YDS: The Clare Spark Blog

October 29, 2016

Hillary, Comey, and “faux feminism”

Filed under: Uncategorized — clarelspark @ 7:44 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,
Naviex/Achievement Hunter

Naviex/Achievement Hunter

Mulling over James Comey’s (ambiguous) “bombshell” announcement on October 28, 2016, earlier today, I posted this item on my Facebook wall: “After the initial euphoria, today I am still wondering if the Hillary supporters are motivated by faux feminism and/or compelling personal advantage in the welfare state/progressivism.”

This blog is about the meaning of “faux feminism”—my own attempt to distinguish the excitement over “the first woman candidate of a major political party” from the enthusiasm that some of us felt in the 1970s. I am guessing that it is faux feminism that may have taken in (moralizing) progressives of the “Left” in 2016.

For instance, I remember that the late Francine Parker organized a whole bunch of us in Los Angeles to protest an experimental production of the Mark Taper Forum because a male director was in charge, presumably messing with women’s heads. Francine, an antiwar documentary director herself http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/arts/22parker.html) ,  used to declare that she would defend “all women” anytime and anywhere. Yet this separatist impulse (reflected in Women’s Studies departments and in role-reversal*), stood in contradiction to the feminism that I preferred at the time—consciousness-raising that would ostensibly alert all women to their true conditioning as “the second sex.” (Such enlightened radical women would be distinguished from liberal feminists; Francine Parker fell between two stools)

Of course, “the movement” would end up as a hodge-podge of motives: Great Goddess Feminists, right-on Feminists (who, as NYC radicals, largely faded fast), New Age bourgeois Feminists, postmodern Feminists, and so on.

It is hardly surprising, given the confusion of “what women want” that Hillary and her “liberal” supporters would play “the Woman Card,” hoping to snare as many votes as possible. (For an anti-Trump review of feminism, see http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/27/hillary-clinton-and-the-history-of-women-in-american-politics; for a prior treatment by leftist-feminists of “faux feminism” see https://www.amazon.com/False-Choices-Feminism-Hillary-Clinton/dp/1784784613; for some of the reasons I left the Left, see https://clarespark.com/2014/05/10/why-i-left-the-left/.)

*role reversal: assuming that male characteristics are better, and that women and men are identical.

October 9, 2016

The Man of the Crowd must be a rapist

1934 image, Wikipedia

1934 image, Wikipedia

Donald J Trump now stands convicted of sexual assault and, almost as horrid, bad taste. https://clarespark.com/2014/12/18/rape-culture/.

Ask any “moderate” Republicans (i.e., closet social democrats), and they will tell you that they knew it all along. For many pundits (even on “fair and balanced” Fox), one “quasi-apology” is not enough, for the man’s essence must be rotten to the core, just like the “white working class” that he ostensibly represents in all its embarrassing  “misogyny.” (Even Charles Krauthammer, Chris Wallace, and Hillary Clinton share this liberal opinion, though they don’t mention class perspective, as I have. See https://clarespark.com/2009/08/24/the-people-is-an-ass-or-a-herd/.)

Who knew that Fox’s female anchors and featured players were such prudes, given their come-hither long eyelashes, heavy make-up, above-the-knee dresses/exposed thighs, high heels, (where possible) cleavage, and (usually) long, princess hair?

Why, one would suspect that these strong women are ardent defenders of the female sex, hence feminists, more interested in “character” and “judgment” than in policy (especially national security). If so, this would line up the Fox ladies with the most bigoted patriarchal types, accepting the stereotype that the “lower orders” (i.e., Trump supporters) are criminal by nature. https://clarespark.com/2009/08/24/the-people-is-an-ass-or-a-herd/.

trump supporters, Meme.com

trump supporters, Meme.com

October 4, 2016

Trump’s taxes and Clinton’s “sacrifice”

Photo by Thanh-Nguen from Les Mirages

Photo by Thanh-Nguen from Les Mirages

The media (including “fair and balanced” Fox) are raising a stink about Trump’s taxes as “revealed” by the New York Times on October 1, 2016. It is a misapplication of “family values” to the public sphere. I can’t believe that Hillary Clinton is constantly flouting the law, ostensibly in “the public interest” and getting away with this conflation of (appropriate) “sacrifice” and civil society (the latter of which now has gone the collectivist way of all flesh, celebrating the “oceanic feeling” of unity with the cosmos).

Who would deny that there is a measure of “sacrifice” entailed in having children? Both genders are trapped in the supposedly feminized sentimental culture that displaced economic considerations (the study of political economy,) since the antebellum period of the 19th century that I wrote about here: https://clarespark.com/2015/11/07/the-change-of-heart-explanation-for-dr-ben-carsons-redemption/,  https://clarespark.com/2009/08/24/the-people-is-an-ass-or-a-herd/, and https://clarespark.com/2009/10/10/ralph-bunche-and-the-jewish-problem/.

