Wednesday, December 14, 2016

The Liberal Post-election Meltdown

Back when Al Gore lost the 2000 election, liberals couldn't let go. So we had the Florida recount (which was only necessary because the media called the state before the polls in the Florida panhandle had closed). And Democrats chased the result all the way through the Supreme Court.

So Democrats decided that George W. Bush was "selected, not elected." And they never really conceded defeat. All the Priuses and Subaru Outbacks in rich-bitch north Seattle had anti-Bush bumper stickers for four years.

After the 2004 election, which was another surprise for the polls had Kerry winning, Democrats were so traumatized that their obliging therapists invented a new mental health category for them: PEST, or post-election selection trauma.

Now, after the 2016 election we have Democrats crying all over the place. We had a CNN personality talking about popping Xanax; we had college girls crying together; we had college presidents sending out sympathetic letters. Not to mention the usual stuff about racism, sexism, -phobias, and digging up conspiracy theories like "fake news" and Reds under the bed.

Somehow, when Republicans lose there is no need to invent new mental health categories. Why is that?

Of course we know what this is all about. It is not quite what Rush Limbaugh would call the "chickification" of America. It is certainly the mainstreaming of the left's victim culture.

It goes without saying that a victim is incapable of action. A victim needs a wise and powerful patron to do all the thinking and acting for her. And it is a profound act of betrayal if the victim ever feels unsafe or afraid.

And the classic behavior of the victims is this delicious story about a college instructor ranting in class about the Trump win being an "act of terrorism," and then heading for the hills when one of her students videoed her rant and put it up on social media. Because she got death threats.

Our liberal friends are always quick to publicize death threats to liberals. But not so much when conservative women are threatened.

Look, I get it. Good little liberal girls go to college and get taught that politics means a protest march to City Hall.

What they are not taught is that politics is civil war by other means. They do not get taught that "peaceful protest" is nothing of the kind, but a deliberate attempt at intimidation, the first escalation from a genuine discussion of the issues to outright street violence. So these good little girls get the shock of their sheltered lives when their liberal virtue-signalling runs into opposition. Nobody ever told them about that! No fair!

I think there is a big issue here, arising out of the entry of women into the public square in the last century. And my go-to guy on that is German sociologist Georg Simmel. He wrote that in time women would transform the public sphere to suit "a more feminine sensibility."

Yes, but. It stands to reason that some aspects of the public square do not lend themselves very well to a more feminine sensibility. For instance, in high-stakes politics and business. If you ask me, the number one requirement for a successful politician or business leader is to have a warrior personality. He must be a courageous person ready, willing and able to boldly outdare the dangers of the time. And that includes physical danger.

I well remember my days as a glider pilot. One of the things we learned is that when women pilots experienced a dangerous situation, they would almost always quit flying. When you think of it, it makes sense. Who would continue to do something that is dangerous? But that is exactly what men do, they instinctively know they must outdare the dangers of the moment, and then come back and do it again tomorrow.

The woman college teacher that got caught in her rant fled to another state. OK. That's what liberal SJWs do. But a real man would have stayed his ground and confronted the student that recorded an undercover video. Maybe he would have staged a teach-in so that all sides in this contentious post-election season would get their chance to be heard. Yeah, maybe, if he were a conservative.

It is nice that women are out in the public square. It is nice that they have altered it to suit a more feminine sensibility.

But not everything in the world can be altered to suit a more feminine sensibility. There will still be a big area in the public square suitable only for people willing to boldly outdare the dangers of the time. Truth is, there aren't many men capable of that: certainly I am not that kind of man. There are fewer women: Margaret Thatcher, for example.

But one thing about Trump. He doesn't give a damn about caterwauling liberal women.

No comments:

Post a Comment