Frightening McCarthyism Style Senate Hearings For US Supreme Court

Abominable sexism is all over the planet. It needs to be fought. The sword of mental progress should decapitate sexism. But a sword works best when it has not been shattered, by striking too hard an object of no value, gaining naught. This is the problem caving to the Kavanaugh hearing hysteria. I am for the hearing, not the hysteria. [Thereafter Kavanaugh will be K and his accuser F.]

This is a philosophy site. Philosophy means loving wisdom, which can’t be accomplished without hating stupidity. And thus, in particular, hating the stupid (Sade, Hugo, Nietzsche did that well). Thus, creating philosophy has rarely been perceived as nice by most contemporaries. New philosophy exists by finding ways to contradict yesterday’s wisdom, uncovering stupidity, thus the stupid.

Individuals with over-wrinkled (F), marked, or reddish faces (from alcohol blown capillaries, watch K’s ruddy face and pink cheeks) and, or neurologically frazzled behavior (both K and F) show evidence of alcohol damage to various tissues. Thus, ex-old drunkards testify in front of the US Senate. Yes, because they both admitted to heavy  drinking of alcohol… while underage, and thereafter. K has made many statements about the festive state alcohol put him into, during many public events he was invited to in the past. Accuser Ford? The woman was a drunkard at the time… and what was a 15-year-old girl doing at a drunkard’s’ party  with older boys? If not for enjoying inebriety, trouble and illegal behavior?

A few points to which the USA seems most immune to: 

  1. crimes, except against humanity, shouldn’t be prosecuted 36 years later: no serious defense can be set-up.  
  2. Even more importantly, both K and F were children at the time… Ah, but the professional prosecutor who interrogated K said that even “horseplay” (what children do) could be sexual in nature, thus… a crime!  

A grotesque standard was established by the prosecutor: “sexual behavior” was defined as “genitals touching” (whatever “genitals” are) voluntarily or not, through clothing or not (this probably makes jammed subway people and football/rugby players sexual behaviorists engaging in “unwanted sexual behavior”). Puritanism gone mad, and vicious: because people are really sent to prison in the USA for behaving, at some point, for a second or two as if they were in Tokyo or Paris subways… This is deep inside the violence, judicial or social of the US: prosecuting what are basically non-crimes, enables the prosecution and law enforcement, and legislating bodies to ignore real crimes, as if it was not their fault. They just ran out of attention, cognition, reflection, time and energy you see. Instead they all worry about the hand of a child, perhaps, on the mouth of a drunk 15-year-old girl… 36 years ago.

An entirely grotesque process then. Kavanaugh the judge was the object of 6 FBI inquiries prior, before his various nominations as a judge. The accuser suddenly remembers in 2012, under “therapy” what happened in 1982. I have been assaulted much more severely, more than once… A tendency is to forget assaults, just to get inner peace, not to suddenly remember them. But never talking about them after they happened? No way. One is forced to share trauma.

***

Before gaining altitude, in a follow-up essay on sexism, to come later, let me reiterate the obvious:

Dreaming is best done above the clouds, for those who search ultimate wisdom, freedom

I am no philosophical friend of Kavanaugh, but mostly his enemy. In particular, I don’t like show-off Christians (they are liars: who can believe all the Jesus fable? Lunatics? Pedophiles?)

Nor do I like drunkards: the good judge was always one of them. I believe drunkards tend to forget, make up stories to fill-in the missing memories (I believe Ford was sexually assaulted in one of her drinking bouts, and that’s why she drank; whether K jumped on top of her, horseplaying, I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter: these were kids, but they shouldn’t have been drinking alcohol). Even more, drunkards can’t live with themselves. Socrates was a drunkard, and proud of it. But how can one be proud of “know thyself” and yet proud of messing up with one’s ability to gather knowledge?

However, this is a witch hunt: the alleged assault, had it happen, barely qualifies as such. It qualifies as horseplay on steroids. And the fact is, the accuser didn’t go to the police (she had probably committed crimes herself, hence her lack of alacrity to testify then or now).

Real assault, something I am all too familiar with, is something quite different. One doesn’t wait 30 years to “remember” it, as Ford claimed. One wants to share it with others, share the sense of injustice. I had a few near-death experiences (some from assault), and I am not mute about it, never was. It’s actually normal to mention violent occurrences… as long as one has nothing to do with the situation which led to the aggression.