Intellectuals in both North and South underwent this transformation from 18th century empiricism, science, and humanism to the self-sacrifice and group-think inherent in reactive sentimental culture, just as the notion of culture has been deployed to curb moral but all-too  “revolutionary” sentiments grounded in economics, human nature, and the laws passed by the revolutionary bourgeoisie.

But it confirms everything I have written about the “moderate” male anti-capitalism of pseudo-progressives. (https://clarespark.com/2009/09/19/populism-progressivism-and-corporatist-liberalism-in-the-nation-1919/.)

Despite her ardent “feminism,” is Hillary Clinton turning out to be just one of the boys?

The Conjurer by H. Bosch

The Conjurer by H. Bosch

October 1, 2016

Pseudo-feminism and the Alicia Machado flap

Alicia Machado as depicted on HuffPo

Alicia Machado as depicted on HuffPo

[Ersatz “feminists” are prolonging this fight  on the grounds that Hillary was just “protecting her marriage.” So I ask, “what marriage”?]

This blog is about the political debate following Hillary Clinton’s criticism of Donald Trump’s alleged sexism at the tail end of the first debate. What is at stake here?

It is the mark of the upwardly mobile female to profess “feminism” while ignoring the facts of material existence. Many television figures, while promoting “inclusion,” ignore the controversies that have emerged since the second wave of feminism lapped at the shores in the late 1960s and 1970s. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism.

For instance, it is not clear that the claims of liberal feminists that men and women are biologically “equal,” stand up to scrutiny. One need not be a George Gilder-style biological determinist (see Sexual Suicide, published in 1973 as a critique of abandoned and abandoning women) to note that women who combine the roles of mother and breadwinner (i.e., who seek a career outside the home), may experience role conflict, apart from socialization in “sexist” institutions, as many feminists claim. Are such conflicts built into our female “nature,” or are they a symptom of the incomplete transition from home-bound Mom to female leader (e.g., in the media, military, or in politics and academe)?

Or take the pseudo-feminist outrage that Trump insulted Alicia Machado by allegedly calling her “Miss Piggy”. Do not these same defenders of science lecture us about obesity and the importance of exercise and nutrition? When Michelle Obama emphasizes such issues, do liberals carry on about her sexism and “fat-shaming?” (For a liberal feminist treatment of “fat-shaming see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-reaction-to-trumps-fat-shaming-reinforces-toxic-ideas-about-fatness/2016/09/30/800fba0c-872b-11e6-92c2-14b64f3d453f_story.html?utm_term=.192c7341b412.)

(For another controversy within the dominant social democracy, see the fuss over (materialist) “male science” versus mystical “female science.” Feminist science, it is said by our betters, would prioritize Green politics as the sane corrective to bizarre male empiricism. The “posthumanist” Donna Haraways of the world are in the same bag as the female defenders of equality in all things.

Fabrizio Terranova still of Donna Haraway film

Fabrizio Terranova still of Donna Haraway film

Speaking of Hillary Clinton’s rumor mongering, how do we know when we are not fascists?

Who owns the facts?

September 25, 2016

“Temperament” laced with “love”

Jungian archetype for Great Mother

Jungian archetype for Great Mother

See this first (https://clarespark.com/2012/05/15/progressive-uplift-vs-new-left-nihilism/. It quotes an anticommunist work from the progressive period devoted to uplifting recent immigrants, to self-control, i.e., “moderation” in all things for both rulers and the ruled.)

“Calm down!”

One of the tenets of this year’s presidential campaign has been that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the sane (centrist) alternative to wild man Donald J. Trump, the man of the crowd. This blog is about the deployment of the word “sanity” as against Madam Secretary’s “crazy,” “unpredictable” and “narcissistic” opponent.

The all-embracing Great Mother is played off against the Bad Father, a phony– even as he has managed to get the votes of the mob (in all its destructiveness and cries of “off with their heads”—the Jacobin Red Queen).  And yet, if there is another cop shooting of an “African-American,” liberals can rejoice that they have yet another opportunity to let their hair down by embracing primitivism in a black mob. (It is almost as satisfying as tap dancing.) Thus, the story out of Charlotte North Carolina elbows out the objectively more menacing terrorists in NYC, New Jersey, and Minnesota.

As I write this, really existing fascism goes unnoticed as ever so diverse progressivism/multiculturalism is rehabilitated by calling it the sane alternative to the madness of industrial society.

Let a thousand flowers bloom! http://meixianqiu.com/selected-works/let-a-thousand-flowers-bloom/.

Maoist slogan

Maoist slogan

August 19, 2016

What _____ “Community”?

Filed under: Uncategorized — clarelspark @ 7:20 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,

communityThis blog is about 1. What the establishment means by “community”; and 2. How the New Left generation erased “class” in favor of “race” (a deviation from early 1930s’ Communist ideology and practice).

All the trendy movements since the late 1960s have collaborated in the New Left project: feminism (i.e.,“the woman’s movement” privileges gender above all, hence the tears rolling down the cheeks of many Democrats as Hillary Clinton clinched the nomination); Greens; rock ‘n roll (primitivism); and all the cultural nationalisms approved by “ethnic” minorities.

