The show hinges around how ad executive Dre Johnson, who is played by Anthony Anderson, attempts to maintain his cultural identity while living in an affluent neighborhood. In many ways, Dre represented the successful American who struggled to maintain a sense of identity (and, for that matter, dignity) in an world that, notwithstanding the increasing identity politics, discourages people from attaching themselves to a broader culture. While the show has touched on several sensitive issues, particularly race, it had done so in a good-naturedly way that treated its diverse audience with respect.

Not anymore.

The premiere episode of this season, “Juneteenth”, was a thirty minute scold-fest. The show usually takes advantage of Dre’s inclination to take a superficial matter as an indication of a larger injustice. However, in this episode, his indignation never lets up and hangs over it throughout.

It began with the Johnson family watching a school Columbus Day pageant in which Dre’s elementary school-aged children, Jack and (previously pathological) Diane, are participating. Dre imagines a rap his children would perform if the play was performed according to the truth:

Everything you know about Columbus is a joke

He didn’t discover America prepare to get woke

I’m Christopher Columbus, and I’m pretty much evil

On Hispaniola, my men killed the indigenous people

…

You’re so brave, Columbus more than words can convey

And it’s cool how your men killed 3,000 people in one day

So let’s make one thing perfectly clear

Celebrating Columbus is celebrating a slavery pioneer

But at least you can get a great deal on a mattress

Hilarious.

Dre then uses the “fake history” (gee, I wonder if this is meant to sound like “fake news”? Bueller? Bueller?) of the play as the pretense to ask (once again, indignantly) if black people have to celebrate white holidays, why can’t white people celebrate Juneteenth, a “black holiday”?

The rest of the episode – otherwise known as the longest twenty five minutes of my life – is then dedicated to “educating” the audience on what Juneteenth is. (Spoiler alert: it’s the day that celebrates the abolition of slavery in Texas, which occurred on June 19, 1865.)

The dialogues were horrible. Dre and Bow (and Daphne Lido, who works in the same ad agency as Dre) were woke, indignant, and condescending to every white person to whom they spoke. The white people were subservient, inarticulate, and stupid.

Meanwhile, the middle of the episode included musical numbers about how black people used to be slaves in America, how slavery is bad, and how slaves became really happy when they were emancipated. Yes, there was the mildly amusing ditty that played tribute to Schoolhouse Rock’s “I Am a Bill” (can you guess which word they replaced with bill?), but that did very little to compensate for the fact that someone thought it was a good idea for Black-ish to teach lessons that 99.867936% of Americans learned when they were five.

I don’t know how the rest of Black-ish‘s season is going to play out, and I don’t care. It has joined the NFL, ESPN, and awards shows as those entities that have succumbed to the social justice virus. Given that they have taken severe ratings and popularity hits, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what will happen to Black-ish if they continue this course.

In fact, signs of the show’s deteriorating popularity can already be observed. According to tvbythenumbers.com, ABC had only 4.61 million viewers of Tuesday night primetime shows, behind CBS (11.03 million) and NBC (8.73 million). At the 9pm slot, 4.69 million watched Black-ish, well behind behind Bull (10.72 million) and This is Us (10.92 million). While Black-ish had a relatively similar portion of the 18-49 year-old audience as Bull, the youth have also been watching less traditional TV over time.

However, that will not stop the social justice virus from clinging to whatever host that will accept it. Unfortunately for TV audiences who merely look to be entertained, a previously successful sitcom is the latest victim.

 

The post Black-ish: the latest host infected by the social justice virus appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Black-ish: the latest host infected by the social justice virus

From the Daily Mail:

Catalan officials claimed 90% of 2.2million voters had called for independence in an ‘illegal’ referendum blighted by violent scenes which left at least 888 people injured.

World leaders condemned the brutal scenes after officials revealed that hundreds of protesters have been injured so far.

Officers were seen kicking and stamping on protesters as they stormed buildings and seized ballot boxes.

