A piece in the trade journal Automotive News talks about something styled “micromobility” – which translated means an American take on the Chinese concept of mobility . . . circa 1970, when most Chinese used pedal power to get wherever they were headed. Which was necessarily not very far – and thus they were more readily corralled.
The American take on this concept 50 years later is the electric pedal bike, the so-called “e-bike.”
You can see these things in urban areas all over the country – as they are being heavily nudged via sweetheart contracts with the providers, who profit from a corollary campaign to kick cars out of urban areas via “road diets” (the reducing of traffic lanes, as from two to one each way so as to make traffic worse) and even by the outright elimination of asphalt for cars, replaced by “walkable” (and electric-pedal-bike-able) downtown cores.
It’s easier to corral the cattle this way.
Note that none of this is organic – the result of market forces, of people freely choosing that it makes sense. Instead it is being forced on the people, to thwart their free choice – of a piece with the “mandates” to wear the Holy Rag and (soon) the “mandate” to submit to a vaccination.
To several vaccinations – as there will be more than just one, once the principle is normalized that it is acceptable to force people to submit to this injection. To believe it will be limited to just this injection is to believe that allowing the government to tax one thing won’t mean it will tax other things.
But the cattle have difficulty seeing this, their vision being limited by the sight of the rear-end of the cow ahead of them.
These e-bikes, like pedal bikes, can only go so far – and not very fast. Most are limited to a speed about as fast a man can run – about 15 MPH – and have a range of about 20 miles.
This makes it hard to run away on one.
They also have the “advantage” – from a certain perspective – of being largely unusable in poor weather due to the exposure of the rider to the cold and wet and the inherent danger of riding anything on two wheels on the snow and ice.
Cars slide. Bikes topple over.
But sssssssaaaaaaaaaaaafety isn’t the point. Getting people out of cars – which enable them to escape the corral – is. The way this is being done is indirect and for that reason, ingenious. The car is not to be outlawed; much too noticeable, that. Instead, they are to be made so expensive and so inconvenient as to be no longer viable for the bipedal cattle.
You cannot drive what you cannot afford. This includes a house far away from the urban core cattle pen, which requires an income sufficient to be able to afford it, as opposed to the renting of a small apartment in the urban core cattle pen.
The WuFlu hysteria has made it very difficult for millions of people – most especially the young – to be able to afford anything more than a small apartment in the urban core cattle pen. It is hard to earn anything when you are debarred from working Because Corona. Actually – accurately – because of the totalitarian measures imposed using the pretext of Corona.
These measures – not “the virus”- are the cause of the economic ruination of the nation, though not of the big corporations who have massively benefitted from the economic ruination, which has served to enrich them while enserfing the population.
A majority of the young – which encompasses those pushing 40 – have never left home. Their parents’ home. They can afford that . . . until their parents no longer can. Then they will need “housing” – which will not be a house at all but rather an apartment, probably shared with others, in the urban core cattle pen.
They will still need to get to their neo-feudal job, of course. And so they will share – not own – a community bike, electrically powered – because many are so obese they cannot pedal one the distance.
They will pay each time they use it. Or rather, a certain sum will be deducted from their Universal Basic Income each time they use it. Which they will be permitted to do so long as they are good bipedal cattle, obediently “masked” and vaccinated. If not, their UBI will be withdrawn and they will have to walk.
If they’re allowed to do that. If there’s anywhere they’re allowed to go. If there’s anything they’re still allowed to do.
This is the micromobility of Chinese America 2030.
. . .
Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If that fails, email me at [email protected] and I will send you a copy directly!
The green movement sucks, royally. No matter, to be able to drive a car or truck you still need roads, for the most part. All the states have to do is give up road repair and within a few years many will be unusable. That also means fewer trucks, which are still the backbone of the nationwide supply chain. Fewer delivery trucks and fewer 911 calls answered. Then maybe the public will become a little bit outraged over how government is destroying their freedoms, liberty and life choices. It’s Pareto’s 80-20 rule that is so prevalent throughout our existence in effect…if 20% of things are bad, few care. It’s only when 80% of the world crumbles that people take action. then it is usually far too late. Continue to sleep people and wake up in Hades.
I am thinking of getting rid of my cell phone. I have no desire for it and I see it being a future crutch with all that is going in the world. I was thinking of investing in some UHF/VHF radios. I know the range is limited…anywhere from 2 miles to 30, but I would like my kids to be able to contact me if something were to happen or an emergency comes up.
Is anyone familiar with these? Are there any other alternatives than a cell phone device?
I’m an amateur radio operator, RG. The hobby has been greatly reduced precisely because we used to use our HT’s (Handy-Talkies) and car rigs as phones among family and friends. The cell phone has largely supplanted this. I seldom even use my UHF/VHF gear anymore, though I do still enjoy occasionally bouncing an HF signal off the ionosphere to contact someone elsewhere in the world. (I have a more advanced license.)
Small low powered radios can communicate over great distances by using repeaters, which are hobbyist operated radio towers that actually do repeat your transmission. I’m in South Carolina and one can communicate all over the state and farther when they’re linked.
In order to do this legally you’ll have to get licensed. Technician class can use UHF/VHF frequencies. The test isn’t difficult and quite inexpensive, but it does make you instantly identifiable when you state your call letters, which you’re required to do. It’s also technically illegal to obscure the plain language meaning of a transmission except by using well known Ham codes or CW (Morse code). There are groups of hobbyists who enjoy “fox hunting” illegal operators, by the way, and they’re very good at it. They can triangulate the location of an illegal transmission in no time, and these aren’t even the FCC enforcers. I knew a former military communications guy who claimed they could locate a station (an operator) almost the instant the mic was keyed.
So, there ya go. Operating is free, but out in the open like CB radios. Everyone in your group would need to be licensed. There are some really cool fringe aspects to the hobby that have kept me somewhat interested (burst transmissions, bouncing off the moon, contacting the space shuttle, hooking up a computer), but overall I wouldn’t say it could really replace a phone.
It occurs to me that you may mean those little Family Band radios one can buy at Wally World. For those there are no tests, no call signs, and no range. Those are pretty much for cars traveling right behind one another and maybe for family members at the county fair. The signal is easily blocked, weak, and still open to everyone and anyone. They do have their uses, but they’re very limited.
Thanks, Bill. You provided some terrific advice. I appreciate it.
There’s also GMRS, which is somewhere in-between FRS and amateur. A little more power, but with license requirements. Repeaters are permitted. I believe Target uses GMRS in their stores.
There’s also going with “part 90” radios, which are commercial UHF radios used for dispatch communications. You and a few neighbors, or perhaps a community organization like a church could get together and purchase a license and put up a repeater. And there are two-way radio dealers who have shared repeaters as well. It isn’t as common as it used to be, but the radios usually work fairly well and can send text and location data between themselves. Expensive and very restrictive though.
But the best answer would be to get amateur licenses. The variety and selections of radios, frequencies and options for putting a station together blow away any other option. It does require a good bit of homework and familiarization with some basic physics, but not hard to do at all. One issue I find is that people will often get excited about getting their license, buy a cheap hand-held radio (some can be had for under $20 on Amazon), quickly get frustrated at the difficulties placed on them by the lousy radio and give up. Or they toss it in the glove box and forget about it thinking it will work when the time comes. A very good mobile radio (20-50 Watts maximum output) can be had for $100-$150, add another $50 or so for an antenna, and do the same thing for a home station. This will allow for communicating over several miles simplex (point to point) and reach most repeaters in your area. You have to be careful about what you use it for (no commercial business and probably shouldn’t announce anything you wouldn’t say in a crowded room), but for chit-chat and whatever probably OK. Most repeater owners are fine with anyone using the repeaters occasionally, but if you’re a regular they’re probably going to want you to pay dues. Keep in mind that if you use a fairly active repeater there will almost certainly be other people listening.
For the sake of completeness I’ll mention “free banding” which is using radios set up for specific use cases, usually marine but sometimes air band, for general communications. If you’re caught you will face a hefty fine and probably a record. The communications act does allow for using any radio on any service for life-threatening emergency use, but I don’t know that is a real use case especially since a sim-free phone can dial 911 and I doubt anyone will be listening to the marine band if you’re 100 miles inland.
Thanks, RK. It seems like a pretty good amount of information I need to dissect and see if this would be a workable situation.
I threw away my cell phone ’01, since I was no longer in the busy-ness for which it came in handy. Replaced it with just a prepaid Tracfone that I keep in the glove compartment for emergencies.
Why do people now need to be in-touch all of the time? We lived just fine before cell phones…and we can still live just fine without them. I like it the old way: I go out and am incommunicado; I come in, and I can check my answering machine- which nobody seems to leave messages on anymore, ‘cept my mother, ’cause everyuone’s now used to instant communication, and they want to “text” (I. DON’T. TEXT!)…. If they can’t leave a message..then I guess it isn’t important enough that they even needed to call, so I’m glad to have missed the call.
Life is good without all of this crap!
Hi Nunzio,
This may be where I am heading. I am with you, I am not a fan of texting. I hate when people text me because they expect an immediate reply and I have no desire to be tied to my phone all day. I prefer to talk to people over the phone or better yet, in person, but this apparently is a no no in this day and age.
I will look into the Tracphones. I just want something in case of an emergency if the kids need to reach me.
I like the idea of a portable phone, but that’s about it. I don’t need a crappy digital camera (prefer film) or web surf on a small screen (great for your eyes!!!).
Texting is idiotic. I like complete sentences with good grammar and spelling. We’re not retards.
The main reason people love cell phones is the feeling of self-importance they get from using them. The advent social media further accelerated it. It’s become the new crack.
I’ve read cell phones can actually change your brainwaves via electromagnetic signals. Perhaps that’s why there are so many obedient, moronic drones in the world today.
Same here! However, I don’t mind texting people every once in a while. But when I do, I use PROPER ENGLISH because I believe in clear, concise communication. By the way, I’m also one of the few millennials who STILL uses a *gasp* FLIP-phone! I just don’t get why idiots would shell out HUNDREDS of dollars for a device that’ll be obsolete in like 2 months. Instant gratification, perhaps? “Oh but you can FINANCE it through your carrier”, one of my friends always tells me. Yeah, and you’ll STILL be paying for it long after it’s been scrapped! Not to mention that if you drop it once, it’s pretty much useless. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve dropped my flip-phone, yet it STILL works like a champ!
And I definitely agree with the whole (anti)social media thing. Even when I was back in high school about 15 years ago when Myspace was king, I just never understood the concept of putting one’s business out there for everyone to see. Hell, I’d bet most of these kids never even heard of Myspace! lol
“I’ve read cell phones can actually change your brainwaves via electromagnetic signals. Perhaps that’s why there are so many obedient, moronic drones in the world today.”
Aha! So that probably explains why they’re so quick to attack us “non-believers”. The dildos have literally been reprogrammed!
Hi Blue,
I am very grateful to the Motor Gods that I was born just in time to grow up before the advent of smartphones, social media and even the Internet. Life was a great deal more actually social in the quaint world that existed before the 1990s. I give more and more thought to dumping my smartphone and going back to using my corded wall phone.
I still use a flip phone from 2010. Works well enough to make calls and text occasionally. No life controlling smart phone for me.
I suspect the dildos will eventually have their smartphones telling them when to eat and go to the bathroom!
Bluegrey, guys – have you tried out smartwatches !!! I mean they are brilliant – they tell you when to stand, when to sit, when to breath, how long to wash your hands for, when to put the music down because it can hurt your ears. I hope somewhere it can tell me how to put it back in the box and return it to apple because I think its annoyed quite a bit….
Morning, Nasir!
I’d buy one of those “smart” watches just to smash it. How do you stand it?
Hi Eric. Really didnt realise it’d be so annoying. They are sold as something which will help improve your life but in reality are just one more thing to nag and annoy you. I basically needed something for a fitness tracker, pulse, etc for when I exercise, someone recommended an apple watch as a good option. But honestly it annoys me too much – and really dont see the point over a dedicated fitness tracker which would be cheaper and better at the purpose. And im the person who as a kid had a calculator watch and then a databank watch. and I cant see the point of a connected smartwatch, which does a crappy job of doing all the stuff your phone does, which does a sub par job at all the stuff your computer does anyways….
I live in a college town in Liz Warren country where outdoor masking is compulsory even when solo on the biking and hiking trails. Joggers, hikers, bikers, most everyone’s masked. We’re being shamed into it and quite effectively. The Ministry of Information, via print, screen and audibly through speakers in offices and establishments permitted to open, reminds us hourly that we wear our masks less to protect ourselves, which would be selfish, than to protect others, which is compassionate, and they do the same. If you’re unmasked, you’re a free rider at the expense of your kinder, more conscientious neighbors.
I strolled past a fellow hiker on the trail yesterday. As we approached each other, we both donned our masks. I thought that he may have donned his mask because he may have thought that I thought that he should, the better to protect me from him and he may have thought that I donned my mask because I may have thought that he thought that I should, better to protect him from me while we both may have donned our masks, thinking that each of us may have thought the other may have thought that we should, the better to protect ourselves from one another. When you live here, it may take a while but soon it all makes sense as the purpose of the mask, not accidentally, is to get us to fear and mistrust one another.
When im hiking, I walk right past people, say good morning & smile at them. Most avert their eyes & lift their mask to their face. If they breathe through their sweat & germ filled rag while I pass, or wander 12 ft into the itchy bush to socally distance, thats their thing. Ill take no part in it. Since I work & shop, I use the thinnest cheapest gaiters available for that purpose. If I had more money, id wear a radiation suit with scuba tanks for shopping trips.
In San Francisco, before COVID, there were a lot of those electric scooters and bikes for rent. But nobody knew if they were insured, or by whom. So if you rented an electric scooter, and then you ran-over a little old lady, you might be personally liable for millions of dollars in personal injury.
The e-bike companies are playing a dirty game. They don’t insure the equipment, or the renter of the equipment; and they don’t inform the renter that he’s not insured. If there’s an accident, they claim ignorance, or say that it’s on page 35 of the user license agreement. What a con.
All companies that rent e-scooters, or e-bikes, or e-cars must have a signed rental agreement which includes insurance, or the option to buy insurance. And it’s really a shame that Nancy Pelosi and her criminal family would even permit this situation to occur. But I guess that’s how the Mob operates.
Insurance is a scam. Life is dangerous. Insurance doesn’t stop bad shit from happening it just siphons wealth to the point that any accident or disaster leaves those involved insolvent and forces them to hope for an insurance payout. It’s a negative feedback loop that will eventually force everybody into destitution. Buy that shit if you want. Maybe buy insurance that protects your shit from the uninsured. Leave the rest of us alone.
One last thing: This ties into “prediction #1 in 2030” from the Bald Asshole and the World Economic Forum:
You’ll own NOTHING…and you’ll be HAPPY.
Hi Michael,
I can’t figure out if Klaus looks more like Auric Goldfinger or Dr. Evil. I don’t know why the Germans always feel the need to start a World War, but I have a feeling Schwab will be tied to the next one. The great thing is they always lose.
I was a baby in the 1970s, but the Climate Change Clan have been bellowing from the rooftops since then….anyone remember the coming Ice Age? Ooh, and let’s not forget carbon dioxide. Bad, bad stuff. Of course, today, we have a whole new crop warning us about Global Warming. The fun never ends!
We will still have everything in 2030 and 80% of us will still be miserable. If this was a single person bent on world domination (Stalin, Bonaparte, Hitler, etc.) I would be more concerned. The great thing with the Democrat and the Labor Parties is they don’t know how to accomplish anything. It is much easier to talk about what they are going to do rather than implement it. The only ones to be fearful of are their lackeys that are willing to go along with the charade. Let AOC believe her Green New Deal will see the light of day. Let Kamala dream that she will change the world (I am sure the Middle East, China, and North Korea will take her seriously). Let Ole Joe believe he is going to unite the USSA and everything is going to go back to normal. I wish them all luck.
Hi RG,
How about Ernst Stavro Blofeld? The model for Dr. Evil.
Hey Eric!
Blofeld couldn’t have been totally evil, he always had a cat in his lap 😸 .
I always think of the line from Bill Cooper: Animals who don’t use their intelligence are no better than animals without intelligence. Beasts of burden and steaks on the table by choice and consent.
Disgusting, heartbreaking, but also can be hilarious (you can choose to be weeping Heraclitus or laughing Democritus) how masochistic most of the “people” are in this country. Begging and wanting to be dominated and told what they can and cannot do, just as long as EVERYONE can’t do that stuff either. Then, ahhhhh, they feel content and all is right in the world.
Well said. Additional disadvantages of an “e-bike” in the winter include the fact that batteries don’t do well in the cold, and as a sometimes winter bike rider, I can also affirm that if you don’t have the biggest muscles in your body warming you up while you ride because a motor is taking up the slack, it’s pretty darned COLD. It’s not that warm even if you’re pedaling, but if you’re not, it’s COLD. It’s like being on the chair lift all the way to your destination with no interludes of actually skiing.
Probably the most dangerous thing about e-bikes in the winter, though, is the flat torque characteristic of the motor. A human muscle has the same thing, but with a big advantage; you can feel it as the wheel starts slipping, and you can therefore reduce your torque to tiny levels so you don’t slip around. With a motor, you don’t have that, and hence your risk of slipping around goes up in a big way. That’s not a good thing when the consequence of slipping around is to go under the wheels of a truck or bus.
Although I love to read on this site, and agree with most of the comment’s posted. I suppose (at least in my own mind and heart) that I would not call an article of clothing enforced by an unholy alliance called the state, Holy. I still think conventional definitions should not be blurred to exact generic meanings. When the titles of Parent and Child have become violated and meaningless, how much more so, freedom to remain autonomous in the path of the collective herd that is immune to reason? The old paths served us well, but I still prefer to segregate words and definitions to their proper functions so that for myself, they might still retain meaningful meaning.
Hi Clyde,
I use the term – Holy Rag – to make the point that what we are dealing with is a religious (a cultic) phenomenon. I believe this is an important point to make; i.e., that the Holy Rag is an accoutrement of faith in a dogma that must not be questioned and that to question it by not wearing the Holy Rag is tantamount to denying the one true god.
Indeed. Since there are no facts to back it up, what else could it be but faith/belief.
bit I surely DO question, and ridicule, the “dogma that must not be questioned”. Nor do I slap the mug nappie across my face.
As to ebikes… your numbers for speed are WAY low. On a road bike I can usually cruise right along at high teens, twenty mph on the flat, still air. A can easily keep up with the comoon grade eBike. Up a hill,when a strong rider is using max boost, I can’t keep up.. but will at least sometimes ragain what I lost to him on the climb.
There are diferent classes f eBikes.. the slow ones can be ridden on sidewalks most places, the mid speed ones daylight only in bike paths and lanes, and the fast ones MUST have lights, and have restrictions.. no sidewalks, can’t remember in the bikelanes. (friend of mine gave me the run down). So the average ones can put along near twenty, and have a range at partial boost of thirty or forty miles. The downside is they are HEAVY… WAY heavy. So when the juise all leaks out you’ve got a real hard slog to et to a current bush, then a nice long wait to recharge.
No, I’ll take my push bike. Unlmited range, at least within itself. I’m outta shape last couple years,but can still manage fifty miles in close to three hours. Used to be I’ve gone interstatae used it for long trips, and such. If they clam on the crs (fuel prices are raidly rocketing upward last two weeks) I will still be able to get about as needed. Where I live we ararely have weather that makes riding impossible.. thoguh unconfortable. One Feb a while back I took off for alittle get outta the house ride… merino woll cycling tights, leg warmers, fleeece pullover, insulated full fingered gloves, a skier’s ear wrap, and went out. Felt slugis onwered if I was not coming down with some bug. Stopped after about 45 minutes to stand, and take a drink. My water bottle had frozen solid… from warm tap water to solid ice in forty minutes. OH, I get it.. its’COLD outside. Made ithome.. one descent as I came back through town after dark presented a couple tense moments as, going slow to maintain control, the back wheel started dancing a bit on the dry but iced macadam. I WILL NOT voluntaril go out in ice or snow on the bike. My skinny tyres make that a deathwish….
Controlling us by controlling our mobility is a real issue.
But it is NOT the core challenge. Bicycles are one thing, vaccinations, national ID cards, strip searches and all the other hooks the oligarchs are installing pale to insignificance in the face of our learned submissive skull fuck.
Like it or not, we have been poisoned regarding leadership. As children, we hated and rejected the reality embodied in the discipline of fatherhood. We preferred the mollycoddle of our mothers and subsequently, women.
From mommy we went to wifey, and never looked back. The skull fuck was complete, and so was the destruction of our autonomy.
Like it or not, men lead, innovate and build; women have babies and support the system that empowers their agenda. When men enter the frames of women, they lose their God given role, and supplicate to the fears, wants and desires of women.
These men are CUCKS, and have been replaced in society by Daddy Big Government. Unlike a real daddy or father, big daddy government intends to rule all for the absolute benefit of its leaders. Hence, male autonomy must take a knee, or a mask, or a vaccination, or anything else so decreed.
To do otherwise makes women uneasy, unpleasant and dry.
Our subservience to women is our Achilles Heel. Saying it again, remember who seduced Adam with an apple. We now have the “Big Apple”, and it is the same thing.
Resume saying “No” to women, the consequences are far lower than the results of “Happy Wife, Happy Life”. She cannot handle conflict and crisis, but we can. Seek Freedom, Not Safety….
Or, keep pedaling…
MGTOW !
Oh, Jack. Psychologically, I am trying to figure you out. Are you scared of women? Was your mother a dominating woman? Did your father not stand up to her? Was your ex wife a bitch? So many avenues to start from.
Maybe my problem was I grew up around strong men. I grew up around tough women, too, but I can’t imagine someone like my father, my husband, my grandfathers, or my uncles reading your post and agreeing with. None of them would take a knee if they believed in something strongly, even if their spouse thought differently. A marriage is a partnership, but that does not mean either person loses their identity or belief system. Two people do not become one. A man (or woman) should never be fearful of their significant other. If you are then you are with the wrong person.
Some men are weak willed and hand off their balls to the wife after they say “I do.” We call them snowflakes or beta men. Just a small secret from the opposite sex….we really don’t respect these men. There is a reason that women read romance novels and all the men are alphas, we have pictures of Viking warlords and football players on our walls…okay, maybe that’s me, but women do read romance novels and none of the main characters are described as soy latte toting, man bun, skinny jean wearing boys.
Why? Because women don’t want that. They may settle for it, but they don’t want it. Let’s be honest Keanu Reeves is sexiest when driving a 1969 Mustang and toting a TR 1 in John Wick then anything Paul Sutton did in A Walk in the Clouds.
Morning, RG!
I amen all you’ve written. But I understand Jack’s position as well. The culture has been emasculated. Feminine men and masculine women. Not all, of course. But it is a real thing. The system emits relentless propaganda and there is enormous social pressure applied to boys and young men to be submissive and girls and young women to be aggressive – both to a distorted/unnatural degree. If a boy doesn’t have proper male guidance, he may grow up believing that to be a man is somehow shameful; that he should strive to be more what the culture/social pressure portray women as wanting – but which of course most women do not want. Women, in their turn, are programmed and conditioned to believe they want a feminine man but of course despise such a man.
Adding to this terrible dynamic is the systemic effort to make marriage and family extremely perilous because tenuous – it lasts so long as everyone’s “happy,” often ephemerally and based on unsustainable expectations and is very easy to undo, with shattering consequences for all but especially the men and the kids. This is why many men avoid marriage – especially re-marriage. And kids, too.
Hi Eric,
Which generation did this take place in? Who allowed it to happen? The Baby Boomers? Generation X? Why did men take a step back? Let’s be honest this is all culture. Asian men (Middle East, India, China, Japan, etc.) and Latinos families are still run by male dominated figures. In these communities the family unit remains strong. Which is why their kids are kicking our ass.
White and black men took a knee, especially the Americans, the Europeans, and the Australians. I don’t agree with the sentiment of male toxicity. I think the whole movement is garbage.
You mention that men today choose not to marry (or remarry) or have children, doesn’t this men even weaker? If the “real” men choose to forfeit the game then that just allows the “weak“ men to win by concession. Then we wonder why boys don’t have a strong figure to look up to.
Hi RG,
All valid points; no argument from me.
Of course, not all men took a step back. Just as not all men are wearing a Diaper. But many did – and are. Why did they? I think the main reason is the generational conditioning directed most specifically at white middle class men over the past 30 or so years. As a Gen X guy, I can remember the world as it was before the conditioning began in earnest, which was in the mid-late ’80s. Before that, boys were still boys and did the things boys tend to do and weren’t shamed for it. But the boys who came after us – the ones born in the ’80s – grew up with saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafety seats and Helicopter Moms and were programmed to passivity and servility. I think black and latino and Asian kids grew up with less of this damage because they were not as specifically targeted and because their culture was – and remains – more masculine, as you’ve noted.
I will offer up some personal insight which may help to explain at least some of the aversion to marriage/re-marriage:
When I got married, I entered into it assuming I would be married until I died. It did not work out that way – and not by my choice. I suppose I could try again – with a woman who believed that to get married means to stay married, absent some truly gross violation of the contract. But this is a contract that can be broken at will, for literally no real reason other than “I’m not in love with you anymore” – and there goes however many years you invested and possibly a great deal of money, too. It is a deterrent. I’m not saying I won’t commit to someone again. But I doubt I will get married in the eyes of the law again.
I can understand ones hesitancy in remarrying, but I don’t understand one never getting married or writing off women (or men) in general.
My sisters and I grew up with a mother who clearly stated to us, “Pick right, because you are stuck with him forever.” In my family, there is no divorce, especially if children are involved. It was drilled into us that children deserve a strong family unit where they felt safe and loved and there was no changing your mind midway. Cheating, drugs, and beating were exceptions, but everything else you had to work out. I married a man whose entire external family had been married 2, 3, even 4 times. I had my work cut out for me.
We have no control on what someone else will do. My husband could come home tomorrow and tell me he is trading me in for a younger model with bigger boobs. He would be stupid if he did, but it could be a probability. 😉
The system is at a crossroads. When strong men don’t step up to the plate and when strong women don’t believe they have to try to make their marriage work, then society fails and the kids are the shrapnel.
At this point how does civilization reverse itself? What we are doing is not working and we have created a generation who has no willingness to fight either for their principles, their relationship, or a cause bigger than themselves.
Simple answer. Drugs. Boys are handed drugs to make them act more like girls. After years of consuming them, their frustrated masculinity expresses itself. Which is why most of the juvenile mass murderers have been boys subject to such medication. Masculinity does indeed have some violence attached to it. Otherwise how would they protect their family? Frustrate it, and it explodes, or they become feminine replicas of men.
Hi JWK,
I agree with you, the prescribing of drugs such as Ritalin or Adderall to calm kids “hyperactivity” is BS. Kids are naturally active and need to be in a constant state of motion. They need to be outside swimming, bicycling, running, etc.
Parents throw these kids in front of an IPad or TV and wonder why the kid is squirming and rambunctious.
We also are now just seeing the effects that these drugs are having to a child’s developing nervous system. We then seem surprised when these kids (especially boys) are trying heroin and ecstasy to give them the same rush that they have been experiencing with prescriptions that are the equivalent of speed over the last 10 years.
“I don’t understand one never getting married or writing off women (or men) in general. ”
It’s simply risk and reward. What’s the reward and what is the risk? If the marriage contract was a business deal evaluated without emotion or social construct it is rationally stupid for a man to enter into it. Nobody in their right mind would enter into a contract where he has all the costs, burdens, responsibilities, obligations, and exit penalties.
It’s also lived experience. With only some exception the decent stable responsible men spend a lot years getting rejected and kicked to curb. After all they are boring and young women are told to chase excitement.
When the women come around to them the women don’t look as good, they have debts, problems, children, etc. Now these men are told to step up and marry these women. Um how about no. Relationships with younger women are shamed and the younger ones largely look to older men for money. And then there’s those marriage contract terms again.
It’s not that men swear off marriage or women it’s that marriage and women swore off them by becoming this horrible deal and changing the nature of pairing up. Being the last choice and burdened with consequences of her past choices isn’t exactly an attractive selling point.
Yeah I know, not all women are like that. There aren’t enough of those to go around and each new crop of women has fewer than the one before.
Hi Brent,
I would not expect any man (or woman) to take on someone else’s responsibility (e.g. kids). That is a lot of baggage and then one has the fun of dealing with exes, baby daddies, and the like.
I am happily married, but if it did not work out, I would not remarry, because of that very reason. I have kids. I have assets. The man would likely have kids and assets as well. To try to commingle all of that sounds like pure hell.
I guess my thinking was more about starting out together. Where two people would lay a foundation, before their careers took off, they would buy the assets together, the kids would be theirs, etc and they would work toward a common goal.
I got married young, at least by today’s standards. I noticed the older that people are when they get married they are a bit more set in their ways, a little more jaded, maybe a little leery of the relationship or marriage working out. Many will disagree with me, but I am not sure waiting until your 30s or 40s to settle down is wise.
Maybe a bit of inexperience and naiveness is best for both parties.
For most modern women there are classes of men they do not consider when they are young and child and burden free.
Men that would make good long term stable marriages are men that they are taught to put off until later. More and more men are simply saying ‘no thanks’ when later comes.
Brent, in your series of posts, you NAILED it as to why I’ve remained single! Now that I’m older, I’m thankfully no longer a slave to the damnable sex drive; I’m at an age where I find a good dump more satisfying than an orgasm.
It’s not that I didn’t want to get married or have a relationship; I did, esecially when I was younger. Thankfully, God in His mercy saved me from all that… 🙂
“Men that would make good long term stable marriages are men that they are taught to put off until later. More and more men are simply saying ‘no thanks’ when later comes.”