Next: why sexism should be eradicated. Ah, last but not least: the prosecutor, a woman, was morbidly obese. That’s a form of violence, even lethal violence. Some will say:’Oh, but she kills only herself.’ No, she enjoys millions of women to view putting a hand on a mouth, or “genitals” through clothing somehow colliding with some other organics under clothing, as a most major crime. But dying of obesity pretty soon? That’s the American way.

I see a violence in obesity, as I do in prosecuting hand on a mouth 36 years later, or judging children as adults, 36 years later, but not of the parents who failed to provide supervision… 

Another point: while I am as anti-sexist as they come, I can see perfectly that sexism is a two-way road. Clearly, in the society at large, women are not on top proportionally to their number and, or, education. However, that should be no excuse for the self-described (pseudo) “resistance” to mimic McCarthyism, just worse. Some may scoff that, surely, this is not as bad as McCarthyism.

But consider this: the original population of Western Europe and North America is not reproducing, it’s actually dying, at a very fast pace by historical  standards. It’s not as fast as the collapse of the Aztecs (which went from say 16 million in 1520 CE to one million in 1600 CE). However, the Aztecs, like other American Native got crushed by Eurasian disease their genetics was weak to resist: it was a special situation. Now EU authorities say they need to welcome (mostly Muslim) immigrants, because European youth is collapsing.

Maybe, tighten the seat belts, please, maybe what is collapsing quite a bit too much, is good old machismo (I will not Tweet this, lest I lose plenty of followers…) If men of a particular ethnicity are going to be terrified of all and any “horseplay” with women, that particular ethnicity won’t just stoop to the level of fanatical Islam in its relationship between men and women. It will also implode. White Euro-American populations will also be replaced by Fundamentalist Muslims, because the latter reproduce aplenty… The reason is obvious: Fundamentalist Muslim males are not living in terror of approaching women when, and where, and how it really matters as far as survival of the “race” is concerned. Differently from all these disheveled white men on the run…

And the worst? All this is fake. The anti-machismo movement is supposedly to help women… But, in the end, it just helps those who have it all…  Those old white men it pretends to excoriates… By removing the fangs which could tear them up, and only fangs will do.

The point of this essay is this: whenone is civilized, it’s important to be civilized in-depth. In depth, Kavenaugh represents much that I condemn, and despise. The sort of aggression Ford claims she was victim of, I also despise and condemn, however much she assiduously prepared herself to be a victim of, with systematic drinking. However, one can’t judge civilization in-depth alone, especially regarding individuals. After all what is going down in-depth is hard to ascertain. Whereas superficial forms are easy to observe: acceptable form, appearance, politeness have also to be extended too, it’s a matter of civilization one can see and judge easily. When Feinstein and other “Dems” (Demons?) sat on the accusation against Kavanaugh, keeping it secret, until they could spring it at the last moment, they were sabotaging the (pseudo) democratic process of Supreme Court generalissimo selection.

Applying full adult justice on children, decades later, only an unacceptable civilization would do this. As Kavanaugh himself said:’What goes around, comes around.” In their fight to death against Trump, the “democratic” powers that be play a dangerous game: they create a precedent of using any sort of propaganda, however improbable (Trump as Russian agent… when Trump is on tape as having exactly the same opinions when the USSR already existed and Trump was fighting… Ronald Reagan’s plutocratic globalization).

One should not forget (should one know it) that the Roman Revolution which ended up with Augustus as dictator, started with legitimate gripes of the soldiers of Octavian army. Centurions went ahead, one bared and brandished his sword at the… Senate, the Roman Senate, and declared that if the Senate didn’t take the right decisions, his sword would. We are not yet there, and Trump is craftily surrounded by generals. But this is the nuclear age, and history goes fast….

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note: The pseudo-left has also issued scathing comments about the Senate being full of old white men (as the tips of all hierarchies)… First that’s grotesquely ageist, a form of discrimination just as bad as discrimination against children, as the old can’t defend themselves well. Worse: there is a reason it’s called a “Senate”. Like in “Senior”. It’s about older people giving advice, because they have little personally to gain in giving poisonous counsel. Age discrimination is one of the worst thing: it is not just unfair, it deprives humanity of wisdom. Learn.

Tags: , ,

14 Responses to “Frightening McCarthyism Style Senate Hearings For US Supreme Court”

  1. Paul Handover Says:

    This senior, white-skinned, London-born gentleman is approaching this act of leaving a comment with a degree of trepidation! Not least of all because I have recently submitted my application for US Citizenship. Ergo, I am on the record here!