Footage captured in the village of Sarria de Ter in the province of Girona showed authorities using an axe to smash down the doors of a polling station where Catalan president Carles Puigdemont was due to cast his vote.

He said the region had won the right to become an independent state with the referendum results due in a few days.

And in Barcelona, the region’s capital, officers fired rubber bullets at thousands of protesters demonstrating against their votes being denied.

While one can argue over whether the referendum truly reflects the general sense of Catalonians, one thing is clear: Spain has lost the moral high ground. As Vox Day writes:

Spain is losing the moral level of war in Catalonia. Badly. The Spanish can cry “the vote is illegal” all they like, but the Spanish government can no longer pretend to have democratic legitimacy in Catalonia or to be anything but an imperialist state governing an unwilling people by force. The vote is no longer even necessary at this point; world opinion is actively turning against Spain. Had Spain encouraged the vote and offered incentives for a No vote, it might well have won. But by fighting against it and resorting to violence – even well-restrained violence of the sort it has utilized thus far – it has significantly increased the likelihood that Catalans will vote for independence.

I also agree with Vox when he argues that while the Catalonian elite may well be a collection of economically ignorant fools, and rule by the will of the people may well be an illusion, Catalonians have the right to decide for themselves how they wish to be governed. Or put another way, regardless of what Spanish law may say, Spain does not have the right to prevent Catalonians from seceding.

Of course, this devolution from the center could lead to the further splintering of Spain. And Catalonia, for that matter. After all, the principle of self-determination naturally flows down to the individual.

In any event, Spain and the European Union have their hands full. Central governments have been plying their socialist trade for far too long. They have clearly failed their subjects (as if the elite cared about them in the first place), and the subjects are fighting back. Time will tell how Spain’s Catalonian problem will resolved.

Hopefully it will be done so peacefully.

The post Catalonia votes for independence from Spain appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Catalonia votes for independence from Spain

By now, practically everyone has heard of the massacre, presumably by Stephen Paddock, at a country music festival in Las Vegas. As of this writing, at least 58 people have been killed, and 515 people injured. This makes this the biggest mass shooting in American history.

While ISIS has claimed responsibility for the shooting, the FBI said that Paddock had no ties to the organization. If anything, the whole shooting seems bizarre. Based on what little I’ve learned, Paddock could very well have attended, and enjoyed, the festival he attacked.

Nevertheless, this horrible attack has directly harmed hundreds, if not thousands, of families. While we, the living, try to sort out what an earth happened last night, may I ask that you keep those who have been killed and wounded, and their loved ones, in your prayers?

Loving God,
Welcome into your arms the victims of violence and terrorism.
Comfort their families and all who grieve for them.
Help us in our fear and uncertainty,
And bless us with the knowledge that we are secure in your love.
Strengthen all those who work for peace,
And may the peace the world cannot give reign in our hearts.

Amen.

The post Pray for Las Vegas appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Pray for Las Vegas

I recognize that I haven’t posted anything for a while. There are several reasons for my silence on this page; some of them are personal. However, the below tweet by Paul Joseph Watson summarizes quite nicely a key reason for my lack of posting.

The screeching anti-Trump hysteria is so relentlessly boring, I'm thinking of just not even covering it anymore. Every day the same shit.

— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) September 27, 2017

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

I could endlessly report the mayhem occuring in today’s political and cultural milieau. And yet, for what? People who would normally agree with me in the past would probably agree with anything I write, and the inverse would probably be true as well.

I only have one meaningful observation to offer, however small it may be. The past several months have been extremely challenging for me. I have noticed that there’s a correlation between how poorly I react to anything occurring in my life, and how centered I am within my Catholic faith.

I’m not even talking about praying regularly, let alone well. My prayer life has suffered significantly over this period of time. And yet, since I recently lifted up my concerns and fears to the Lord, with Mary’s help, I seem to be calmer, and more centered than I have for quite a while.

