Monday, May 17, 2004


Many Americans may be unaware that the Crown Prince of Denmark has just married an Australian girl. The event got big coverage in much of Europe (and, of course, in Australia) and was even well-covered in China, but I believe that American coverage was minimal. I guess Americans are not too keen on Royalty. Was there a revolution or something? Australia is a monarchy, however, and I have always been a strong monarchist so I found it interesting and pleasing that the wedding got a lot of coverage around the world. Who says that monarchy is an anachronistic irrelevance? If it is, how come so many people watched a wedding in an ancient European monarchy? It was a beautiful show too, of course. Lots of Australian women in particular were absolutely glued to their TVs while it was all happening. So much nicer than watching anything to do with Iraq.

And, if I have any readers in Scotland, I would be pleased to hear whether I guess right in thinking that the wedding would have got blanket coverage in Scotland too. Why? Well, quite apart from normal Scottish sentimentality, the father of the bride is a Scotsman with a Scottish accent who wore the kilt for the occasion! There would have been not a dry eye in many Scottish homes, I think. I felt a bit teary myself, given my Scottish heritage.

And the wedding is another example of how pervasive the Australian diaspora is in the world. I think most people are aware of the big Australian presence in Hollywood these days and people who take an interest in business will be aware that Australians run both Coca Cola and McDonald's, but having an Australian as the future Queen of Denmark does rather set the seal on what a large and successful diaspora it is. And, unlike most diasporas, Australians are not driven abroad by poverty, warfare, persecution etc. They are just adventurous.



The Left of politics are of course doing everything within their power to blame the Bush administration for the prisoner abuse affair. There is a typical example here -- which says that the Guantanamo Bay detentions created an "atmosphere of lawlessness" in the U.S. Army and that led to the prisoner abuses. What utter rot! The U.S. armed forces have been amazingly disciplined in obeying their extremely strict "rules of engagement". If people dance in the street when you are attacked, do you fire on them? Most armies would. Most people would. But the U.S. army never has. The prisoner abuse affair is a very small lapse in that context. Most armies in history could be accused of far worse.

Things are getting better in the USA: "Several social ills that loomed large in recent decades and seemed intractable have also turned around abruptly. Crime is way down: In Fort Apache, the Bronx, the subject of a popular 1981 film, the number of murders per year in the 1970s was about 130; in 2001, the figure was 12. During roughly the same period the number of traffic deaths per year in America fell about 10,000 or roughly 20 percent-even though the number of drivers has increased, the number of miles we drive has grown enormously, and we own more cars, almost one per adult. And despite all that driving, air quality is everywhere improved, as are all other forms of pollution, except for emission of greenhouse gases. Our progress is about a decade ahead of Europe 's, the usual rants in international forums notwithstanding. Our national mood is not disastrous either: The U.S. suicide rate is one-half of France's" Yet despite that, not everyone is happy. Why? See here and here and here and here. There is also a short article on the subject here

A major applied psychology organization says that how happy you are is 50% genetically inherited. Those naughty genetics again! Every Leftist will tell you that we just need to abolish things like inequality, racism and patriarchy for us all to be happy.

Fraudulent beggars:. I saw [the beggar] eyeing me up, but he didn't recognise me. So, as he approached, I asked him for $5 for my train fare. Stunned, he said no.... A doe-eyed plea for spare change for something to eat ended with fierce obscenities being yelled at me when I offered to buy her a hamburger instead of hand over my money."

"Yesterday the Humane Society of the United States, the nation's richest animal rights organization, named long-time vice president Wayne Pacelle as its new chief executive. Pacelle will have virtually unfettered control over the group's $96 million bank account. If you think this change amounts to a different leader's rubber-stamp on efforts to help puppies and kittens, think again. HSUS doesn't operate a single animal shelter, and it is completely unrelated to the local 'Humane Society' in your home town. In reality, it's a gigantic animal-rights lobbying group, focusing more and more on the food we eat. Wayne Pacelle is a strict, near-religious vegan, whose goal is to create 'a National Rifle Association of the animal rights movement.'"

A war on everything: "For all practical purposes, every time the State touches something, it makes war on it, even if it means to make things better. The 'war' on discrimination through affirmative action? It has instead set black against white, women against men, gay against straight, as each tries to use the political process to obtain power over the others. The road to Hell, obviously, is paved with good intentions. When the personal becomes the political, you can be sure war is to follow."

The Left like to portray the Bush administration as a coven of Christian fundamentalists but the Bush administration's has shown "Clintonian" tolerance of its own homosexual diplomats in Roumania.

PID has some more comments on the Zimbardo experiment and the Iraqi prisoner mistreatment affair.

The Policeman's blog continues to put up dreadful stories of the bureaucratic quagmire that is British policing today. Not much policing gets done.

A very pleased-looking Peter Cuthbertson has a photo of himself here with one of the two greatest visionaries of the 20th century.

For more postings, see GREENIE WATCH and POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH. Mirror sites here and here


The Left have always wanted more spent on welfare and made "Fascism" a swear-word. President Bush deposed a brutal Fascist dictator and sponsored a big expansion of welfare. But instead of being admired by the Left, he is hated with a passion. What does that tell you about the Left? It tells you that they have no principles at all: That everything they have ever claimed to stand for is fake.

All politicians seek power but conservatives bring with them some concern for the welfare of their country. Leftists bring only their hate-filled Stalinist hearts and their pretend compassion. Voters, unfortunately, often believe the compassion is genuine

Comments? Email me or here. If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


No comments: