@IngrahamAngle It’s not an act. The programming is real. He believes this. His followers believe even more than this. Find and expose the programmers or everything gets worse.
@bbq_kc The brush creek sidewalks weren’t built for much more than a baby stroller. Lessons learned don’t allow bureaucrats to spend your public money.
Je suis dans un train "climatisé" où il fait 26 degrés. Le wifi ne marche pas. Personne ne bronche.
Et c'est ça qui me fascine le plus : pas la panne, mais l'acceptation collective.
L'État socialiste a réussi un tour de force psychologique. Il nous a fait intérioriser qu'un service médiocre, payé une fortune, c'est normal. Que c'est même ça, le "service public".
Le même service dans un marché libre coûterait une fraction du prix. Et si la clim tombait en panne, vous seriez remboursé dans l'heure, parce qu'un concurrent attend juste à côté que vous changiez de crémerie.
Faites la liste de tout ce que l'État touche :
L'école : effondrement du niveau, profs en burnout, classement PISA en chute libre. L'hôpital : des mois d'attente, des couloirs pleins de brancards, des soignants qui fuient. Le transport : retards, pannes, grèves, prix qui explosent. La justice : des années pour un jugement. La police : débordée, démoralisée.
Budgets colossaux. Prélèvements records d'Europe. Résultat : tout est pourri.
Pourquoi ?
Parce qu'il manque deux choses que seul le marché fournit : le skin in the game et les prix.
Le skin in the game d'abord. Un entrepreneur qui livre un service pourri fait faillite. Il perd SON argent, SA réputation, SES années de travail. Un bureaucrate qui gère mal un service public ne perd rien. Il sera promu, muté, ou au pire il attendra sa retraite. L'échec n'a aucune conséquence personnelle. Donc l'échec se répète, indéfiniment.
Les prix ensuite. Hayek l'a montré : les prix de marché sont un système d'information. Chaque prix agrège des millions de décisions individuelles et signale où allouer les ressources. Quand l'État fixe les prix ou subventionne à perte, il détruit ce signal. Plus personne ne sait ce qui vaut quoi. On arrose au hasard, on gaspille, et on appelle ça de "l'investissement public".
C'est pour ça que le bureaucrate est le pire locataire possible de vos impôts : il dépense l'argent des autres, pour les autres. Ni incitation à économiser, ni incitation à bien servir. Milton Friedman avait résumé ça en une phrase : c'est la pire des quatre façons de dépenser de l'argent.
Le problème n'est pas tel ministre, tel gouvernement, telle réforme. Le problème est structurel. Un monopole sans concurrence, sans prix, sans skin in the game, produira TOUJOURS de la médiocrité. Peu importe qui le dirige. Peu importe le budget.
Si vous avez compris ça, vous avez compris 90% de l'économie politique.
Alors faites une chose simple : expliquez-le à vos proches. Au prochain train en retard, à la prochaine attente aux urgences, posez la question : "qui perd de l'argent quand ce service est mauvais ?" Réponse : personne. Voilà le problème.
L'information finira par se propager. Et un jour, collectivement, on arrêtera de gober.
Le problème, c'est l'État. Toujours.
Read this. Understand who you’re harming by propping up this pernicious ideology. Young gay people are undergoing modern-day conversion therapy. You’re cheering on irreversible body alterations for vulnerable people who were perfect as they were.
@modernhistory Could have been more than a stunt if it was played against a more masculine spar. Still, it’s more than a bit gay glorious that she comes out as an aggressive and defensive transgender mom.
The courts and media are all in unison in taking care to honor the gender identity and use the preferred pronouns of an adult male who raped a 14 year old girl with his female penis because he claims to be a woman
There are many people who claim in all sincerity to have been saved by giving all their money to Scientology or the Moonies. This may even be true. We look at them and feel pity -- but the cult gave them what they were lacking in life. It gave them community. It gave them a sense of purpose. It gave a structure to their desire and their striving.
That is what cults sell and what its salesmen sell successfully precisely because they are themselves true believers in their product because they did in fact derive many of the benefits they sell to others from their own immersion in the cult.
This is what transgenderism sells to its adherents. It sells a story of magical self-transformation that is also the attainment of an authentic self. It does so through rituals of self-mortification that impose a sunk cost so great on those inflicting them on themselves that escaping the resulting immersion in a fictive, pseudo-reality that would vindicate such a sacrifice -- constructed in the same way that all social realities are constructed, through institutional validation -- becomes nearly impossible. "Death before detransition." It does so by creating intense trauma bonds between those who have undergone the rituals, which are further intensified by the cultivated sense of being oppressed unto death by the cisnormative world that surrounds them.
In a liberal, pluralistic society that honors freedom of speech and freedom of association, we don't ban commercial cults. We allow them to proselytize. What we don't do is give them access to schools to recruit children, we don't brainwash children in the millions to accept their beliefs as the only truth, we don't give their cult rituals the imprimatur of medicine, we don't allow them to use state power to force people to pay obeisance to their cult dogmas. The President doesn't affirm their dogmas or direct his executive agencies to propagate them.
Transgenderism is novel in this way. Sharing aspects of many prior group psychological phenomenon -- the social contagions of eating disorders and Recovered Memory Syndrome, the business model of multi-level marketing schemes, the trauma-bonding of the gang initiation or the hazing ritual -- it melded these elements with institutional capture via two masquerades in which it successfully passed as something it is not: firstly, as a form of medicine, secondly, as a civil rights movement.
Undoing this unbelievable concatenation may actually be beyond the critical and epistemic capacities of the Western world.
@legaltweetz Well, she was featured in an impossibly stupid role in the Netflix fiction of ‘Tales of the City’ that took transgender promotion to giddy new heights in 2019. For those of us who were around in 1974, it was an astonishingly fraudulent recreation of the history of transvestism.