Indeed. I am an average looking middle aged man. The number of women who clearly are interested and think I would be interested in theme is surprising, mainly because they think I would be interested in them.
Me: stable, self employed, financially secure, STEM college educated, reasonably fit, decently groomed.
Them: unstable, in debt, disheveled (usually spilling out of yoga pants), a degree in gender studies and working for tips. Oh, and old. Sorry ladies but most of you have a much shorter ‘sexually attractive’ window than the men.
And yes, hypergamy and divorce rape. Men are getting wise to the game. Choose very carefully or just be a ‘pump and dump’ Chad.
I have not had a long term relationship in 20+ years. After a few weeks, the novelty wears off and the manipulation to get me to ‘go along to get along’ starts.
I would rather have a long term loving relationship, unfortunately that is basically playing Russian roulette with half the chambers filled. So Chad it is.
My experience too. Before 30, I couldn’t find a sane girl; and although I was pretty good-looking back then, none of ’em seemed to pay me much attention because I was very mature for my age, and thus not into ‘cool cars’ or partying…but rather was into one-man business, and hiking and exploring.
Right about when I turned 30, all of the women who had been knocked-up with a few kids, maybe gone through a husband or two already, or who had been left in the dust and were getting worried that they were getting older started coming out of the woodwork.
Uhh…no thanks. Should’ve looked me up before you messed up your life.
I just thank goodness I never found what I thought I was looking for, because now in my late 50’s, I see that I’m one of the very few truly happy guys around!
I love being alone; can’t imagine being yoked to some aging monster in 40’s or ;gasp!] 50’s….and seeing as how the courts now treat men as virtual slaves and criminals, while rewarding the woman for doing whatever she wants, I can safely say that never marrying was another one of those ‘best decisions’.
Thankfully, I had the sense when I was 15 or 16 to realize that I’d never want to have kids…and that not only freed me from having to marry, but also helped keep the traditional stay-at-home types whom I would require away.
Just look at modern dating culture today. It is no wonder that enduring marriages and strong families are rare! Also, the fact that the sexual revolution has virtually turned society into a matriarchy; the courts/gov’t have given women undue power while castrating men, etc. etc.
It is no wonder things are so messed up- and the only way anyone today could even remotely attempt to side-step any of this, would be if two people who both had the sense to pt out of this present culture somehow found each other.
I’m too much of a non-conformist to be eligible for marriage. Every girl I meet is blue-pilled. No thanks!
The ‘Chad’ or PUA thing just seems like way too much effort and risk mitigation for far too little benefit. Then again maybe that’s just me.
Today’s women will approach me online or in person with what I now are called ‘sh*t tests’. Okay I get it if some guy approached them, but approaching me with that or any other these choosing forms where then I am suppose to ‘dance’ for their approval.
It’s like how they run the HR departments. ‘we invite you to compete for this job’, now dance for us.
Um how about no. You want me? You do something to get my interest.
Remember when TPTB sold us on the Brady Bunch as the norm? Comingled families were not common then but they got people used to the idea that go ahead and break up the family and comingle with another failed marriage.
Hi subwo,
Actually, it was quite common back then. In 1965, a study came out that 31% of families had a child from a previous relationship. It wasn’t the majority as it is today. I believe 59% of families today have a child from a previous relationship and 40% are born out of wedlock, which are some pretty astounding statistics.
This brings us back to the original situation, as the nuclear family has crumbled there goes society.
RG, that ’65 “study” is BS. The divorce rate in ’65 was a fraction of what it is today- and it was still considered disgraceful for a woman to have a baby out of wedlock, and few men would marry a divorced woman, much less one with an illegitimate child- even in NY!
Many illegitimate babies back then were put up for adotpion (Heck, I personally know at least three people born in the 60’s who were adoptees for that reason- and two of them were from the poorest families- which I say to illustrate that illegitimacy was just as much a concern among even the poor- Until recently, as one of the basic values of Western Civilization and Christianity, it transcended every strata of society- except for a few ethnic minority groups- who were probably cherry picked to be the subject of that study, so as to assure all those who weren’t around in the 60’s “how it really was”, lest any young’uns should get a clue as to how far we have fallen as a society.
When I was in elementary school from ’67-’73 I did not know one kid (out of hundreds) who lived in a ‘blended’ family; and only two who did not live in a home with their biological mother and father (and one of them was me! 🙂 ). -And this was 60 miles east of NYC!
This reminds m,e of Ira Levin’s 1984-style novel “This Perfect Day” in whci the main character has a little real knowledge of the past from stories his grandfather had told him, and that is the only thing which makes him question the official narrative of the past as portrayed by the gov’t/schools/society around him. [I highly recommend the book- I prefer it to 1984]
‘Zactly, Subwo! The Brady Bunch- much as I like the show, the idea was: Make something that looks squeaky-clean (“They’re not divorced! They’re widowed!”) so that even the most staunch conservative won’t object, and won’t have his defenses up when watching it…and letting his KIDS watch it…and just slip in that one subversive concept…..and POOF! Here we are….mix-and-match mulatto mutt revolving-door famblies where no kid feels like they have a permanent home; a distinct herritage, or a full-time forever parent have become the NORM, while the traditional fambly with a bio mother and father, and kids living full time in one house with the same siblings, and having a full-time mommy is ultra rare.
Sesame Street had a lot to do with it too, pushin g multiculturalism and normalizing minorities from day one.
Nunzio,
Thanks, I will give the Brookings Institute a call and let know their study is shit.
I didn’t say anything about divorce. I said 31% of families had a child from a previous relationship. It didn’t say anything about a divorce.
By 1965, 24% of black children were born out of wedlock, 3% of white children, and 3% of Hispanic and Native American children.
There is also the consideration that many men and women lost spouses and remarried, which would make the child(ren) from a previous relationship.
Just because you didn’t experience doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
RG, the numbers still don’t add up- just as if you were to look at a mainstream “study” today about COVID.
Really, I don’t think that my lower working class family in the NY metro sarea at the time, and all those around us were in a bubble. Other parts of the country ere even far more conservative. If illegitimacy and divorce amongs whites were low….and believe me, it wasn’t like every other family was losing a young father to Vietnam or crime or disease….. unless they were concentrating strictly on blacks, their conclusions about the ubiquitousness of an ‘other’ kid in so many famblies is pure nonsense for that time.
I think Andy Griffith may have been the first to normalize single parenthood.
But on all the old TV shows the single or remarried parents the other biological parent of the child or children was DEAD.
What happened to the other spouse/parent is irrelevant. The idea is to get the public used to the concept of single parenthood and other so-called “family” structures.
It may not have been intentional in the case of The Andy Griffith Show, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was considering the decade it came out in.
I think men (and women for that matter) who are child-less are actually stronger in some ways. At least in my realm it seems fathers tend to be more spineless, capitulating just to make it through another day.
They’ve already mentally given up their future and kids to the State so what do they have? A hollow existence that they don’t really like living anyway. Child-less people usually so by choice because they have other things they want to do and it’s important to them, e.g. some lifestyle or avocation for which they feel passion.
I actually think it would be better socially if *more* people were child-less and living meaningful lives. We’re surrounded by millions of people just going through the motions of college-job-marriage-kids-Disneyland-retirement-death. There’s no underlying joy in Whoville worth fighting to keep.
To each his own, A, but it sounds pretty dismal to me. I thank my parents for having me. I am thankful I grew up when I did, I am thankful that I met my husband and I am thankful that I have my children.
Never once as a parent have I felt a “hollow existence” nor do my children stop me from doing things. If hubby and I want to go to Turks and Caicos we get on a plane and go. Sometimes, the kids came with us, sometimes they didn’t, but one doesn’t stop living when you have children.
As for the State, why would any parent give up their child to the State? Are you referring to school? That is a personable preference made by each parent. My children have never attended public school, but I realize not every parent can do what my family did nor do many of them want to.
It is dismal!
You’re also atypical.
Someone who was awake or willing to wake up. Willing to accept responsibility. The number of home schooled kids is small, too small to make a dent in the prevailing trend. I actually had hopes that COVID would make parents realize things but my state just doubled down on dumping money into teachers unions and infrastructure build-outs. There’s no great awakening. They just want their kids back in K-12 daycare, now to be made supposedly disease safe, as soon as possible. They removed the religious and personal exemptions from vaccinations to send them there some time ago and yet enrollment numbers didn’t drop.
Giving their child to the State is a figurative statement. Meaning they’re willing to let government dictate their vaccine schedule, to warp their brain in government primary schools and turn their sons and daughters at adulthood over to either the military or higher education indoctrination centers. The whole time from birth to 18 they operate under the threat that child services will punish them for stepping out of line on the “approved” rearing plan.
I don’t see much evidence that the average family in this country is willing to take any risk to live free and happy. My own sibling was unwilling to have us visit this Thanksgiving despite us having driven 1,000 miles to see them as planned for months.
My parents were happy to have us and we had a small dinner but I won’t lie, it was tough to stay positive after getting a text with some bogus positive COVID test in school so we’re going to have to quarantine. Fuck them for breaking our parent’s hearts. They’re still holding on to literally a trip to Disney that got cancelled this year and they think if they just comply a little harder it’ll all be OK. My brother is a very Republican vet, a person who smacks his lips constantly about Molon Labe but there’s always a screen in his McMansion with FOX news warping his family’s brain.
He’s typical.
We’ve not always seen eye-to-eye. Which has long been the case (since my awakening thanks to Ron Paul). What’s changed is his and society’s willingness to let us live on the fringe. It’s no longer tolerable to have us flaunting their diktats. They are tightening the noose on the stragglers since they already knew they had the masses under their thumb.
My theory is the face masking allow them to identify those who aren’t complying. As it is now facial recognition watches everyone (and you’re in the system if you have a driver license) but there’s too many to really watch (government being above all bloated and inefficient) and it was easy to circumvent. Grow a beard then shave periodically, wear glasses or a hat, wear a mask or a few properly placed make-up lines. But by getting 99.9% of people to cover their faces they can focus resources on those who are not. It’s brilliant in all honesty. I’ve periodically worn a face covering this year at places I knew to be collecting data, government buildings and the like just so I didn’t give them any extra data.