    But the common sense displayed in your post strikes at the heart of what is not working and how we seniors must not be timid in holding up a mirror to these times.

    When I write what is not working I don’t just have in mind my new home country. Across the ‘pond’ the country of my birth has demonstrated the same disease of the national mind. A modern disease of it being better to argue, never agree, and retreat to well-defended corners rather than truly listen to the other side and mutually accept that compromise is the only way forward.

    K. and F., Brexit, et al, are just droplets ahead of a gathering global storm that if not dealt with in a united manner internationally will be seen as a ‘walk in the park’ when the last few survivors look back at this modern 21st Century.

    Thank you for your inspiring essay.

    Like

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks for the wise comment, Paul. Your comments, being so wise, are always appreciated. Yes, this time I didn’t mention Brexit: I argue enough on my Twitter account with hysterical Brexit fanatics. Brexit is fully insane: it could only work by having the UK move to Mars… Or between Canada and the USA, and obeying the USA… The global storm is literally a storm, from climate change… and may sober everybody up! 😉

      Like

  2. benign Says:

    We are the stage of “intra-elite competition,” as Peter Turchin calls it, as factions of bloated Plutocrats struggle for control (in this case sometimes referred to as the Ziocons, who like war and military globalism, and the Patriots, who are for rebuilding the nation and its people). It is the struggle at the end of Empire, and a new viable social contract can only be born in a collapse to total that everyone feels a need to cooperate, IMHO.

    We know Trump is politically astute. Allegedly, his second choice is a non-Ivy League woman from fly-over land. If I were K, I would be worried. Trump could score brain-stem-level points with women if he dumps K and goes with a woman–and how could the Left oppose her without alienating their own base?

    Total dysfunctionality. I hope to skate through to my appointed hour on somewhat limited resources.

    Martin Armstrong is forecasting the breakup of both the EU and the US–and no collapse of Russia in the foreseeable future. His model has been right on most of these big calls.

    cheers,
    b

    Like

    • Oatmeal Activist Says:

      The appeals of Amy Coney Barrett aside, simply allowing the Democrats to defeat the Kavanaugh nomination may trigger a red tsunami in November. It’s gambit, but Trump, as you observed, is politically astute and probably better positioned than any other retail politician to turn it into electoral jet fuel. And it would be fitting rebuke to the corrupt histrionics of Kamala Harris, Kristin Gillibrand and Mazie Hirono.

      Like

      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Trump is not professional politician in the sense of getting money from it. Instead, he is really attached to some ideas, always the same since he battled Ronald Reagan (the creep Obama admired so much) in the 1980s… And the question of quality jobs is the number one concern, anywhere.. Serfs in the Middle Ages already were driven by it…

        Like

        • Oatmeal Activist Says:

          Patrice, are you at all familiar with Sir James Goldsmith? He was sort of an English/French proto Trump. Of the plutocracy yet against it, attached to ideas that challenged its agenda. He died well before my time, but you can find a copy of his manifesto, The Trap, available as a free PDF on his still-functional website:

          http://www.sirjamesgoldsmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/The-Trap-Sir-James-Goldsmith.pdf

          There’s also an insightful hour-long interview with Charlie Rose (before he struck down by #MeToo) on YouTube:

          Like

          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Not familiar, will look into it.
            The debate is not new:
            First the Gracchi brothers held that reasoning, and gave up security at the very absolute tiptop of Roman society to end up assassinated, like the real Jesus Christs they were…

            Proudhon who was a thinker AND, later MP! got the ball rolling. Marx stole and detested him: Marx was a wealthy heir hanging around even wealthier heirs, Socrates style, while vomiting on democracy, Socrates style again. Proudhon was the genuine article…
            Proudhon influenced Lasal, who had an enormous influence on his interlocutor Von Bismarck… who thus installed MEDICARE FOR ALL, aka universal healthcare in Germany in the early 1860s:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Lassalle
            That was the first such system.
            Lassalle, Proudhon arguments is that fixing the system was in the best interests of the wealthiest, not just the poorest. That’s also my position, and, of course, Trump. Marx, Engels, like all too many german thinkers, were all into destroying any semblance of democracy, first. They got their wishes, for all too long…

            Like

  3. G Max Says:

    Surely as a progressive atheist you hate Kavenaugh. So I guess it’s a testimony to yor inner strength that you extends so much fairness to him.

