Derangement
-
Dennis Prager
This past weekend, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd added another column to the myriad irrational and hysterical pieces about the "existential threat" climate change allegedly poses to human life.
As I do after almost every piece I read on the internet, I read comments submitted by readers.
One provided me with an epiphany.
It was a comment submitted by New York Times reader "Sophia" of Bangor, Maine:
"I have one child, a daughter, who told me age 8 that she would never have a child because of global warming. She's now 34 and has never changed her mind. So I will not experience a grandchild. For her wisdom, I am grateful. I would be heartsick if I did have a grandchild who would have to experience the onslaught of changing climate."
It is hard to imagine greater proof than that comment of the power of mass media and of the left. That a normal woman would celebrate her daughter's choice not to be a mother and not to make her a grandmother can only be described as deranged. No normal-thinking human being would think that way. Jews had children during the Holocaust and made sure to have children if they survived the Holocaust.
Does this deranged woman know how few people are dying due to weather-related incidents in the era of global warming?
Danish statistician and economist Bjorn Lomborg noted this past week:
"Over the past hundred years, annual climate-related deaths have declined by more than 96%. In the 1920s, the death count from climate-related disasters was 485,000 on average every year. In the last full decade, 2010-2019, the average was 18,362 dead per year, or 96.2% lower.
"In the first year of the new decade, 2020, the number of dead was even lower at 14,893 -- 97% lower than the 1920s average ...
"The preliminary estimate of 2021 climate-related deaths (is) 5,569 or 98.9% lower than the 1920s ...
"The newest Lancet study of heat and cold deaths show(s) that cold 'vastly' outweigh heat, and that climate actually has dramatically lowered (the number of) total death(s) ... "
Of course, none of that matters to Sophia -- because she relies on The New York Times (and probably NPR and CNN) for her understanding of the world.
For more proof of how deranged many New York Times readers -- and Washington Post readers, CNN viewers and NPR listeners -- are because they rely on these sources for what they believe about the world, here are some replies to Sophia's comment from other New York Times readers:
B. Rothman, New York City: "I completely agree. I have 6 grandchildren and weep inside for the calamitous life that is ahead for them."
Ida Martinac, Berkeley, California: "I weep with you, Sophia. Whenever I look my 11 year old daughter in the eyes I feel so many emotions: guilt for bringing her into this dying world."
Liberal, Texas: "I feel your pain. I have 2 sons. Neither one will have children and their partners agree. I'll never have grandchildren. But I also realize that their decisions have in some way been molded by me. I am proud of their decision."
Liz, Portland: "Frankly, as someone who has been concerned about climate change, and observing what is happening over the last ten years with real dread, I do not understand why anyone in the last ten years would voluntarily have a child."
CC, Sonoma, California: "My only daughter shares your daughter's feelings. I will have no grandchildren. As I watch my peers enjoying their final years surrounded by grandchildren, I can't help feeling a little jealous. At the same time ... our daughters are stepping up to the challenge. I'm proud of them."
Marisa Leaf, Brooklyn, New York: "I, too, am coming to terms and accepting that my 36 year old son will not have a child as well -- for stated reasons. It is painful for me when I watch other young men and women his age going about town with their children. But I understand, and concur, on an intellectual level, that of course they're right. Bringing more children into the world these days is an existential worry. And irresponsible. So, as I grieve for our planet, I also grieve for the grandchildren that I will never have."
What do all these deranged reactions have in common? How could so many people living in the healthiest, wealthiest society in human history welcome not having grandchildren?
The answer is they have been brainwashed by the media (and college). They have read and heard nothing -- absolutely nothing -- by scientists and scholars (such as Steve Koonin of NYU, Richard Lindzen of MIT or William Happer of Princeton, to name just three) who have studied climate change and found the hysteria morally as well as scientifically indefensible. It is not possible to live a life insulated from left-wing ideas. But it is extraordinarily easy to lead a life insulated from all non-left-wing ideas.
So, then, the epiphany I had was this: A majority of people will believe anything the mass media tell them.This is especially true of those who received a college education. Colleges teach students not to question, not think for themselves and not to think rationally.
That is why many people believe the world is coming to an end; it is good not to have children or grandchildren; men give birth; Russia colluded with the Trump campaign; Israel is an apartheid state; all-black dormitories on college campuses are progressive; there should be fewer police; it is fair to women to allow biological men to compete in women's sports; and myriad other absurdities.
There is no other explanation for these deluded readers of The New York Times.
However, I do agree with them on one point. I, too, support their children's decisions not to have children. The world doesn't need more fools.
-
@jolly said in Derangement:
What do all these deranged reactions have in common? How could so many people living in the healthiest, wealthiest society in human history welcome not having grandchildren?
The answer is they have been brainwashed by the media (and college).Pop culture, Mr Prager. Pop culture.
-
I'll never forget the November 2016 morning after Trump was elected, when a female co-worker started a meeting by relating to me how her nine year old son cried at the results. She said this to impress upon me what a tragedy had just occurred. Something so vile, even children are crying. Meanwhile, all I heard was that politics was a main topic of discussion in her household, and her kid, at nine years old, was fully indoctrinated into her tribe. Child abuse? Sure, of course. But normal, for the leftist tribe of today.
-
@jolly said in Derangement:
Danish statistician and economist Bjorn Lomborg noted this past week:
"Over the past hundred years, annual climate-related deaths have declined by more than 96%.Well, Dr. Lomborg, as an economist you should be familiar with this famous observation: "Past Performance Is Not Indicative Of Future Results."
I wonder. Is it more foolish to read NYT and WaPo and all those other sources that are stupid because they disagree with you, or to form your opinions from the tribe you so comfortably surround yourself with so as not to suffer the slings of intellectual challenge?
You've done pretty well for yourself pursuing the latter course, haven't you?
Here's a thought, Dennis Prager, aka Mr. Self-Satisfied Fatuousness: How about a little of both? God forbid you should learn something from the heinous NYT, but think what it'll do for your rep for broadmindedness -- now more calcified than Death Valley. You'll be a hit at parties!
The future will tell who's right -- the pro-climate changers or the anti-climate changers. The more even-handed is one's education of self, the less foolish you will look if you are proven wrong.
Just sayin'.
'
-
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@jolly said in Derangement:
o...Do you think people should not have children because the NYT promotes the theory of man-made climate change?
Enlighten me; perhaps I embedded that point in my post above without realizing it.
The question -- like so many of your questions -- is unanswerable in its form. But I'll try. I don't give a damn what people decide to do, and I don't give a damn which source they use to make their decisions. I do give a damn how well informed they are before making them, and particularly in the present era, they won't do that by sticking to one "truth" over another.
You know what's funny? People like Prager get off big laffs mocking the fools who slavishly follow the NYT -- but have zero problems with people who believe every word out of his keyboard. Yessir! That's what puts the ol' maple syrup on the pancakes, amirite?
-
Freaking Prager.
The rest of the townsfolk are trying to rescue the tsunami victims and he's broadcasting proudly that water damage of that scale is highly irregular and we should all find it shocking.
Yes, please, let's yet again list out all the histrionic shit the left has been peddling for, oh, the past 20 years or so. It's cathartic, and plus at the end of it we all get to feel better about ourselves because we all know better.
Everyone knows not having kids is a modern liberal virtue, and climate change is often cited as the reason. Sorry, I'm not at all shocked, I've been on the internet at some point since 2004.
I'll start listening to Prager (and plenty of others for that matter) once he starts entertaining some possible solutions that don't involve "I'm right and liberals have something wrong with them." Condemning the mugger for his amorality isn't going to keep him from shooting you, you're just upping your chances.
-
If there's a petition to sign stating my agreement that not having kids because of global warming is a derangement of the human psyche, caused entirely by the ideas assigned to us by the culture we were born in, I'd sign it.
I'll never forget the time I saw a particular elderly white progressive woman write, in a neighboring forum, that she believes white males should voluntarily step down from their jobs so minorities could have them. I'm pretty sure this person has sons. Crazy? Or a consequence of our mainstream cultural ideas? It's like some people become addicted to feeling virtuous. To feeling superior down deep in their very human souls.
Education is extremely important.
-
@horace said in Derangement:
If there's a petition to sign stating my agreement that not having kids because of global warming is a derangement of the human psyche, caused entirely by the ideas assigned to us by the culture we were born in, I'd sign it.
I'll never forget the time I saw a particular elderly white progressive woman write, in a neighboring forum, that she believes white males should voluntarily step down from their jobs so minorities could have them. I'm pretty sure this person has sons. Crazy? Or a consequence of our mainstream cultural ideas? It's like some people become addicted to feeling virtuous. To feeling superior down deep in their very human souls.
Bear with me here for a second:
Say there's this white guy who grew up in Baltimore. Terrance was a black kid and a buddy of his, and he was cool and all—liked basketball, played the same video games, had a Hutch just like this white kid—but Terrance wouldn't be so cool about hanging out with this guy when Terrance's other black friends were around. It's not something they ever talked about, it was just kind of a thing.
This white kid also knows Juan, who's hilarious, but he has to put up with some bullshit at home about being friends with Juan because his old man doesn't trust Juan's family.
And he likes Kim okay, but Kim's got some serious hangups regarding his parents' expectations and as a result he drinks way too much and it gets weird sometimes.
In adulthood, I don't care how liberal or conservative that guy is, how rich or how poor, what neighborhood he lives in, or what he does for a living, there's a 0% chance he's going to get into virtue signaling or CRT.
Please love yourself.
-
@aqua-letifer said in Derangement:
@horace said in Derangement:
If there's a petition to sign stating my agreement that not having kids because of global warming is a derangement of the human psyche, caused entirely by the ideas assigned to us by the culture we were born in, I'd sign it.
I'll never forget the time I saw a particular elderly white progressive woman write, in a neighboring forum, that she believes white males should voluntarily step down from their jobs so minorities could have them. I'm pretty sure this person has sons. Crazy? Or a consequence of our mainstream cultural ideas? It's like some people become addicted to feeling virtuous. To feeling superior down deep in their very human souls.
Bear with me here for a second:
Say there's this white guy who grew up in Baltimore. Terrance was a black kid and a buddy of his, and he was cool and all—liked basketball, played the same video games, had a Hutch just like this white kid—but Terrance wouldn't be so cool about hanging out with this guy when Terrance's other black friends were around. It's not something they ever talked about, it was just kind of a thing.
This white kid also knows Juan, who's hilarious, but he has to put up with some bullshit at home about being friends with Juan because his old man doesn't trust Juan's family.
And he likes Kim okay, but Kim's got some serious hangups regarding his parents' expectations and as a result he drinks way too much and it gets weird sometimes.
In adulthood, I don't care how liberal or conservative that guy is, how rich or how poor, what neighborhood he lives in, or what he does for a living, there's a 0% chance he's going to get into virtue signaling or CRT.
Well, I'm not sure such a person would be definitely uninterested in virtue signaling, but if your point is that personal experience trumps cultural ideas, sure, I'd agree it's important. But to the topic at hand, global warming, nobody really has much in the way of personal observation. It's entirely dominated by cultural ideas and the emotional valence given to them, by how they are presented. ("Existential threat to all of humanity, within our lifetimes", etc.)
Education is extremely important.
-
@horace said in Derangement:
Well, I'm not sure such a person would be definitely uninterested in virtue signaling, but if your point is that personal experience trumps cultural ideas, sure, I'd agree it's important.
Well, I see this mete out all the time where I live, which is fairly close to Baltimore. White liberal-folk from Montgomery County can very often check all the pop culture boxes. But in Baltimore County? Might be a lot of liberals there, but a much larger proportion of them are less silly about race.
In other words, I don't think pop culture is the culprit. It's pop culture filling in for a dearth of personal experience.
But to the topic at hand, global warming, nobody really has much in the way of personal observation. It's entirely dominated by cultural ideas and the emotional valence given to them, by how they are presented. ("Existential threat to all of humanity, within our lifetimes", etc.)
Honestly I think that's just the environmentalists taking their queues from infomercials. You get more agency behind your bullshit if you qualify everything you say with, "but you've got to act NOW!"
I understand that, but what I don't understand is their commitment to ignoring the wins we've had over the past 50 years. We've actually corrected a lot of environmental problems, and we're working on others. It's not that they gloss over them, they're completely covered up if not outright disbelieved.
-
The NYT is mainstream media and Maureen is one of their longest running commentators. In the parlance of the day, an "influencer".
His point is that this paper, through both its editorials and its coverage, are crafting a certain world view among a certain portion of the American population. And that coverage is echoed in other "papers of record", such as the Washington Post, along with broadcast media, such as CNN.
The coverage is powerful enough or some people are so susceptible to this portion of the national media, that they have chosen not to procreate while living in the most abundant society this earth has ever seen. Historically, downturns in population rates occur during bad times, not good.
So...Is the NYT or the Post to be no longer revered as nothing more than pop culture? Have they vaulted into worthlessness? You tell me...
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@jolly said in Derangement:
So...Is the NYT or the Post to be no longer revered as nothing more than pop culture? Have they vaulted into worthlessness? You tell me...
To a large degree, yeah. But not completely.
-
@catseye3 said in Derangement:
@jolly said in Derangement:
o...Do you think people should not have children because the NYT promotes the theory of man-made climate change?
Enlighten me; perhaps I embedded that point in my post above without realizing it.
The question -- like so many of your questions -- is unanswerable in its form. But I'll try. I don't give a damn what people decide to do, and I don't give a damn which source they use to make their decisions. I do give a damn how well informed they are before making them, and particularly in the present era, they won't do that by sticking to one "truth" over another.
You know what's funny? People like Prager get off big laffs mocking the fools who slavishly follow the NYT -- but have zero problems with people who believe every word out of his keyboard. Yessir! That's what puts the ol' maple syrup on the pancakes, amirite?
I worry about your sanity.