Hi A,
The homeschool trend is turning (slowly, but it is turning). I am part of the state homeschooling association and they recently sent us an email that homeschooling has grown from roughly 40K kids in the state to 64K….that was in one year, actually one semester.
Many of my clients are leaving the cities and hightailing it to the suburbs and the country. If the government’s goal is to keep us all city bound, they are failing miserably.
I have never worn a face mask (I have worn a Halloween mask twice, though). I don’t care if they have me on camera or not. I live my life as I see fit and if they can’t deal with it that is there problem. I have been walking around mask less for nine months now. Knock on wood I haven’t suffered any repercussions.
Stay positive. This is not going to go forever. The Spanish flu epidemic (which actually was deadly) lasted 18 months. The vaccine will not be mandated (at least anytime soon) and 60% of the masks will be removed. Some of us are going to have to continue to skirt around the blowholes, but we will, because we are tough and much smarter than them. 🙂
Homeschooling is not that difficult. There are abundant lesson plans available, and all you have to do is stay one lesson ahead of your children. In fact, it takes far fewer hours a day to make it work. Children are actually quite eager to learn, just not to learn the unadulterated male bovine fecal matter they are taught in public schools. They learn a lot when left to their own devices, or simply given material to work with.
Hi JWK,
I agree with you, homeschooling is not difficult.
Many people believe it needs to be at a desk eight hours a day, but it can be anywhere….a museum, a battlefield, a new country, the grocery store. Every place is a learning opportunity.
Amen, RG!
Best education O ever got when I started skipping school and using my transit pass to hop on the subway and explore every far-flung inch of NYC!
Yeah, I dopn’t know wha’ hoppen’d at the first session of the House Of Birdshitzes in VA. in 1642….but I darn sure knew the realities of my world!
Hubby and I actually skipped most of our senior year in high school and did something similar in DC. We would tour the museums, take the Mustang up to Skyline Drive, go to Kings Dominion, drive up to Annapolis and sit at a crab house drinking beer (because nobody checked IDs back then).
I agree with you, the best thing anyone can do is unschool.
I’m long past child rearing age, but have delivered an excellent specimen of manhood upon the nation. He understands that to sacrifice his morality and principals on the alter of his children is an exercise in futility. What point in saving his children so they can be enslaved?
Speaking of “systemic” efforts:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/facebook-new-approach-hate-speech
New “approach”, huh? From the article: Posts containing comments about “whites” and “men” will be marked as “low sensitivity.” In other words ignored, or maybe even encouraged “wink wink.”
Irrespective of anyone’s opinion on the validity of the term “hate” as a modifier to speech/crime and laws pertaining to such, this is an obvious incitement to speech then violence against white men.
‘There is a reason that women read romance novels and all the men are alphas’ — RG
What happens to alpha males after entering a relationship? Too often, this:
‘In fact, nearly 70 percent of divorces are initiated by women. Among college-educated women, this number jumps up to 90%.’
https://www.whitleylawfirmpc.com/3-reasons-why-women-initiate-divorce-more-often-than-men/
There’s a deep-seated contradiction in women naturally wanting alpha males, but having the final, unappealable say over whether those males get to stay in their lives or not.
I’m not sure that either sex can explain this phenomenon. Some biological asymmetries are wired into us. But as Eric commented, the fact that women usually initiate breakups looms large in the minds of men who have experienced this unfortunate fact first-hand.
Hi Jim,
I agree that women are usually the ones to initiate a break up, but I don’t think it has to do with the man being an alpha or a beta.
Do women handle most of the cleaning, cooking, and child rearing? Yes. The toughest part of my marriage was the baby raising years. It caused many a fight. I was the one to get up in the middle of the night with a screaming baby, while still having to get up by 6 and head into work. My husband had to get at 4:30 so there was no point in both of us suffering from lack of sleep. I was moody. He was moody. Everybody was moody.
I think what hurts many marriages is not putting your partner first. Even after having kids spouses still need to put each other first. We would hire a babysitter and go to dinner every month or two, twice a year we would go away for a weekend leaving the kids with Grandma and Grandpa. It kept him and I sane. As the kids got older and could start doing more themselves it got easier. I think the other mistake that most people make is taking each other for granted and not appreciating what the other does. I thank my husband for everything from planting the mums along the sidewalk, to changing out the light in the hallway. He thanks me for making dinner and helping the kids with their homework. It takes two people willing to work at it to make any relationship successful and that is no guarantee that it will be, but I think people should try.
ding, ding, ding. To my wife and I, putting each other first, over everything else, even kids, we believe, has been the #1 reason for how successful our marriage is (25yrs so far).
‘Dating’ is big to us, and showing interest in each others passions, etc…
The many unsuccessful we have witnessed usually starts with the wife saying the kid(s) are the most important thing, and down the rabbit hole it goes. 50% or more end up in divorce, per our experience.
Thank you RG.
Hi Chris,
I am just happy to see I am not in left field here. 🙂
Congratulations on the 25 years of marriage, we recently celebrated our 20th.
I agree with you when the children are #1 on the ladder rung, the marriage will suffer. Plus, I think it is important for kids to see that their parents are a united front and sometimes their time for each other takes precedence over them (the kids). It keeps the kids from being placed on a high pedestal and realizing that the world doesn’t evolve around them.
You aren’t out of the woods yet. I was married to my Ex for 37 years. One day she decided she wasn’t “happy” and 6 months later she was gone. Probably as a result of some feminist propaganda she had been fed. Happiness can be described in many ways. Perpetual giddiness is not an accurate one. Not only did she leave, she won’t even speak to me since. Also probably on some feminist’s advice.
I think she was unhappy I got old, and less energetic. I didn’t want to “go and do things” all the time. After a lifetime of working in construction, I’m tired.
Women in general today- but even more so amongst the college-edumacated variety have been subverted to desire independence and “equality”. Marriage is a mutual dependency. Men overwhelmingly still see themselves as the upholders of the traditional role which is necessary for husbands to fulfill to create and maintain strong healthy permanent famblies, and will fulfill their obligation as such even when ‘not happy’ or when things aren’t going their way.
Conversely, women have been propagandized to reject their respective role, and to put some nebulous concepts of personal fulfillment, achievement, independence, personal happiness, etc. above the vows of marriage- so that when the marriage no longer fulfills some fantasied ideal of ‘making them happy’ or if the union of which they have become an integral part encroaches on their ‘personal growth’ or autonomy, it is jettisoned for some perceived life of splendor, living alone in an apartment while working in a cubicle, or to try again with ‘someone else’ who will somehow make them happy (Maybe by being a genie in a lamp who will grant their every wish while requiring nothing of them, other than a quick rub)-not realizing that THEY are forever doomed, because it is often their own inadequacy to fully accept and fulfill their role as a wife which causes most of their trouble and unhappiness, and which renders the marriage impotent.
What’s more, the ‘educated’ come to a marriage often with huge debts; are getting a late start, thus missing the crucial opportunity to ‘grow together’ before becoming fully mature and set in their ways; and are the ones who highly value ‘career’ over marriage, and who devote more time to outside institutions, rather than home, husband and children- so how possibly can they succeed as a wife and mother when that role is not primary in their life, but rather just seen as a compartment of their life- like just another thing to have, like a corporate position, car, or condo?
There is a vast difference between a marriage with a husband-father and wife-mother vs. ‘cohabitation’ with a ‘partner’.
Hi Nunzio,
Good post, but I don’t believe the female propaganda machine plays as large as a part in what woman do. A girl observes the women around – her mother, grandmothers, aunts, and sisters and usually follows a similar path. Society’s influence is usually less apparent. I think the same thing can be said about boys. They scrutinize the men around and look toward them for leadership. If you are reared in a loving household with two parents a child would construe this as “normal”. If your parents divorced at a young age and dated several people over the years this would also be deemed “normal”. We are influenced by those around us.
I think we give too much credit to the MSM, celebrities, and representatives. They carry very little weight in the court of personal opinion. Those closest to you – friends, families, and peers affect the person that you are or will become.
The problem with society today is the fundamental breakdown of the family. I think most men and women have no idea what they want and they keep telling themselves that he or she will show on a white stallion and all of their dreams will come true. Let’s be honest, this only happens in Disney movies. I don’t believe there is one perfect person for everyone, but a lot of good people for someone. I think it is quite possible for a woman to be career oriented and still have the traditional family structure. It is difficult, but doable. The woman has to be accepting that most of the burden will fall on her though.
Hi RG,
I do agree with much of your overall conclusion here- but I think the part about girls and boys being influenced by their parents/relatives, while overwhelmingly true in the past, is not so today- and even when it is these days, those doing the influencing are usually just as much manipulated by propaganda.
I mean, who even spends that much time with their parents these days? So many kids are in ‘day care’ from a young age; then school; endless organized activities; then cloistered away in their room with video games or TV or texting…..
Instead of learning a trade from his father, a boy may grow up never even seeing the place where his father works….probably rarely even sweeing his father (if his parents are even still married), as the father may leave the house at 6:30Am to commute, and not get home till 7PM (Very common in many metro areas- like Long Island, where I was from)….
THAT basically is the problem- the family, and it’s influences have largely been neutered, and replaced by institutions and collectivizing homogenizing influences.
Heck, I remember when I was a kid in the 70’s. My uncle and his wife and 4 kids lived in a nice big suburban house. My uncle was just a blue-collar worker- an upholsterer- but his wife could stay at home and be a full-time mother; they had 2 cars; lived in a nice place; even had a lot next door with a barn and horse for their daughter! -60 miles east of NYC! It was idyllic.
Today? A coupler of professionals live in that house. They both workl long hours, and their one kid is basically in the company of strangers nearly 12 hours a day, away from home. No horse/barn/lot next door. That seems abysmal to me- and that’s one of the few families that’s even now considered “traditional” as it’s a husband & wife with a bio child in a suburban home with “good careers”……
We’ve strayed so far from the idyllic; so far from even the functional. 🙁 Just think who’s influencing that kid above…..
Heck, it makes me sick to think about this.
RG,
I have to call BS here. Women are herd creatures. They’re also trend conscious. If what I say is untrue, then riddle me this: when Carrie Bradshaw on SATC got Manolo shoes, EVERY woman and her sister in Amerca wanted Manolo shoes! They were like, OMG, Carrie has Manolos; I want ’em too!
If women aren’t herd creatures, then riddle me this: why is it women who work together SYNC their periods? Why, after working together for a while, do they have their periods.
If women aren’t herd creatures, then why do all the women in their section of an office get a divorce after one woman gets a divorce?
MM,
What freaking women are you hanging out with!?
This woman (me)
1. Owns zero pair of Manolos…I do own a few Stuart Weitzman high heels, but my favs are a pair of Timberland steel toed boots….they are comfy and don’t hurt my feet.
2. Have never synced my period (or even discussed it) with another woman. Honestly, I didn’t know such a thing existed or how and why someone would even want to do that.
3. I have had several clients that have divorced over the years and never even once remotely thought “You know it is time to give up my really great husband so I can hang out with a bunch of bitter unhappy women who hate men.” Seriously, who the hell does that?
Which leads me back to my original question….Do you not associate with normal women?
Also, I am greatly concerned that you know what Manolos are and apparently have watched Sex and the City. Those women are not real and if guys are holding these women up as examples of what’s out there….lord have mercy, no wonder you guys are so screwed up.
Hi RG,
There are women like you (and a few I know) and there are women such as the ones described by Mark. This has probably always been so but the relevant question may be: Which predominates today? This is a hard one to answer. An easy one to answer is that normal relationships have been severely undermined and gimped by the system of incentives which exists now, including no-fault divorce and its general encouragement by the propagators of “culture,” who also encourage women and men to regard commitment/family as almost silly if not outright stupid, especially when you are young. This propagation works similarly to the cases! the cases! It programs many, perhaps most people to conform to the wanted behavior, without realizing they’ve been programmed.
Woman: think of a man and then take away reason, logic and accountability……
Women aren’t worth marrying anymore. Married men get used up and tossed to the curb like an old appliance. Now all the good men are gone and the selfish strip mining of men for their resources is going to hurt women in the end. Hypergamy is real. Get used to fixing your own shit and enjoy that dead end career because a man has no use for a woman that offers nothing but grief in return.
Islam is RIGHT about women 🙂
100 percent facts
Hi A,
Just out of curiosity, what resources are we stripping from men again? Inquiring minds want to know…
Very good, even if “the lady” named Z Man doth protest too much, apologize too much, for the “less” corrosive, & so therefore preferable, testosterone soaked version. Androgens to the smash & rescue.
https://www.takimag.com/article/the-rise-of-gyno-fascism/
What’s got two sides but no substance? Lines (& lines & lines ∞∞∞) on paper, on computer screens, transferred to quicksand. Stupid, incorrigible, fookers, & fookees – no matter how smartly strung seem the sentences – all around.
I’m rereading de La Boétie’s The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude. Short story shorter: same shite “different” 500 years ago.
Headfook’s got nada to do. Fooked heads, from conception on, is the order of it.
Oh, & micropenis, whichever gender floodity, gots to compensate with the micromanagement.
“To believe it will be limited to just this injection is to believe that allowing the government to tax one thing won’t mean it will tax other things.”
You got that right Eric!!
Acquiessence to that is to subject oneself to a never-ending string of injections of WHATEVER the STASI wants you to have. The number of people that believe the mainstream hype on ANY of the “benefits” of injections is stunning, absolutely stunning.
My family and I have already decided we’ll go down fighting first. No injections for us regardless of the consequences. HINT: I’m not going to let myself starve to death.
Hi 37 –
Yup. Accept one thing and you have already accepted the next thing. Such a simple, logical easy-to-grasp thing and yet so many cannot grasp it. because they do no think logically. They only see whatever is in front of their face, not what is about to be put in front of their face. They have an animal’s consciousness; hence “cattle.” Which is just how they are handled.
Indeed, taxes are an excellent representation. Once the state is granted the power to tax, there is nothing to stop it from taxing at a 100% rate. likewise the vaccine. If it acquires the power to inject you, there’s nothing to stop it from injecting whatever it pleases. If it can control the means of travel, it can dispose of travel.
Tyrants do not create tyranny, submission does.
If claiming 100% of a person’s labor via taxes is in effect slavery at what percentage is it not slavery? Of course zero, which everyone here knows but frustrating for the statist to comprehend.
So…..I’m expecting they’ll be ‘mandating’ bicycle licenses and registrations, and even insurance any day now. Such schemes have been been being proffered in some places, like NYC, for decades- I’m sure it’ll come to fruition any day now.
Sad thing is, people in places like Nueva York and San Fagcisco have already been primed for Chinky-cycles, because of the cost, inconvenience, and impracticability of owning a car in such places, pedal bikes and e-bikes are already ubiquitous- and even advantageous in such places. A good, modified e-bike, like Louis Rossman’s can be a real God-send in such places….but when they are FORCED upon all, and by purposely making cars a hassle to own, by removing already sparse parking; making driving slow and tedious by reducing speed limits to essentially the speed of a bicycle, or less, etc. etc. then a truly good piece of technology essentially becomes a tool of tyranny.
The powers that be cannot abide someone like me being able to travel 20 miles away from my home without permission or being tracked. That’s why I’ve said for years that they’ll go after bicyclists sooner or later. In a big city like Chicago a bicyclist could really get around well untracked, untaxed, etc. They can’t live with that. So they will do something about it when the time comes.
Don’t knock e-bikes too hard, Eric, they make sense for some of us.
I have a 10 mile commute in an area with a lot of traffic in the Bay Area of CA. I built myself an eBike which has easily a 50 mile range (off a 1kWh battery) and 1000W of power, which is the maximum legal limit that won’t get you in trouble with the law. Anyhow, this thing _ALWAYS_ makes 1000W, even at 1RPM. The short of it is that I can easily bike at 35mph by pedaling at about 250W, which isn’t a lot, and the bike adding 1000W.
It’s shortened my commute from 40 minutes to 20 minutes, the weather is mild here, I go along ocean side trails instead of being stuck bumper to bumper on the highway.
I’m old enough to remember just being able to get into a car and drive wherever. Now I get that with a bike. Easy to park, no cops on trails (yet), nobody bugs me if I forget my helmet, though at 35mph I damn sure wear one.
Hi OP,
I don’t object to e-bikes, per se – just as I don’t object to EVs,per se. What draws my fire is the way both are being pushed on us; hope I made that clear in the article!
Try commuting on your e-bike during a February snowstorm in Cleveland and tell us how it works out for you. What’s good for San Francisco isn’t necessarily good for the other 99% of the country…
Which of course is the fundamental flaw in any omnipotent central government. A fatal flaw, for the victims of it. Let us give thanks to Saint Lincoln for creating ours.
Check it this line of thinking – and I live in SoCal do weather is not a factor. May not apply elsewhere. Here in CA there are 3 classes of bikes, pedal assist with limited speed and power, class 2, no pedal electric up to 20mph, and class 3 pedal power and more powerful motor up to 28mph.
Couple of points – no license, no insurance, very little operating cost, many places you can ride all 3 on the road and bike paths which are abundant here in SoCal. Check out Segway emotorcycle. It is bike lane legal.
I see it as more a way to avoid costs and legal licensing and be off the radar.
I get it – it doesn’t work everywhere and it doesn’t address the other issues Eric brings up. But if it does a little to starve the beasts of fees, taxes, mulcting, and restrictions I can see why there ubiquitous out here in SoCal.
Hi 1Unknown,
I agree, actually. As I do about electric cars – in that they can be a good thing. The thing that isn’t good is when electric cars or bikes or anything is shoved down people’s throats by busybody micromanagers – i.e., “the government.”
Eric,
I gotta argue against your premise. Walking and Cycling are freedom. Cars represent chains.
🙂
Hi Vooch,
I understand what you’re saying, but the answer is – it depends. Yes, a bicycle can be liberating. But it is also limiting. For example, one cannot realistically live away from the urban/suburban area without some form of powered (and enclosed) vehicle. Unless you live Amish, of course.
I am comparatively far more free out here in the country – with my truck – than I would be on a bicycle downtown, where I’d be forced to deal with the Face Diapered Freaks at every turn and also the endless, insufferable micromanagement of everything. I can step away from my keyboard right now and shoot my gun out the window of my house if I like. How many suburban people are free to do that?
Few mammals thrive in crowded conditions. People are not one of them. We long ago past the point where living in cities was any advantage, predating the automobile by centuries. Cities are now a tool used by the Psychopaths In Charge for the purpose of maximizing the exploitation of their victims. They would like nothing better than getting us all corralled in one.
Cars are not chains, the massive load of state regulation of them are. Absent the costs of such regulation, from miles per gallon to licensing and taxing, to insuring at gunpoint, cars would be a fraction of the liability they are now. The state supplies the chains, as they always do.
Cars are chains even without regulation. You rely on a steady stream of oil and refining to keep them useful. The U.S. strategic reserve would run out of fuel nationally in a month at normal consumption. It’s one example of the power of the market that they exist and serve such a massive convenience but regardless of the why we built a society that has become very reliant on something with a fragile and easy to manipulate foundation. Oil has been political for as long as it’s existed, e.g. the Standard Oil break up, Middle East wars since the 1950s, embargoes, regulation, etc. Then the product itself is essentially a drug from a business standpoint. You get hooked and dependent to the point the supplier knows you’d be willing to pay almost any price to get another gallon.
Cars as mandated fit that profile. A car without GovCo interference could look much different than the limited options available today. Take the diesel VW that eric wrote about previously. 200 mpg goes a long way to reducing the need for oil. Or allow vehicles like quads and side by sides on rights of way and mobility without expensive paved roads opens up huge swaths of land for habitation. Ever seen the price of properties on unmaintained roads? Talk about cheap livin’.
Hi Anon,
In re: “You rely on a steady stream of oil and refining to keep them useful. ”
Well, yes – but we – human beings also rely on a steady stream of energy (food) and so on to keep us useful, too. I think what’s relevant is whether the whatever-it-is is on balance a net positive.
I believe cars are. A gallon of gas – abundant, inexpensive – can take me 30-plus miles in an average car and 60 on a motorcycle. The vehicle itself does not have to be expensive, either. My 2002 truck – absent what I am forced to pay the government in taxes and such – is essentially free mobility. And what does it provide? The ability to live far away from urban pestholes yet not be isolated. This is a boon of almost incalculable value.
I get not liking cars. But that doesn’t mean they’re not valuable to many people, either.
Not to mention that fuel is actually a minor cost in motor vehicle operation. 30 years ago when I wrote off a truck for taxes, the IRS offered a flat rate for vehicle costs at $0.50 per mile, which means it actually cost more than that. I have never owned a vehicle that used a quarter of that in fuel, including some rather hungry trucks. Keep in mind that was 30 years ago.
The same thing could be said of the food supply, the water supply, the electric grid, and much more. But so long as we have a free market then there will be numerous competitors, redundancy. It is the government, the collective, that promote this idea of fascist efficiency. That is to avoid the redundancy of competition. And once the redundancy of competition is gone you have a fragile system.
It is a matter of degrees, so not a perfect comparison. But almost any individual can grow some of his own food and thereby fuel the bike. Human power is what preceded using horses for work, which also can be maintained and fueled at a slightly less individual scale, being the oat burners they are.
I’m not suggesting internal combustion using petroleum wasn’t a step function in human efficiency but just that it’s not without compromise entanglements, too. I also agree that without overbearing FedGov the possibility for a reasonable performing small diesel running on waste biodiesel you brew yourself might be a real thing, too. Or being able to grow and refine hemp yourself for a car.
If someone tries to actually grow enough food to exist entirely outside the system on a small plot of land like people typically have and government will stomp on him. I am not saying it can’t be done, but government monopolization and fragility exists.
One could power ICE vehicles on biodiesel or ethanol that he makes himself. Government will stomp once it learns about it.
The systems are fragile by design because control freaks can’t control robust systems.
Like most things, very few things are inherently good or bad under all circumstances; the problem is when others seek to prohibit one from doing something, or try to force you to do a particular thing.
Building a world that requires one have a car, and forcing all to pay for the infrastructure is bad, because it forces all to participate; creating an environment in which cars are effectively untenable is just as bad.
Nunzio,
There are cities with good transit systems for those who don’t want to have a car; your native NYC is a good example. That said, the cost of living is high in NYC, and the quality of life overall leaves a lot to be desired.
For those who want to live outside the city or the country, a car is necessary. Even though cars can be a PITA at times, I LOVE the freedom that they provide! I love being able to go somewhere when I want to go, not when the MTA or someone else wants to go there. The overall cost of living will be less, while the overall quality of life will be higher.
It’s like anything else in this life; everything has its pluses and minuses. The question is: what pluses and minuses are we willing to live with?
Um, okay, why are you at a car blog then…?
You know what, I don’t care anymore. The search for a car site populated by car enthusiasts continues.
35 mph on a bicycle, no matter if it’s pedal-powered or otherwise, would, at least for me, be terrifying. If it hits any obstruction, even sand on the road, let alone puddles, snow and ice, the resulting Road Rash could be devastating to bodily integrity.
I’ve used a simple pedal-powered bicycle in the Berkshires in western Massachusetts, and I’ve had to dismount and walk on lengthy down slopes just to limit the speed. I was terrified of a potential spill from the sand and other debris along the road edges, especially at curves and at the bottoms of the hills. Furthermore, any kind of cargo other than my own body affects the stability of the bike. The bike provides absolutely no protection from either the weather or a crash. These factors combine to limit the practical speed of a bike, pedal-powered or otherwise, to about 15 mph, or perhaps 20 mph tops. I couldn’t imagine 35 mph! I’ve ridden bicycles enough to have experienced occasional crashes, so I guess that makes me a bit of a wuss! Not to mention that I haven’t carried health “insurance” since the 1970’s.
Having said all this, a bicycle provides me a sense of freedom as I travel through the dystopian landscape of the USSA of 2020 and beyond. One can see and grok quite a lot of the lay of the land from a bicycle that is just not possible from the cocoon of a motor vehicle- the dreary, depressing sight of the legions of terrified 2-legged livestock dutifully wearing their Slave Muzzles all the more stark! No government permission/hassle to have or use one (yet!), although I do recall back in the early 2000’s talk radio host Dan Rae on WBZ clear-channel AM proposing mandatory government registration of bicycles because the bike MIGHT hit and injure someone- just one more instance of tyranny being excused because something bad “might” happen. When I phoned in to express my concerns that such an application of government force has no place in civilized society, I had but a few seconds on the air before the host pressed the button on me. So much for even ‘conservative” mainstream” media!
Now that bicycle use has become “politically correct,” at least in the urban northeastern USSA, I haven’t heard of any such proposals in years. The mass hysteria/hypochondria has for me now removed ALL transportation options but bicycle, foot, and private car, because I WILL NOT diaper for ANYONE. Back in early May 2020, near what proved to be only the beginning of this “virus” nonsense, I tried to board a commuter train in Cambridge, MA bound for the suburbs- the conductor, as well as other passengers, DEMANDED that I diaper while proffering several diapers in my face, as a condition of boarding. You should have seen the odd looks of these people as I stepped back off the train while plainly telling them I’ll walk out to the suburbs before I’ll submit to the Holy Rag. I haven’t been anywhere near a taxi, Uber, bus, train, or plane ever since, so that leaves me with Private Car, Bicycle, Foot or, perhaps, Skateboard. Now that the Bicycle has now become Politically Correct, perhaps I can now use that without fear of hassles from Dystopian Storm Troopers!
Morning, number one!
I applaud your manly stand against the Holy Rag. I wish more had the same willingness to endure some inconvenience for the sake of a very important principle. This aversion to conflict for the sake of convenience will be our undoing.
“I’ve used a simple pedal-powered bicycle in the Berkshires in western Massachusetts, and I’ve had to dismount and walk on lengthy down slopes just to limit the speed.”
Interesting. I just use my brakes.
The brakes on a bicycle are not alway enough on the hills of the Berkshires, especially when I’m carrying a lot of cargo. Those pads wear out very fast under these conditions. Not to mention that sudden application of the brakes to the front wheel can toss you right over the handlebars…so I simply dismount and walk if the slope is too steep/lengthy. Hills like this are common in the Berkshires of western Massachusetts!
On the old Western Flyer, you only had a brake on the rear wheel.
I have no trouble with the Rocky Mountains towing a fully laden BOB trailer using brakes. Bicycles in the past 20 years have benefited greatly from trickle down disc brake technology from motorcycles. But, sure, riding anything on two-wheels is inherently less safe. Risk-reward.
Yeah, in recent years, bikes have gotten DISC BRAKES! They can be either mechanical or hydraulic, but they exist for bicycles now, particularly downhill mountain bikes, which can achieve high speeds over rough terrain. I think that a bicycle equipped with disc brakes, good wheels, and appropriate tires could be safe, provided the rider pays attention…
I had to chuckle at USSA. I think I will start calling it that now. Thank you .
At one time if I had the wind pushing me I could cruise on a bicycle at 35mph on flat ground if I was on an arterial road. In a few instances I was able to go as fast as the cars on 45mph PSL road with a slight downhill. The speed by itself is not scary at all.
Going 45mph (or even 35mph on a lesser bicycle) on a steep downhill and picking up speed, now that starts to get scary. It’s the acceleration from gravity that you can’t easily control that makes it scary, not the speed itself. On flat and almost flat ground it’s not scary because just stop pedaling and the bicycle slows down dramatically. Change gears and you slow down. Coming down a mountain that doesn’t work.
I should be clearer… 45 with a slight downhill and the wind pushing. The wind direction makes all the difference in the world. That same road with the wind in my face I am lucky to maintain 20mph even in the the downhill parts.
> Going 45mph (or even 35mph on a lesser bicycle) on a steep downhill and picking up speed, now that starts to get scary.
If you’re just using gravity, wind resistance kicks in pretty quickly. The human body on a bicycle isn’t the most aerodynamic thing in the world. 🙂
There was a steep hill not far from where I used to live when I was a kid. I’d take my 20″ BMX down it and regularly hit 35+ mph by the bottom of the hill. One time, with a tailwind, I got up to just over 40. The same day, I went home, swapped my bike for Dad’s 3-speed, and took that down the same hill while the wind was blowing. Even with being able to pedal longer before it became ineffective (due to the gearing), I think I only got the 3-speed up to 35 where my BMX had just done 40. I blame the taller profile of me on the 3-speed vs. me on the BMX for the difference.
I’ve not had the air slow me much. Now I’m a flat lander so my experience with mountains and good sized downhills is limited but I was going uncomfortably fast before hitting any sort of air resistance limit. And when the cars aren’t passing me any more I know I am going at a pretty good clip. Using the brakes not go any faster than that it’s disconcerting.
Scott,
A recumbent bike will give you a better, lower profile against aerodynamic drag. All bicycle speed records have been set on ‘bents. Recumbents were used in bike racing, and they KICKED ASS because they offer much lower drag! Of course, the cycling federation outlawed recumbents, which is why you don’t see ’em on the Tour, Giro d’Italia, etc.
OTOH, on an upright (i.e. conventional) bicycle, you’re expending up to 80% of your energy just to move the air out of the way. Why do you think that groups of cyclists ride single file? It’s so they can draft and cheat the drag. Of course, they have to cycle out the lead rider every so often.
It’s not the home made electric assist bicycles or even the kind a person would buy that’s the issue. It’s these phone-app bike share things that are rented and tracked that are the problem. These being pushed by tax and central bank subsidy. The idea is that you won’t have your own untrackable paid for home made e-bike, you’ll rent, from them.
The future the 50s promised us included flying cars, hypersonic planes and rocket ships.
These days, they expect us to get excited about “sustainable e-mobilty transportation solutions.”
Ever see that picture of the astronaut on the moon, next to the lunar lander, above a caption that reads, “This was done with a slide rule.”
It’s as if we started regressing as a civilization once computers became commonplace.
Air travel is basically frozen in the 1950s, at least for the United States and the countries who follow the guidelines of the FAA. Aircraft hardware is pretty much the same cost as an automobile, with the same sort of depreciation. The cost is in all the requirements for flight, including the cost of acquiring all the certification necessary to make a personal aircraft practical transport. And it is one of those industries where technological advances increase the cost instead of allowing Moore’s law to decrease them.
Not saying that the FAA is useless, but from what I’ve observed the civil aviation community does a pretty good job of self-policing. Given that the wages of sin are death, I can understand why.
Unfortunately there is no room for the free individual in aviation. When I was getting my private pilot schooling I began to realize what a bunch of prigs I was associating with. An awful lot of the culture comes from the military/jet jock cadre.
Aircraft still use magnetos for God’s sake, and updraft carburetors. There are some good but no longer relevant reasons for this, but actual innovation is stifled completely by bureaucrats and lawyers. New light planes like a Cessna 172 were the price of 2 or 3 new cars in the 1960’s and private pilot training was not prohibitive. Now entry level “light sport” aircraft (very low performance only capable of 2 passengers) run about 100k and certificated general aviation stuff starts about 250k.
Just like TPTB want it- travel is a privilege and not for the peasants.
Ernie,
The good thing about mags is that they can run INDEPENDENT of the aircraft’s electrical system; even if you totally lose your electrics, the engine will still run. That’s an important consideration when you can’t just pull over when the engine dies!
But yeah, the costs of aircraft and flying have gotten RIDICULOUS! A brand new C-172 will set you back like $400K now! A C-182 is what, $600K? If you want to buy used but have to overhaul or replace the high time engine, that’ll set you back $25K-$30K easy. Shoot, even a Continental O-200 on a C-150 will cost you about $25K for overhaul if you have Continental replace the engine with a factory reman.
Back in the late 1980s or so, Porsche, whic made air cooled engines back then, offered an optional engine for the Mooney. It offered modern electronics and all that. The Porsche powered Mooney replaced your throttle, prop, and mixture controls with just ONE control; it was an early form of FADEC that greatly reduced pilot workload. It was great! For whatever reason though, it didn’t sell well, so it was dropped…
Bicycles are for the most part recreational, not transportation.
I am in the midwest USA, where they are generally useless in the winter. I put my bike up on the wall in the garage in November and it stays there until April most years. I would be crazy to ride it in the snow.
And the last thing most busy downtowns need are more crazy people on bicycles. The package messengers on those bikes are menaces on the sidewalks and streets in DT Chicago. They ride the wrong way on streets, run red lights, are on sidewalks with lots of people walking.
One thing that the planners forget, until they get us out of our cars, many of us avoid places like DT Chicago. I used to go there regularly, but since driving there is an expensive pain (and restaurant meals come with nearly 25% tax rate), and public transportation generally sucks I rarely venture there anymore. Politics have ruined Chicago.
Even out in the county bicyclists are nuts. Most seem to think THEY paid for the road. That THEY have the right of way at all times. That it’s perfectly acceptable to block traffic as they entertain themselves.
The new urbanists have ruined Chicago transportation. They hate automobiles, but they don’t like bicycling or transit despite their claims. So they create things that ruin all three at the same time. See people who really like bicycling wouldn’t do the nonsense they’ve done to the streets that make bicycling something like one would do as a child if it’s feasible at all because of how they’ve ruined things. And transit? If one liked transit they would advocate it to go where people want to go when they want to. Instead they want to use it to dictate where people can go and when.
I don’t bother going into the city proper any more since major lightweight caused the only things I went into the city for to be canceled this year. They make everything a hassle to even so much as go outside your own neighborhood. Want to visit someone? Oh they live in residential permit zone. Want to go to a business? The leased out to crony corporation parking meters or some other permit parking zone. Want to take the CTA? it doesn’t go where you need to go when need to go. Meta? Even worse. F it.
How will micromobility work? It’s fine in a city environment with its high traffic volume, low traffic speed, and short distances to be traveled. How will that work in suburbia though? In suburbia, the traffic volume is lower; the traffic moves at higher speed; and the distances traveled much greater. That is to say that micromobility will not work in suburbia or the rural areas where many live.
I suppose it’s to “nudge” us in to the cities, so as to usher in UN Agenda 2030. That begs another question: where will all these people GO? Did anyone think of that?
You know what I think? I think it’s long past time we, the people, rise up and LYNCH these psychopath technocrats and globalists behind this shit!
Now Mark, you cannot just lynch them. They need to be impeached/removed, tried, and THEN executed. Lynching implies action by an unreasoning mob. They nead the Ceausescu treatment.
All these socialists are going to be in for a surprise when the Marxists take over. UBI will be what’s sold, but not how things will work. In actual communist countries, unemployment is illegal. Everyone has to work. I’m going to have some serious schadenfreude when I see it, even though we’re all going to be stuck with the same authoritarian hellhole they are.
Don’t use the word “Authoritarian.”
“Authoritarian” derives from “Authority,” a word that carries strong connotations of legitimacy.
Use “Totalitarian” instead. Much more accurate.
Authoritarian as a concept and term lost all impact when Bubba American stopped questioning authority and learned to love their slave chains. Unfortunately totalitarian never will have an impact because, like, didn’t we win the Cold War or something to defeat it?
That’s a fair point.
Mattacks,
In East Germany everyone had a “job,” but not everyone was gainfully employed.
My uncle in East Germany, whom I visited many times, often for weeks at a pop, worked in a factory, but he said that only about a third of the people actually had work to do. Technically they had “jobs,” but they did not actually do anything.
He said it was demoralizing for many. Apparently they’d just sit around and pretend to be doing things or otherwise preoccupy themselves, but they had to be there.
It’s kind of like government work today. It’s all a jobs program, but the reason why it’s been growing so rapidly is because the Global Elites knew that the more people they had on their payroll the more those people would comply.
We’ve become a society that has literally now sold its soul(s).
We’re worshipping mammon uber alles! It’s ungodly to the core and we’re about to pay the price as a whole.
People in East Germany barely had what they needed. Few had more and what they did have, there really wasn’t a lot to spend it on.
The East German/Communist model collapsed because there was a “West.” But where we are headed the entire world is going to be like East Germany with no “West” to offer hope. And frankly, we see what the final destination of the coopted West is now.
People need to prepare for the worst. We’re about to find out whether we’re the “Home of the Brave,” or the land of the frightened cowards. Based on how people are reacting to mask edicts, not even laws, with little or no consequences, I’m hardly hopeful that when the screws really get applied that they’ll all of a sudden find courage.
I’m ready to go down resisting. I’m prepared both physically and mentally/emotionally.
Funny, we live in a nation full of tough guys with Gadsen Flag bumper stickers who’ll offer to beat the hell out of your for passing them on the highway, but when something threatens their lives, their onions shrivel up and they blow away like fairy dust.
I’m not hopeful.
Hi 37,
Amen.
I am prepared as well. And appalled by the needless servility. The “mandates” have no teeth in most areas and there isn’t even an attempt to enforce them in many and yet the presence of a sign on the door and social pressure applied via TeeVee and their scolding wives and cuckold husbands is enough to get them to don the Holy Rag and play Sickness Kabuki.
It is pitiful – precisely the right word. Because not necessary. All people need to do is say no – and not even say it. Just show it, by not wearing it.
But 99 percent of them just mooooo – and will do whatever they are told because they are scared about what might happen if they don’t, failing to understand what is going to happen because they do.
But, as a Russian in the Soviet Union pointed out many years ago, “We pretended to work, and they pretended to pay us”.
I tried a friends mountain bike version, and I have to say, wow, they are cool as crap.
His could dial in assist levels from pretty high assist to almost no assist. He said he has worked his way down to 10-30% assist, I guess from getting in better shape over time.
The high assist was a little weird/scary……
I think he said in lower assist levels, he can get 20-30 miles.
His is fairly higher-end unit I think.
It’s the next iteration of the electric scooters that now litter the sidewalks of urban centers. Just tap the app and off you go, then leave it wherever. Like having your own Hop On Hop Off tourist bus. Amusing to watch adult children use these electric douche canoes, sending pedestrians scurrying for cover. How pathetic, that these lazy, obese, adult coloring book-requiring plebes now need electrified bicycles. But wouldn’t electric tricycles or electric big wheels be better suited for their psyche?
Yes, cribs on wheels!
Wikipedia: ‘The federal Consumer Product Safety Act defines a “low speed electric bicycle” as a two or three wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals, a top speed when powered solely by the motor under 20 mph (32 km/h) and an electric motor that produces less than 750W (1.01 hp). The Act authorizes the Consumer Product Safety Commission to protect people who ride low-speed electric vehicles by issuing necessary SAAAAAAAAAFETY regulations.’
As with cars, e-bikes are crippled by regulation. One is shocked — SHOCKED — that e-bikes are still sold without an air bag on the handlebars. /sarcasm
The one use I would have for an e-bike is speeding up the return leg of a nearby four-mile, 1,700-foot descent to a scenic site, on a national forest road that’s closed to motor vehicles. With gravity down and e-power up, the eight-mile round trip could take as little as an hour, versus a half day if one walks or pedals up the steep grade in granny gear. But e-bikes are ‘motor vehicles,’ so that’s out.
The late Walter Williams loved to take 25-mile bicycle road trips, under his own power. He did so by his choice, not because encroaching regulation backed him into a corner.
You’re right about kids not leaving. My sister has 2 “kids”, the oldest is 39, youngest 36. Still living with her, never left. They both have four year degrees. Oldest was selling appliances last I knew, and the younger one is unemployed because her company went out of business because of corona shutdowns. What a world.
Yes, it’s coming. Slowly but surely. UBI trials are underway around the world. Crypto currency will make it more easily implemented. Crypto currency is programmable which makes it perfect for that. The Great Reset.
yes…more (((them))) and way less for the goy.