That’s not to say that I haven’t tried offering my concerns to God in the past. I have. However, for reasons I don’t understand, let alone can’t explain, burdens that have previously been overwhelming for me are far lighter at the moment. Not eliminated. Lighter.

It’s moments like this that remind me that God’s grace truly exists. Without it, I would probably find myself in the insane asylum.

Which leads me back to Watson’s tweet, which resonates tremendously with me. Right now I have neither the energy nor the inclination to identify topics to which I can possibly provide value. The culture war is currently at a standstill. Neither side is willing to listen to the other. What is the point of communicating anything when no one is willing to listen?

It will not be surprising if more time passes before I write anything. To anyone has looked for me to publish anything lately, I apologize for my silence. All I can say is that when the time is right for me to write, I will.

Until then, I pray that you and your loved ones may find peace in your lives.

 

The post Silence within the insanity appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Silence within the insanity

Given the hurricanes that Houston just suffered through, and Miami is currently preparing for, the subject of “price gouging” has naturally arisen.

First of all, the phrase itself indicates more of a moral reaction to, rather than a value-free description of, what happens to prices of goods in the midst of a calamity. It sounds as if someone is manipulating prices so as to inappropriately taking advantage of people who urgently need particular goods at a dire time of need.

However, “price gouging” is the best way to allocate scarce resources under extreme circumstances. High prices encourage more supplies to come in, which will eventually being prices down. Plus with market prices acting unimpeded, people need to decide how much they actually need, so it discourages hoarding. In fact, a very strong argument can be made that allowing market prices to work actually saves lives.

To learn more about how “price gouging” is actually a necessity, please see the following resources:

• Tom Woods Show, episode 987 – “Price Gouging” is Urgently Necessary
• Robert Murphy – 3 Good Things about “Price Gouging”
• Forbes – Price-Gouging Laws – Not Hurricanes – Empty Store Shelves
• Donald J. Boudreaux – On Price Gouging
• David Henderson – Thaler on Price Gouging

The post Price gouging saves lives appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Price gouging saves lives

Sing to “American Woman” by the Guess Who.

American Maoist, stay away from me

American Maoist, mama let me be

Don’t come hangin’ around my door

I don’t wanna see your face no more

I got more important things to do

Than listen to those lies from you

Now Maoist, I said stay away,

American Maoist, listen what I say.

 

American Maoist, get away from me

American Maoist, joker  let me be

Don’t come knockin’ around my door

Don’t wanna see your shadow no more

Fuzzy feels can empathize

Too much truth brings tears to eyes

Now Maoist, I said get away

American Maoist, listen what I say.

 

American Maoist, said get away

American Maoist, listen what I say

Don’t come hangin’ around my door

Don’t wanna see your face no more

I don’t need your fairy tales

I don’t need your screams and wails

Fuzzy feels can empathize

Too much truth brings tears to eyes

Now Maoist, get away from me

American Maoist, joker let me be.

 

Go, gotta get away, gotta get away

Now go go go

Gonna leave you, woman

Gonna leave you, woman

Bye-bye

Bye-bye

Bye-bye

Bye-bye

You’re no good for me

I’m no good for you

Gonna look you right in the eye.

Tell you what I’m gonna do

You know I’m gonna leave

You know I’m gonna go

You know I’m gonna leave

You know I’m gonna go, Maoist

I’m gonna leave, Maoist

Goodbye, American Maoist

Goodbye, American clown

Goodbye, American twit …

The post American Maoist appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – American Maoist

In more ways than one.

As the New York Times reports:

Google on Monday fired a software engineer who wrote an internal memo that questioned the company’s diversity efforts and argued that the low number of women in technical positions was a result of biological differences instead of discrimination.

The memo, called “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” angered many in Silicon Valley because it relied on certain gender stereotypes — like the notion that women are less interested in high-stress jobs because they are more anxious — to rationalize the gender gap in the tech industry. The memo quickly spread outside the company, as other Google employees railed against many of its assumptions.

James Damore, author of the now-infamous memo, identifies himself as a “classical liberal”. It begins with the following paragraphs (with adjusted formatting):

I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at
population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.

Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo
chamber.

Despite what the public response seems to have been, I’ve gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.

Damore’s memo focuses on supporting the following arguments:

• Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety .
• This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
• The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
  ○ Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
  ○ Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
• Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership.
• Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.

Because Damore holds these views, Google fired him.

To explain Google’s action against Damore,  memo Danielle Brown, Google’s Vice President of Diversity, Integrity, and Governance, wrote the following memo to employees:

Googlers,

I’m Danielle, Google’s brand new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I started just a couple of weeks ago, and I had hoped to take another week or so to get the lay of the land before introducing myself to you all. But given the heated debate we’ve seen over the past few days, I feel compelled to say a few words.

Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.

Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said. “

Google has taken a strong stand on this issue, by releasing its demographic data and creating a company wide OKR on diversity and inclusion. Strong stands elicit strong reactions. Changing a culture is hard, and it’s often uncomfortable. But I firmly believe Google is doing the right thing, and that’s why I took this job.

Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.

I’ve been in the industry for a long time, and I can tell you that I’ve never worked at a company that has so many platforms for employees to express themselves—TGIF, Memegen, internal G+, thousands of discussion groups. I know this conversation doesn’t end with my email today. I look forward to continuing to hear your thoughts as I settle in and meet with Googlers across the company.

Thanks,

Danielle

Because nothing says “we love diversity” more than firing someone who holds a perspective outside of the corporate zeitgeist.

The liberal media has already lined its talking points over the firing. This isn’t surprising, given that they are based on political dogma rather than actually understanding the facts behind this particular case.

As can be seen in the NYT article above, rather than focus on Damore’s concern about an ideological echo chamber in Google’s Mountain View campus, SJWs are defending the firing on the premise that the memo “sought to rationalize the gender gap in the tech industry”. Newsweek‘s article on the firing, in addition to focusing on the gender gap, is bringing in the alt-right’s supposed reaction to it:

Google has fired the employee that wrote a widely criticized memo suggesting that “biological differences” are the reason why there are so few women leaders in the tech industry. The tech giant’s decision sparked outrage on social media, with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and alt-right media outlets claiming the company was censoring James Damore, the sofware engineer behind the leaked memo.

Bringing in the alt-right into the story is an obvious attempt to obfuscate the simple fact that Damore was fired for pointing out that Google lives in an ideological echo chamber.

Which is, you know, censorship.

And a social justice campaign can’t be complete without its dutiful priests reciting their creed to the heathens via Twitter.

Brief reminder that racism, sexism, ableism, etc. are prejudice plus power. That's why "reverse sexism" isn't real: men hold systemic power.

— Pup Chantilly (@aphyr) August 6, 2017

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

If men really hold systemic power, I’m sure Damore would like a little bit more of that right about now.

Speaking for myself, Google’s firing of Damore really hits home.

It has become increasingly clear that the social justice movement has infiltrated corporate human resources departments. All Damore’s firing did was merely put an exclamation point on the matter.

As someone who works in a corporation, yet also identifies himself as a libertarian, the Google firing is among the scenarios about which I am most concerned.

After all, there is a reason why I am writing anonymously.

Social justice warriors, otherwise known as American Maoists, would like nothing more than for non-leftists, within and outside of companies, to shut their piehole so that their fairy tale sense of reality may take hold. (Of course it never will, primarily because they don’t understand human nature, but that’s another matter.)

What Google, if not SJWs, will discover, however, is there is a consequence to every action.

In the end, regardless of how the liberal media spins this particular incident, American corporations who react poorly to well-reasoned arguments will be hurting no one but themselves. And their bottom line. The sooner businesses realize this, the better.

Meantime, I’ve got some more blog posts to write before the American Maoists get to me.

 

 

The post Je suis James Damore appeared first on A Simple Fool.

Source: A Simple Fool – Je suis James Damore