Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there! Some Scary thoughts

The Destruction of the American Male by Paul Craig Roberts

The backbone and principal resource of every country is the male heterosexual population.  Without them there is no country, no births to take the place of deaths.  Men have the temperament and strength to fight and to lead. They protect women and children, property, borders.  They lead families, communities, businesses, and governments.  That has always been their role throughout history.  When men become effete, the society collapses.  In America this indispensable resource is being destroyed.

It begins with boys, which means they never become men. I remember when boys were trained for leadership.  They received more discipline and were given more independence than girls, who were trained for nurture and motherhood. The roles of the sexes were as distinct as the sexes.  There was no such thing as a girl who wanted to be a boy or a boy who wanted to be a girl. Transgenderism is an invention of a sick and dying society.

Everything related to becoming a man has been banned.  School playground fights, today an excuse to call police and arrest children, were part of growing up.  Sports were where you developed confidence as you learned to catch a high fly, field a grounder, throw a strike, hit a single or a home run.  Boys were encouraged. They had their own space, sandlot teams, Little League, Boy Scouts.  They had after school jobs–newspaper routes, bagging groceries, cutting lawns, washing cars.  Girls developed cooking skills, sewing skills, artistic skills, chaste demeanor.  None of this meant that women were barred from professional lives.  They were authors, Registered Nurses, accountants, para-legals, teachers, scientists, scholars.

The destruction of the male began with feminism.  The feminists were the first transgender advocates. They insisted on no difference in the role of men and women.  It was the feminists’ insistence that the male role was better than the female’s and that women assume male roles and male sexual promiscuity, combined with their attacks on men as misogynists, that destroyed the role of men in society.  All of a sudden it was not alright for boys to have their spaces.  Boy Scouts had to have girls.

Little league teams had to have girls.  Think about this for a minute.  Parents felt they had to support the girl players.  Effusive praise would follow a girl catching a high fly, fielding a grounder, getting a hit.  But as these are things the boys were expected to successfully do, they didn’t get the praise, and it went on from there. As “diversity” and “multiculturalism” progressed in America, it was less safe for girls to be as independent from home as boys.

The equality on which feminists insisted meant that the independence of boys had to be curtailed. Today American parents who allow their male children the independence my generation had are arrested for child endangerment.

The feminist desire to turn women into men meant a diminution of male leadership roles in society as women entered politics and corporations were pressured to create “gender balance” in executive roles and in academia.  Just as white people are sidelined by the accusation that they hold back blacks, men are sidelined by the assertion that they held back women.

Years ago Christina Hoff Sommers addressed the destruction of the male role in family and society.  But nothing came of her warning.  No lesson was learned.  Today behavioral problems of boys, declining academic performance, depression and suicides arising from the loss of their role is falsely explained as girls having better self-control, as boys’ slower development, and attributed to alleged hormonal and neurological causes.  No one notices that these blamed causes are new as are the conditions.  Neither cause nor conditions were present when boys had leadership roles.

The facts are bald-faced.  Normal young white heterosexual males grow up in a non-merit-based society.  They witness preferences for females, preferences for blacks, preferences for sexual perverts.  What do the normal white men get out of it? The theft of their leadership role and blame for holding back others.

Recently I heard men of the passing generation comparing women of their time with those of today.  The adoption of young women of the stripper’s G-string as beach attire, the female use of four-letter words, and so on.  They all agreed that the emotional support a wife gave a husband is a thing of the past.  They wondered what this means for the marriages of the younger generations.  Divorce which once implied failure now has no negative connotation. Are marriages becoming commitment-free?  Has marriage become a temporary sexual and economic contract that once a better one is found becomes void?

In my day boys were forbidden to bully girls.  Today men are bullied by women.  The role of men today is to get out of the way of women and preferred racial minorities. This is not a picture of a society that is succeeding.

Hon. Paul Craig Roberts is the John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy, Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. A former editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal and columnist for Business Week and the Scripps Howard News Service, he is a nationally syndicated columnist for Creators Syndicate in Los Angeles and a columnist for Investor’s Business Daily. In 1992 he received the Warren Brookes Award for Excellence in Journalism. In 1993 the Forbes Media Guide ranked him as one of the top seven journalists.

He was Distinguished Fellow at the Cato Institute from 1993 to 1996. From 1982 through 1993, he held the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. During 1981-82 he served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy. President Reagan and Treasury Secretary Regan credited him with a major role in the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, and he was awarded the Treasury Department’s Meritorious Service Award for “his outstanding contributions to the formulation of United States economic policy.” From 1975 to 1978, Dr. Roberts served on the congressional staff where he drafted the Kemp-Roth bill and played a leading role in developing bipartisan support for a supply-side economic policy.

In 1987 the French government recognized him as “the artisan of a renewal in economic science and policy after half a century of state interventionism” and inducted him into the Legion of Honor.

Dr. Roberts’ latest books are The Tyranny of Good Intentions, co-authored with IPE Fellow Lawrence Stratton, and published by Prima Publishing in May 2000, and Chile: Two Visions – The Allende-Pinochet Era, co-authored with IPE Fellow Karen Araujo, and published in Spanish by Universidad Nacional Andres Bello in Santiago, Chile, in November 2000. The Capitalist Revolution in Latin America, co-authored with IPE Fellow Karen LaFollette Araujo, was published by Oxford University Press in 1997. A Spanish language edition was published by Oxford in 1999. The New Colorline: How Quotas and Privilege Destroy Democracy, co-authored with Lawrence Stratton, was published by Regnery in 1995. A paperback edition was published in 1997. Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, co-authored with Karen LaFollette, was published by the Cato Institute in 1990. Harvard University Press published his book, The Supply-Side Revolution, in 1984. Widely reviewed and favorably received, the book was praised by Forbes as “a timely masterpiece that will have real impact on economic thinking in the years ahead.” Dr. Roberts is the author of Alienation and the Soviet Economy, published in 1971 and republished in 1990. He is the author of Marx’s Theory of Exchange, Alienation and Crisis, published in 1973 and republished in 1983. A Spanish language edition was published in 1974.

Dr. Roberts has held numerous academic appointments. He has contributed chapters to numerous books and has published many articles in journals of scholarship, including the Journal of Political Economy, Oxford Economic Papers, Journal of Law and Economics, Studies in Banking and Finance, Journal of Monetary Economics, Public Finance Quarterly, Public Choice, Classica et Mediaevalia, Ethics, Slavic Review, Soviet Studies, Rivista de Political Economica, and Zeitschrift fur Wirtschafspolitik. He has entries in the McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Economics and the New Palgrave Dictionary of Money and Finance. He has contributed to Commentary, The Public Interest, The National Interest, Harper’s, the New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, Fortune, London Times, The Financial Times, TLS, The Spectator, Il Sole 24 Ore, Le Figaro, Liberation, and the Nihon Keizai Shimbun. He has testified before committees of Congress on 30 occasions.

Dr. Roberts was educated at the Georgia Institute of Technology (B.S.), the University of Virginia (Ph.D.), the University of California at Berkeley and Oxford University where he was a member of Merton College.

He is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in the World, The Dictionary of International Biography, Outstanding People of the Twentieth Century, and 1000 Leaders of World Influence. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

Categories
N.S.F.W. Well I thought it was funny!

Well I was amused by it!

https://youtu.be/gqLVFFLLjsQ

Categories
All About Guns

A Winchester MODEL 63 SEMI AUTO WITH PERIOD FIXED POWER SCOPE in CALIBER .22 LR

Winchester MODEL 63 22LR CALIBER SEMI AUTO WITH PERIOD FIXED POWER SCOPE .22 LR - Picture 1

Winchester MODEL 63 22LR CALIBER SEMI AUTO WITH PERIOD FIXED POWER SCOPE .22 LR - Picture 3

 

 

 

 

Categories
Hard Nosed Folks Both Good & Bad

More Stuff that they don’t teach at School – Cheyenne Dog Soldiers vs. Kiowa Hunters: Porcupine Bear’s Revenge

Categories
All About Guns

Model 1885 “low wall” Winchester in 22-K hornet

r/guns - Model 1885 "low wall" winchester in 22-K hornet.

Categories
A Victory! All About Guns

South Carolina on Track to Become 27th Constitutional Carry State

A protester wearing a pistol on his hip stands near the location where a car plowed into a crowd of protestors marching through a downtown shopping district August 12, 2017 in Charlottesville, Virginia. The car allegedly plowed through a crowd, and at least one person has died from the incident, …
Win McNamee/Getty Images

South Carolina’s Senate Judiciary subcommittee advanced constitutional carry legislation Wednesday, keeping the state on track to become the 27th constitutional carry state in the Union.

On February 2, 2023, Breitbart News reported that South Carolina State Rep. Bobby Cox (R-Greenville) put forward H.3594 to secure constitutional carry in the state.

On February 23, 2023, NRA-ILA noted that the South Carolina House passed Cox’s legislation.

Now constitutional carry is moving through the South Carolina Senate. The Post and Courier observed that it passed out of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee by a 3-2 vote on April 5, 2023, and now goes to the full Judiciary Committee.

Breitbart News spoke with Cox about the constitutional carry legislation on April 6, 2023, and he said, “The Senate should not delay in passing H. 3954. The House version was a collaborative effort between 2A groups and law enforcement to restore our constitutional freedom and keep guns out of the hands of criminals.”

Currently, the Union has 26 constitutional carry states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming. (Florida’s constitutional carry law takes effect July 1, 2023.)

 

Categories
All About Guns

History’s Guns: The Colt Single Action Army | Shooting USA

Categories
The Green Machine This great Nation & Its People Well I thought it was funny!

Some GI Humor

Categories
All About Guns

CZ 83 380 ACP Pistol Review

Categories
Our Great Kids The Green Machine War

Ukraine war: Leak shows Western special forces on the ground

Why Is the Pentagon a Pentagon? | At the Smithsonian| Smithsonian Magazine

By Paul Adams & George Wright

The UK is among a number of countries with military special forces operating inside Ukraine, according to one of dozens of documents leaked online.

It confirms what has been the subject of quiet speculation for over a year.

The leaked files, some marked “top secret”, paint a detailed picture of the war in Ukraine, including sensitive details of Ukraine’s preparations for a spring counter-offensive.

The US government says it is investigating the source of the leak.

According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent of special forces in Ukraine (50), followed by fellow Nato states Latvia (17), France (15), the US (14) and the Netherlands (1).

The document does not say where the forces are located or what they are doing.

The numbers of personnel may be small, and will doubtless fluctuate. But special forces are by their very nature highly effective. Their presence in Ukraine is likely to be seized upon by Moscow, which has in recent months argued that it is not just confronting Ukraine, but Nato as well.

In line with its standard policy on such matters, the UK’s Ministry of Defence has not commented, but in a tweet on Tuesday said the leak of alleged classified information had demonstrated what it called a “serious level of inaccuracy”.

“Readers should be cautious about taking at face value allegations that have the potential to spread misinformation,” it said.

It did not elaborate or suggest which specific documents it was referring to. However, Pentagon officials are quoted as saying the documents are real.

One document, which detailed the number of casualties suffered in Ukraine on both sides, did appear to have been doctored.

UK special forces are made up of several elite military units with distinct areas of expertise, and are regarded to be among the most capable in the world.

The British government has a policy of not commenting on its special forces, in contrast to other countries including the US.

The UK has been vociferous in its support of Ukraine, and is the second largest donor after the US of military aid to Kyiv.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the Department of Justice had opened a criminal investigation and he was determined to find the source of the leak.

“We will continue to investigate and turn over every rock until we find the source of this and the extent of it,” he said.