#diversityisourstrength

America’s cultural revolution and the long march back to equality

Within 48 hours of the confirmation of the electoral votes, unelected tech giants displayed once again how they can dictate terms to the democratically elected leader of the free world and his followers.

The First Amendment might as well have been written in invisible ink.

Now other platforms are following suit, laying the groundwork to ensure directly/indirectly there will be little effort to help unite the country by restricting/cancelling access to conservative sites.

Who is inciting who exactly?

Three quotes to reflect on before we begin:

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

The one who does not remember history is bound to live through it again,”

and

History is written by victors.

The left is in raptures over Trump’s expulsion from Twitter. Of course they have no issues with cancelling those who don’t share their ideological views. Yet if you question their rights to free speech, hell hath no fury. After all everything that parses their fingertips is good, clean and wholesome. If you say otherwise you’ll be cancelled. Got it?

Yes, the argument will be made that privately run social media companies have the right to police those who may damage site integrity and promote the collective safety of subscribers. Have they been asleep at the wheel for the last 4 years? Even terrorists have been allowed to tweet without sanction.

The problem is that the unelected and unqualified overseers making those determinations to suspend others have shown time and time again they back the side not the principle. OJ Simpson on justice anyone?

A great example is Twitter’s Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth (@yoyoel), an avid anti-Trumper. Several days after the 2016 election he proudly tweeted, “I’m just saying, we fly over those states that voted for a racist tangerine for a reason.” We should sleep soundly at night that he also referred to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as “a personality-free bag of farts.” Surely there is no risk of conservative bias with the integrity team at Twitter…sleep soundly!

Black conservative Candace Owens proved just how biased Twitter is when she was suspended for replacing the word ‘white’ with ‘black’ and ‘Jewish.’ She proved the point with respect to the incendiary tweets made by the NYT’s then latest recruit, Sarah Jeong. Never let racism get in the way of the decision making process!

Facebook recently threatened to de-platform conservative comedian JP Sears for satire.

Now, Google has decided to remove conservative forum, Parler, from its Android store presumably just because Trump has endorsed it. So will every single thing that he has supported be shutdown or targeted? Watch out Goya!

Will Apple join the cultural revolution? Are all Parler users foaming at the mouth Trump cultists? Or do some simply like to entertain a wider spectrum of opinions?

Is this merely targeted anti-competitive behaviour? A secondary boycott? Has Parler actually committed any crime? Has Google been unethically marshaling the content and traffic of another private company to form the determination that it needs to be publicly sacrificed? Would it help to appoint a Google overseer to sit on the board of Parler, like Chinese corporates are now forced to accommodate? Will Rumble be the next conservative site to be axed from Android?

Can’t the free market determine whether Parler has a right to exist rather than a select few politburo officials from Google?

We can be sure that if Parler wasn’t experiencing the explosive growth it has had to date, Google would not have seen a need to expunge the threat. Alas too many wanted to seek an alternative platform to exchange ideas. It’s day one, year zero. Black is white. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Got it?

One has to question the legal basis for allowing a hateful and venomous platform like Twitter to function on Google Android but an upstart alternative – which couldn’t hold a flame to the incumbent – needs to be taken out?

Is this the type of healing we’ve been promised by the incoming administration? Restore unity by sitting idly by and allowing the media to silence those that disagree with them?

What better way for Biden to stamp his leadership credentials on uniting a fractured nation than stating how important the 1st Amendment is for all Americans.

But why bother? The tech giants are firmly on his side. After the last 4 years, it is high time to make sure that a monster of their own creation never upsets the political apple cart ever again. We await the glowing support of the climate change agenda, Paris, WHO, discrimination-driven racial equity and the benefits of allowing a path to citizenship or 11 million illegal immigrants.

It does not matter that Trump recently tweeted a video to his followers to go home peacefully and respect law and order. That was deemed incendiary and subsequently blocked. Don’t believe your lying eyes because we will be told what we can and can’t consume. Obviously we aren’t capable of thinking for ourselves.

Clearly to Jack Dorsey’s mob, it was imperative to prevent any sensible commentary by Trump from seeing the light of day. We wouldn’t want anything to challenge the narrative. The tech giant had to ensure that he was portrayed in the worst possible light before cancellation. No right of reply. Voltaire would be rolling in his grave.

We don’t deny Trump has said many silly things over his term but compared to some of the bile that has never faced sanction, it is laughable.

We fear that such moves will only fan the flames of division.

It seems these platforms want to proactively create an atmosphere that allows for the incoming administration to clamp down even harder on supposed enemies of the state. What better way than to douse their opponents in high octane fuel while carelessly playing with matches?

We are always amazed that more haven’t seen the TED talk by a black musician, Daryl Davis, who befriended the KKK by simply ‘listening‘ to them. That was all it took to get so many to hand in their robes.

Note the word “listen.”

Sadly, social media platforms have long drowned out reasoned debate well before the commissars found the need to jail dissidents with sanctimonious edicts.

This is a dangerous precedent being set. By muzzling a country that is built on a constitution that enshrines free speech, it is playing with fire. We ain’t seen nothing yet. America will be decisively cut in two.

In closing we’ve long argued that Trump pulled the scab off the festering wound of deep seated division. He was the catalyst. Not the cause. With the incoming administration, failure to address the growing power of big tech will lead to more people taking the law into their own hands.

We don’t condone unlawful behaviour but will be the least bit surprised if those who feel the most marginalized think they’ve nothing to lose.

If we thought 2020 was a horrible year, 2021 could well destroy that myth but thanks to social media you’ll only be able to view the world through the rose tinted glasses of willfully dishonest propagandists.

The social media giants will do well to remember that “before setting out on revenge, first dig two graves.”

Why should we believe in the science when such people are modeling it?

We were continuously told last year that we must follow the science on COVID-19. No ifs. No buts. We’re all in this together. Right?

Not so fast. Politicians continued to collect paychecks while forcing so many into financial destitution by preventing their right to earn an income. Even worse the political class continuously broke their own draconian rules which landed many of the less fortunate with fines, arrests and in the worst case scenario, prison. Rules for thee but not for me.

Back to the science.

One could be forgiven for possessing a healthy dose of skepticism in questioning the medical advisories by virtue of the constant flip-flopping on how to contain the virus.

Sweden has proven that lockdowns aren’t effective. That didn’t stop a me too approach exercised by most cities/states/countries to adopt economics-destroying stay-at-home orders. It wasn’t based on a science but a safety in numbers approach. The idea that there was less political risk by following a herd mentality rather than herd immunity.

Flu guru Dr Fauci told us masks were ineffective until they became a useful political tool for him to promote their use.

Now a multitude of vaccines are upon us, science doesn’t seem to be the only driver of decisions on how it should be administered.

Were the science to be followed to the letter, wouldn’t the best option be to save lives in aggregate? Wouldn’t that be to give it to the most vulnerable members in society first i.e. the elderly?

Well the CDC has modelers like Jo Walker. Walker identifies as a non-binary trans who goes by pronouns they/them. Walker’s Twitter handle makes a pretty strong case for putting social justice ahead of science. Walker is a fervent supporter of defunding the police and claims to live on stolen land. By that measure, it is not hard to believe that such public disclosure might reveal a certain personal bias.

We don’t know about you but all we look for in data scientists (or any other profession for that matter) is the ability to do the role competently.

Are modelers like Walker partly responsible for pushing the racial inequity narrative at the CDC? In a nutshell, given there are more whites in the 65yo and above category (who just happen to be among the highest risk of succumbing to COVID-19), the CDC believes there is a strong case for minorities being bumped up the queue even if it could result in a higher final death tally.

Put it another way, if minorities dominated the most risky categories (65+) the CDC would have no need to report it because it would merely be the right thing to do.

Expect 2021 to reveal more mind numbing social justice masked as science. So much for uniting people by promoting real equality. Use identity as the yardstick. The more oppression points the better. End segregation by enforcing it.

Then some wonder why fewer and fewer people are in this together. The CDC and many groups like it have ceased being reputable agencies and become activists pushing agendas unrelated to their mandated fields.

Identifying misinformation without facts

You have to hand it to government funded media networks. Just like Australia’s ABC, America’s NPR will peddle its belief system and tell you what is misinformation and what is not.

Here are some of the responses to an NPR poll listed under “incorrect statements”:

“Humans do not play a significant role in climate change

It scored a 69% false rating. Does NPR have facts to support that misinformation?

Have they read the amount of climb downs made by the UN IPCC with respect to have very low confidence that extreme climate events are in any way linked to global warming? Obviously not. The 2018 study compiled by the IPCC just reinforced the findings of the 2013 paper by an even greater degree.

Or the hilarious article in a climate alarmist newspaper that pointed to putting faith in the very investment bankers who they wanted burnt at the stake in 2008. As long as they sing the correct tune in their endeavors of crony capitalism.

Or perhaps the EU Parliament commitment to a climate emergency bill which voted on the following proposed amendment 95 (for), 563 (against), 9 (abstain) by MEPs:

Recalls that climate change is one of the many challenges facing humanity and that
all states and stakeholders worldwide must do their utmost to measure it
scientifically so that policy, and especially spending, is based on observable facts and not on apocalyptic fearmongering or unreliable models; emphasises that there is no scientific consensus on what percentage of climate change is anthropogenic and
what percentage is natural

Wouldn’t want pesky facts to get in the way of doubling commitments to the green climate fund. Openly vote to show evidence is irrelevant.

Of the 1,115 people polled to give a true/false answer on the statement “a group of Satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media” it returned a false rating of 47%.

Perhaps the 53% that returned a true/unsure vote merely thought elements of the statement were true. After all it wouldn’t be a stretch to suggest that elites are trying to control politics and media in a coronavirus lockdown world. Just look at the politicians breaking the very rules we must abide by. If we step out of our homes we risk instant infection from a disease with a 99.9% recovery rate.

With an ever complicit social and mainstream media peddling fear and checking their own facts by shutting down alternative viewpoints (aka free speech), what is so hard to fathom?

NASDAQ wants to enforce diversity on boards as a listing requirement

NASDAQ is pushing for SEC approval of a rule that would require public companies on its exchange to have at least one female director and one “diverse” director – one that self-identifies as an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ.

Companies would be required to disclose that diversity in its filings. Forgive us for being obtuse, but wouldn’t the ability to read a balance sheet or understanding corporate governance be the more relevant skillsets for shareholders? If the best candidates happen to be all women, LGBTQ or whatever other identity, wouldn’t shareholders applaud their appointment based on just being superior candidates as opposed to genitalia or who they choose to sleep with?

We’ve already seen how badly forced diversity programs have worked at companies like PG&E. Remember that the company had full data sets on the diversity of its workforce and suppliers but not the state of the infrastructure of its core business. Alas, not understanding the health of its main product led to the devastating forest fires in California last year sending the company into Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

The irony of the plan by NASDAQ is the partnership with Equilar. The picture above is the Equilar board which doesn’t seem to be playing by the very rules that NASDAQ wants to enforce on others. It reminds us of ACSI, which is a huge advocate for diversity on listed boards, but doesn’t even meet the very requirements it seeks to impose on others.

What if a prospective board member happens to be LGBT but doesn’t wish to disclose that fact as an individual member of privacy? What will happen if a company has to choose between a female, a member of the LGBT community, a person of colour or a female LGBT person of colour? Will more ticks in the identity box grant companies be seen as more advantageous in disclosure reporting even though the LGBT person is the most qualified? What will happen if prospective directors falsely claim they identify as something they are not, merely to be in the selection process? Will the companies check the validity by peering through the window of staff homes to ensure they are sleeping with the right person?

NASDAQ also wants to push the SEC to force private companies to adopt the same framework.

In a lecture we gave to a group of executive MBA students, we put up a chart where someone’s superannuation would have grown to $430,000, $180,000 and $130,000 given three different investment products over a decade. We asked for a show of hands as to which sum people wanted to retire on. Everyone wanted the $430,000. Surprise, surprise. When it was revealed that the first sum came from a direct investment in Harvey Norman, which doesn’t believe in all this woke diversity nonsense (despite having an exceptionally talented CEO who happens to be female, the group was surprised. The middle sum was the broader market index and the worst performer was the ESG fund. When asked would that change their mind, they all said no. Who knew? Being woke didn’t matter as much as being able to retire on a larger nest egg.

The students were more shocked to find out that the management fees for ‘woke’ products was higher than standard investment structures. Who knew that heavily promoting social justice would be more financially rewarding to the investment advisors pushing it? It is for the planet, diversity and their brand new speedboat you know!

When will regulators let shareholders determine who they see best fit to run the companies they choose to invest in? We have no issues seeing more diversity on boards, provided it is based on merit rather than forced quotas.

We can’t help but feel that ambitious people (of whatever incidental identity) don’t need such condescending structures. They have enough confidence in their own ability to succeed than to be patronised in a way that suggests that without intervention they can’t get ahead.

Unfortunately these programs are by their very definition are all about discrimination.

Diversity of thought would be a good start at the ABC

The ABC never gets it. The corporation was eaten by its own for showcasing its lack of diversity (in terms of identity) in political programming.

Ex-deputy editor of ABC Life, Osman Faruqi, tweeted:

Do the people who run ABC News not understand how weird this looks?…At some point, when you’re assembling these photos, you’d pause and think ‘Hmm something not quite right here’. It should so embarrassing that they shouldn’t be able get away with it. But who is going to hold them to account? Everywhere else is even whiter, lol.”

The ABC hit back at the criticism lobbed at it by posting its programs that highlight “diversity and inclusion.”

Unfortunately, the utter lack of “diversity of thought” is behind the long term decline in ratings. That would be a great area for the ABC to start.

We remind readers of the last internal survey at the ABC tucked away in a recent annual report.

The overall employee engagement score from the 2017 survey was 46%, down six points from the 2015 results. 6% down!!!!

This moved the ABC from the median to the bottom quartile when benchmarked with other Australian and New Zealand organisations. Bottom quartile!!!

Employees expressed the need for improvement in several areas, including:

• that the ABC Leadership Team needs to be more visible, accessible and communicate more openly.

• that the ABC needs to do a better job of managing poor performance. Even the staff want to move duds on. A commercial spirit among the staff?

• that employees want to know what action is being taken to address feedback received in the survey.

The ABC often harps out how tough it is doing despite $1bn in guaranteed annual revenue. The network whines at being asked for a pay freeze (which it rejected) while the private media sector has been forced to downsize in order to survive. Every time the budget is raised at the ABC, more staff are hired.

Maybe if the media outlet pushed for more diversity of thought, its ratings might start to climb. Perhaps TVNZ has the answer.

Biden faded fast and choked in the last section

First of all, Kristen Welker did a very good job as moderator. Even Trump praised her.

Joe Biden started off well but faded fast in the back half of the debate. He didn’t handle the saga around his son, Hunter, well. He sounded rattled and will only draw more eyeballs to the suppressed media coverage.

Trump explained his points far better that in the first debate. Getting rid of COVID in the first question allowed the more powerful points for Trump in the back half where he could made significant ground around the economy, foreign policy, race and health.

Trump executed well by slamming Biden for being a “politician” who promises stuff but doesn’t deliver. That he hasn’t achieved the things he proposes now in 47 years in politics or 8 years as VP. Biden even disparaged Obama by saying he can do things he wants if he is president.

When Biden raised Hitler in the debate, he started to back pedal fast. Why talk about Nazism?

Biden’s stupidity was to touch on $15 minimum wages to help small business. Is he nuts? What small business in trouble thinks that recovery will come through higher wages?

Biden asked people to fact check his position on fracking. He said he wouldn’t ban it in today’s debate but is on tape countless times saying he would. Too easy to prove he is lying. Biden’s renewables push was hopeless and Trump made it clear why the US doesn’t need to be in the Paris Accord.

At the very end Biden chucked the oil industry under the bus in the closing remarks of the climate change section. Trump pushed him and he took the bait to say he wants to phase it out for good. Surely not the thing to say in fossil fuel dependent swing states.

In summary, this election will be determined by “lived experience“. Nothing is more powerful than becoming irate at a politician telling you what you aren’t experiencing.

We think the actions of mostly despotic Democratic mayors and governors throughout coronavirus have sent a negative message about what happens when citizens lose control and cede power to law makers.

We still believe Trump has got this.

Sinister Big tech’s intentional election meddling

Big tech is determined to tell users what they deem is suitable for consumption. The top screen grab is from Facebook. Head of Comms, Andy Stone, made it clear the social media giant would curtail the Biden conflict of interest news story under the guise of ‘fact checking.’

The NY Post article that surfaced overnight revealed emails from Hunter Biden’s PC which showed he was leveraging his then VP father’s relationship with Ukrainians execs.

Twitter went to an even more interesting approach to suggest the NY Post link was “unsafe” to prevent views.

What we do know from history is that the more efforts made to cover one’s tracks, the more one guarantees to raise awareness to those problems on a stratospheric level.

Ultimately, big tech firms were granted immunity from prosecution as they promised to be mere hosts of content without fear or favour. Now that they are using discretionary editing, they should lose their sanctuary status and be liable to prosecution for suppressing free speech.

These are deep-seated liberal activist platforms. As businesses they are free to exercise commercial decisions. However they don’t have a right to flaunt laws without real world consequences.

Today big tech crossed a line and outed themselves as interfering in the election.

Driving under the influence of Trump Derangement Syndrome

If you think you’re having a bad day, spare a thought for this unhinged liberal who decided to sound off at Trump supporters while behind the wheel and crashing into the car in front all the while providing front row seats to the police behind her.

We always wonder how showing such intolerance can endear normal people to think the opposition is a viable and credible alternative.

Sent by a subscriber

An amazing synopsis:

A friend shared this and if I knew the original writer, I would absolutely give them credit. Warning- it’s long, but pretty darn accurate. Thanks Jon Jon.

We could not have said this any better:

“If you can’t stand Trump, and cannot possibly fathom why anyone would ever vote for him, let me fill you in.

It’s not that we love Donald Trump so much. It’s that we can’t stand YOU!

And we will do whatever it takes — even if that means electing a rude, obnoxious, unpredictable, narcissist (your words not ours) to the office of President of the United States — because the thing we find more dangerous to this nation than Donald Trump is YOU.

How is that possible you might ask? Well, you have done everything in your power to destroy our country. From tearing down the police, to tearing down our history, to tearing down our borders.

From systematically destroying our schools and brainwashing our kids into believing socialism is the answer to anything (despite being an unmitigated failure everywhere), while demonizing religion and faith, and glorifying abortion, violence, and thug culture.

From calling us racists every time we expect everyone of any skin color to follow our laws equally to gaslighting us about 52 genders, polyamory, grown men in dresses sharing public locker rooms with little girls, and normalize the sexualization of young children, you simultaneously ridicule us for having the audacity to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” or hang a flag on the 4th of July, stand for the national anthem, or (horror of horrors) don a MAGA hat in public.

So much for your “tolerance.” Do you see why we think you are hypocrites?

We’re also not interested in the fact that you think you can unilaterally decide that 250 years of the right-to-bear-arms against a tyrannical or ineffective government should be abolished because you can’t get the violence in the cities you manage under control. That free-speech should be tossed out the window, and that those who disagree with your opinions are fair game for public harassment or doxing. That spoiled children with nose-rings and tats who still live off their parent’s dime should be allowed to destroy cities and peoples’ livelihoods without repercussions.

That chaos, and lawlessness, and disrespect for authority should be the norm. This is your agenda. And you wonder why we find you more dangerous than Donald Trump?

Your narrative is a constant drone of oppressor/oppressed race-baiting intended to divide the country in as many ways as you possibly can. You love to sell “victim-hood” to people of color every chance you get because it’s such an easy sell, compared to actually teaching people to stand on their own two feet and take personal responsibility for their own lives and their own communities and their own futures. But you won’t do that, you will never do that, because then you will lose control over people of color. They might actually start thinking for themselves, God forbid!

This is why we will vote for Donald Trump.

Not because he is the most charming character on the block.

Not because he is the most polite politician to have ever graced the oval office.

Not because he is the most palatable choice, or because we love his moral character or because the man never lies, but because we are sick to death of you and all of the destructive crap you are doing to this once beautiful and relatively safe country.

Your ineffective and completely dysfunctional liberal “leadership”(?) has literally destroyed our most beautiful cities, our public education system, and done it’s damndest to rip faith out of people’s lives.

However bad Donald Trump may be, and he is far from perfect, every day we look at you and feel that no matter what Donald Trump says or does there is no possible way he could be any worse for our country than you people are.

We are sick to death of your stupid, destructive, ignorant, and intolerant behavior and beliefs — parading as “wokeness.” We are beyond sick of your hypocrisy and B.S.

We are fed up with your disrespectful divisiveness and constant unrelenting harping and whining and complaining (while you live in the most privileged nation in the world), while making literally zero contributions of anything positive to our society.

Your entire focus is on ripping things down, never ever building anything up. Think about that as there is something fundamentally very wrong in the psychology of people who choose destruction as their primary modus operandi.

When Donald J Trump is reelected, don’t blame us, look in the mirror and blame yourselves. Because you are the ones that are responsible for the rise of Donald Trump. You are the ones who have created this “monster” that you so despise, by your very actions. By your refusal to respect your fellow Americans, and the things that are important to us.

You have made fun of the “fly-over states,” the people who “cling to their guns and religion,” the middle class factory workers and coal miners and underprivileged rural populations that you dismissively call “yahoos” and “deplorables.”

You have mocked our faith and our religion.

You have mocked our values and our patriotism.

You have trampled our flag and insulted our veterans and treated our first responders with contempt and hatred.

You have made environmentalism your religion, while trashing every city you have taken responsibility for.

You scream from the rooftops about “global warming” and a “green new deal” while allowing tens of thousands of homeless people to cover your streets in literal sh!t and garbage and needles and plastic waste without doing a single thing to help them or solve the environmental crisis your failed social policies are creating.

But we’re supposed to put YOU in charge of the environment while gutting our entire economy to institute this plan when you can’t even clean up a single city??

You complain — endlessly — yet have failed to solve a single social problem anywhere. In fact, all you have done is create more of them.

We’ve had enough. We are tired of quietly sitting by and being the “silent” majority. So don’t be surprised when the day comes when we finally respond. And trust me it’s coming, sooner than you might think. And also trust me when I say it won’t be pretty. Get ready.

When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because you and your “comrades” have chosen to trash the police, harass law-abiding citizens, and go on rampages destroying public property that we have all paid for and you have zero respect for.

When Donald Trump is reelected it will be because we are sick of your complete and utter nonsense and destruction. How does it feel to know that half of this country finds you FAR more despicable than Donald J. Trump, the man you consider to be the anti-Christ? Let that sink in.

We consider you to be more despicable, more dangerous, more stupid, and more narcissistic than Donald Trump. Maybe allow yourself a few seconds of self-reflection to let that sink in. This election isn’t about Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden. This is about Donald Trump vs YOU.

So if on the morning of November 4 (or more likely January 19, by the time the Supreme Court will weigh in on the mail-in ballot fiasco that we are headed towards), and Donald J. Trump is reelected?

The only people you have to blame is the left-wing media drones and yourselves. You did this. Yep you.”

Kamala Harris sponsored fund bails out man charged with sexually assaulting 8-yo

As the media were too preoccupied praising Kamala Harris for making ‘Timberland boots cool again” – after they lambasted Melania Trump for wearing them several years ago – journalists overlooked the fact that the Minnesota Freedom Fund she openly endorsed bailed out Timothy Wayne Columbus.

He faces up to 30 years in prison for allegedly sexually assaulting an eight-year-old girl in 2015. He was released from a Minneapolis jail in early July on $75,000 bail, according to jail records.

In August, MFF paid $350,000 in cash to release twice-convicted rapist Christopher Boswell from jail. Boswell currently faces charges of kidnapping and sexual assault as well.

The fund bailed out Lionel Timms from jail in late July on a third-degree felony assault charge for allegedly assaulting a person on a bus. Timms was arrested again while out on bail for allegedly assaulting a bar manager, who was left with a traumatic brain injury.

MFF Interim Executive Director Greg Lewin released a statement in response to Timms’ second offence saying his arrest while out on bail was a “failure of the criminal justice system.

Deshaun Jermain Boyd was released from jail on $70,000 bail in July after being charged with 1st-degree aggravated robbery. He stomped on the head of a man with a cane and robbed him.

Do we need to go any further to show up a system where a potential president proudly paints criminals as victims?