    Agreed it’s lousy to judge a judge by the teen he once was. Supposing he did what she said he did. False memories are a fact. She may well have had something similar w somebody else, but then associate Judge Kavenaugh to it, bcs he was famous from nominations he had gone thru before 2012

    Like

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      The Ford accuser of K is full of BS, it’s totally obvious. This being said, K is not my cup of tea, either. But that the Dems and feminists all “believe” Ford is maddening: the woman is obviously lying… Mitchell, the sex prosecutor from Arizona, detailed her lies in her Senate report…

      Like

  4. SDM Says:

    The Senate full of old white men- the operative word is “men” almost as much as “white”. The “old” is not the worst part of it. The fact that the F complaint dates back to high school is a troubling but there are other problems with K that are as more a problem than his alleged teen behavior in that he was evasive and lost his composure when a more measured response could have more credible. Another issue is his white male privilege on full display – how dare some woman try to keep him from getting what he believes is his by birth rights. It is all an ugly spectacle but that women have been so marginalized in these situations is bound to have repercussions once they get heard- and are believed.
    The shrill defense of K is the cry of angry white privilege being attacked and the threat it being taken away. Like a child having his his favorite toy taken away. Oh the agony!
    And what of this argument of population collapse because of
    “good old fashioned machismo” being trampled? So that is the problem? Men afraid of fathering children because they might be called a rapist? That is truly laughable. By the way, is not overpopulation a real problem and part of the global warming threat?
    Yes it is bad theater there in the senate hearing room but when partisan politics is the weapon of choice in life time appointments to a politicized and undemocratic court, it is to be expected. Direct democracy and no lifetime judges would be a start in getting past this.

    Like

    • Oatmeal Activist Says:

      There is no such thing as “white privilege” – angry or otherwise – so it cannot be offered as an explanation for a defence of Kavanaugh. A defence, I would add, that is significantly less shrill than the defence of Ford.

      Direct democracy would be no salve to the increasingly internecine war that is Washingtoninan politics. Courts are a safeguard against the mob rule of majoritarian direct democracy. Terms are equally problematic as they would inject the judiciary into the political process. The ugliness of the Kavanaugh nomination would pale in comparison to what would follow.

      A real solution: Temper the imperial presidency, restore legislative authority to Congress, end the tyranny of unelected bureaucracy and require that the Supreme Court interpret but not create law. Legislative power should be restore to our designated legislative body, where political battles can be waged every other November.

      Like

      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Dear OA: The viciousness of the debate in Washington, a theater of fanatical plutos against fanatical plutos, is reminiscent of the end of the Roman Republic… The senators who assassinated Caesar treacherously, and very stupidly, were amazed by the anger of We The People of Rome against them… Point being Caesar was making practical reforms, like draining the proverbial malaria infested swamps… which the Roman population appreciated, after decades of civil wars, hot or cold… The US Senate and Congress, don’t see, like their homologues in the rest of the West, that people want quality jobs not going to China and the like, anymore, while globalization advantages ever more the wealthiest… Hence the change from NAFTA to USMCA…

        Like

  5. Patrice Ayme Says:

    I’m totally #metoo& extremely progressive, but piranhas style frenzy of Kavanaugh hearings: abominable! The crying face of the psycho(logy) professor, who started to talk about attack 30 years after it happened, & after Kavanaugh got famous: unbelievable! https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2018/09/29/frightening-mccarthyism-style-senate-hearings-for-us-supreme-court/

    Like

  6. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [To NYT]
    It’s always good to enrage extremists… Enraging the extremes is the mark of reason… Wisdom… Self-declared “liberals” (what does that mean? That they believe their opponents are against liberty?) should present news ideas instead of threatening to break stuff.

    Breaking stuff can go too far as the Roman civil war which started under the Gracchi brothers showed. The Gracchi and their brothers may have been too keen to break conventions and consensus (although they were right; but their rashness gave an opening to greater violence from the other side…)

    Instead of going personal (Trump! Kavanaugh!), and leaving their “thinking” at that, so-called “liberals” should figure out how to implement real democracy, that is, direct democracy: instead of having a few hundred people taking all the decisions, making all the laws, let’s vote directly on proposals, using the Internet (as California and Switzerland do)

    No need for SCOTUS, president or Congress, then…

    Like

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: