The lost demographic of non-persons

There are certain demographic realities we need to face.

Just how large is the proportion of males [and some females] in what I’d call the 50 plus range, with access to the internet? What proportion of those are political? What proportion blog? Iain Dale might have been biased but the proportion of centre-right bloggers [and we can tack on the “further right” to that] vastly outweighed the left-liberals in his stats. What proportion of women are of our point of view? I can think of Julia M, Misanthrope Girl, Goodnight Vienna, Sue of Muffled Vociferation and some others.

To read the Guardian and Liberal Conspiracy or Harry’s Place, you’d think the proportion of left-liberals was far higher. As was pointed out yesterday, such people, though they have demarcation disputes and can’t work out if they’re the People’s Front of Judaea or the Judaean People’s Front, except on some technicalities which are very real to them, generally close ranks if faced with centre-right policies – small government, family, property, inheritance, free enterprise etc.

At times, if it’s perceived as a compassionate cause, e.g. freedom, they’ll come on board with the centre-right though their way to achieve what they’re after is for the government to ensure it through legislation. “They should” is a common phrase.

Attached to the active left-liberals, though disavowing the connection, are the mass of people, e.g. single mums on the net, who genuinely see themselves as apolitical and that says something in itself. Yet they’ll still vote Labour or LibDem, which is a vote for State intervention and the EU [as is a Tory vote these days]. They’ll be tolerant of female quotas, will abide quangos if they know much about them, false charities, approve of benefits for the “needy”, without actually defining the limits of the needy and they see people such as us as lacking in compassion.

Their answer to political questions put to them is emotion or ad hominem or personalizing an issue. Everything from the sky being blue to children doing drugs in school is a matter of “opinion”. They say “I don’t agree” about things which are facts. When they see that doesn’t cut it, they say “Everyone I know thinks …” When that doesn’t cut it, they go into women’s studies stats to quote or the IPCC or even govt stats.

Now there have been so many articles on govt stats and what the massaging is meant to achieve. Thus independent stats can diverge wildly from the official got line, when you can get them. The govt stats always favour govt policy, e.g. pointing out the continued oppression of women in the workplace, the discrimination against homosexuals, blacks and muslims and so on. There are no govt stats where the govt looks bad, e.g. the discrimination against the indigenous male and the failure of manufacturing but if you look at the unemployment lines, they are around 80% male.

They live in this sort of fantasy world where everything is really OK, that one shouldn’t get one’s knickers in a twist, should relax and just let things go on, on the grounds that we can’t change them, they put our economic situation down to international factors and as far as the EU is concerned, they’re correct on that but that’s not what they mean. They look at our “cussedness” and anger and think we’re people with problems but don’t for a moment think the problem includes them and their meek acceptance of what’s going on.

They won’t face realities. Those that will, like us, are in a state of despair because we know things are very, very wrong. Julia M’s posts – and there are many – are all about some new PC foolishness of the day and the utter non-comps who are being employed where they never should. Chuckles and haiku send me countless examples from America and the UK.

An example is the council workers painting a metre long don’t park double line on a road. The power of thinking, of common sense, seriously seems to have disappeared. “Well yes,” the left-liberals say, if cornered, “there are mistakes, everyone makes them.” Yes we do but not this type which stem from the inability to make decisions off their own bat and to apply common sense.

There are about 40 or 50 instances of this mindlessness in my inbox right now which people have sent.

Yet what is our proportion in the society? It must be high enough for the govt to not quietly round us up and bring false charges against us but methinks they are relying on our independence and failure to combine as the left are able to do. We are often so deeply into our own situations and the fight against the tidal wave of PCism choking the society that we’re either battling to stay alive or are immersed in work and family. We don’t combine. We acknowledge things on blogs. We’re muttering to ourselves or else left-liberals come in and “disagree” with the facts.

The frustration level with ignorance and stupidity is immense and the hope of the govt is that we’ll get so apoplectic we’ll have heart attacks and die off soon. We are most certainly being shut out of the debate, except on the net and the net is vilified, is it not?

Most frustration is when a man comes out with:

I believe in self reliance and individual initiative and risk takers begin rewarded but I also believe in everyone getting a fair shot and everyone doing their fair share and everyone playing by the same rules.

… and that person is Obama in a debate and it’s an out-and-out lie. His policies are diametrically opposed to risk takers, as are Hollande’s and he is heavily into compliance and accepting the narrative. Everyone playing by the same rules? Ignoring a subpoena from SCOTUS to appear with his birth certificate? Putting out false documents or concealing all details of his past – college records etc.? That sort of playing by the same rules?

What proportion of society are still saying the things I wrote in the last paragraph? Are we dying off or are we increasing? Are we an increasingly lost demographic of non-persons that the brave new world is waiting to finally just shut up, roll over and die?


Oh and for my best friend Suzie:

The death of feminism? One in three women say it’s ‘too aggressive’ towards men and they don’t need it any more


6 comments for “The lost demographic of non-persons

  1. October 17, 2012 at 08:27

    My own history is an unremarkable trajectory from left-wing student activist to broadly apolitical (ie distrust them all) but comfortable and at home in the centre-right neck of the woods; from heart to head, as the old saying goes.

    I think you’re right about immersion in work or family or struggling to survive – it’s ironic that, with all the labour-saving devices and electronic communication on offer, work (and commuting) seems to have expanded to fill the available hours and, more than that, narrow the focus down to the immediate vicinity.

    A hobby-horse of mine, I know, but the expectation that women will go out to work from their children’s earliest infancy, along with couples both working long hours, has forced families into frantic catching up at weekends – the only people I know who discuss politics at home are retired; everyone else is too tired or too busy with household details.

    On the bright side, though I’m not a political blogger, I know of other, better-informed souls contemplating taking it up once the children have left home or they retire, and this should include an increasingly computer-literate population ready to use their new-found freedom to good effect.

    Don’t give up hope!

  2. October 17, 2012 at 08:28

    That seems my path too. Frightening that for independent people, we seem to have had similar paths in their dissimilarity. 🙂

  3. Andrew
    October 17, 2012 at 08:44

    Liked the section on opinion formed on emotion with no rational assessment by it’s holder.

    There is a (apparently) an experiment involving monekys. 3 monkeys in a cage with bananas at the top of a rope suspended from the ceiling. Each time one of these monkeys heads for a banana, they are squirted with water which repels them.

    When they’ve all had a taste of the water treatment, one of the monkeys is swapped out for one with no such experience. As this monkey heads for the bananas, the two with the experience of the water, prevent the new monkey from heading up there. Then the second “experienced” monkey is swapped out and the first monkey also joins in the activity to prevent the new monkey from reaching the bananas.

    The swapping out of monkeys continues until the cage is full of monkeys with no experience of the water, yet none of them head for the fruit. They don’t know why but they know to stop anyone attempting to reach it.

    I think the hard left know of this group dynamic and have played it with their group think. I think they know they are in a minority and use those Alinskyite tactics to make themselves appear bigger and everywhere.

    I also think in part, Gramscii’s Long March through the institutions has succeeded and we have what we have today. Even if those who would counter were organised (which they aren’t), it would take a similar 50 years or so to reverse it. That is time I do not think we have. They have got us to Bezmenov’s demoralisation. The collapse beckons.

    However the collapse will be impartial and many who think they are “in favour” will be devoured by the same beast they reared.

    Rolling over and the rest might not feel such a dark option when viewed from such a depressing perspective.

  4. Suzie
    October 17, 2012 at 08:56

    According to an article that I read this morning (ClayLucas SMH) ‘Australian women are the most empowered in the world but men still rule the roost on pay’. It goes on to say that women hold fourteen percent of board seats in Australia, just five CEO’s of our top 200 companies are women and a quarter of our top 200 companies have no women at all on their boards.

    So, I’m not saying I don’t agree without giving a host of reasons but I’m asking how do you reconcile the facts with your version of reality?

    Lower down the food chain, it may be that men comprise 80% of the dole queue but that is most likely because, for one reason or another, the women are not counted as being unemployed. There are myriad excuses for the numbers to be split apart and presented in a particular way.

    I am pretty sure that the UK stats are broadly similar. That is, misleading and designed to downplay the problem of unemployment across the population. Indeed, as the harder times set in here I have read, and sorry, but you’ll just have to trust me on this, that it is predominantly women who are being let go. (Look it up if you don’t believe me.)

    From reading your blog, over a period of time, I have decided that you would very rarely, if ever, credit a woman as doing a good job and you’re right onto it if you find a struggling company that is headed by a woman, because obviously, it’s all down to her. You do not make a point of the dire state of many companies with men at the helm.

  5. October 17, 2012 at 12:51

    Suzie – you’re doing it again – dipping in the biased well and calling it fact. And you seem fixated by it. But let’s say there are more men, it’s because they were already there. What, you want them sacked for quota reasons, even if they’re doing well? This is the feminist madness.

    There are no children in those jobs either – that’s just ageist! Let’s ensure a quota of kids so there’s no discrimination.

  6. October 17, 2012 at 22:02

    I’ve deleted both Suzie’s last strange comment and my own ascerbic reply – there’s really little point. She won’t face facts and I’m bored with it.

Comments are closed.