For instance, here I mentioned that the black masses/underclass have been left behind by their upwardly mobile families and friends (https://clarespark.com/2016/07/09/understanding-black-lives-matter/), but I didn’t mention the erasure of class consciousness in the so-called “black community”  (https://clarespark.com/2014/11/27/what-black-community/). Such a dramatic change from “class” to “race” didn’t happen overnight; rather it happened as multiculturalism’s took hold in the late 1960s under the tutelage of such as Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan and the white liberal establishment (and all social democrats), aided and abetted by the aging [Stalinist] generation suffering from a failure of nerve, supporting such nonsense as “white supremacy.”

Such a move blended well with New Left anti-war movements and student strikes. But their predecessors in the radical movement of the 1930s, would have condemned organicism (the blessed union of Man and Nature) and “race” as bogus terms, rejected by liberal and radical anthropologists alike as excrescences of far right nationalism (i.e., fascism). Above all, the few true red radicals among them focused on the lack of “community” in any sense, for there was a structural class conflict, impeding any community of interests.

Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal class collaborationist programs were termed “social fascism” until the Popular Front against fascism was instituted after 1935. The Reds partook of the post-Enlightenment innovation of “dialectical materialism” by which they meant that the enlightened working class would take the vanguard of social change; history was inexorably moving toward working class rule. The “mechanical materialism” of the big bad bourgeoisie was a ruse, but their technology would provide for all in the new dispensation.

Neither political party in the US will talk about this history. The “far Left” is now occupied almost solely by social democrats, arguably the most proto-fascist movement in world history.

“Welcome to the future” as the television commercial promises. “Race” and “ethnicity” have been rehabilitated.

Differ two.com. image

Differ two.com. image

July 29, 2016

Hillary the driven

Filed under: Uncategorized — clarelspark @ 6:52 pm
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Telegraph.co  UK image

Telegraph.co UK image

This blog is a guess at what makes Hillary run. And why she wore a (mannish?) white pants suit during her acceptance speech at the DNC.

So much is obvious, but this blog attempts a peek into her psyche, extrapolated from mine as another good girl with anger issues.

There is something uncanny about HiIlary’s do-gooding, while at the same time undermining her credibility with easily discoverable errors. Like many high achievers, she seems determined to recreate the perfectly happy family writ large. Bill Clinton drove home this theme, by emphasizing his wife’s early prowess as the Great Mother of us all, thus vindicating Hillary’s welfare state (achieved by soaking the rich with their ill-gotten gains).

Remember the part about Hillary lining the drawers in their first tiny home? Chelsea Clinton mentioned drawers too, recalling the day by day notes that her mother left for her, to make sure that Chelsea had a perfect, detail-oriented mom while she was on the road, changing the world by aiding those less fortunate.

Who said that women can’t have it all?

But beneath the smiling surface she shows anger that powerful pundits will publicly admit, like Brit Hume, complaining about her stridency and hectoring tone. I will compare her rage (?) to the feelings experienced by other women driven by the imperative to hold the family together; at the same time, achieving upward mobility as an “independent” woman, and a slightly different political stance from her lower-middle class family (her parents were Republicans, and she began life in their steps). It is one hell of a balancing act.

For a full-appearing biography see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton.

The testimony of her husband and daughter attempted to vindicate Hillary as the steady presence that inspired them. If their appreciation rang hollow (except to the Democrat faithful, the television camera straying to women weeping), the remarks of Bill and Chelsea suggested compulsive perfectionism in Hillary.

Many women who strive to be as good as a man suffer from the same syndrome. By obsessive attention to detail combined with a smiling façade, we attempt the impossible (to be all things to all people).

Ivory soap ad, 1940s

Ivory soap ad, 1940s

Were the media not so undereducated regarding the woman problem, by turns tearing her down or building her up as a Superwoman, they might note that HRC makes errors that are easily discoverable. It as if, oddly, parts of her want to be discovered as a fraud and punished, even as she projects these qualities on her rival for the presidency, while she retains her Eleanor Roosevelt-style image of Ivory soap purity.

July 6, 2016

James Comey: the best (moderate) man

moderation-veranstaltungen-604x442In all the wrathful outpourings from politicians, pundits, and ordinary people since FBI Director James Comey’s announcement yesterday July 5, 2016 (declining to prosecute Hillary Clinton) no one, to my knowledge, has noted that “moderation” is the quality most admired by advocates of the “neutral state,” conflict-resolution/peace studies, and other pacifiers who keep our all-too-independent polity on the “strait” and “narrow” (quoting Matthew 7.14 in the New Testament, King James version).

Here is a partial list of prior blogs on the barely concealed violence in the discourses of “moderation.”

https://clarespark.com/2011/12/10/before-saul-alinsky-rules-for-democratic-politicians/, https://clarespark.com/2015/04/07/who-are-the-moderate-men/, https://clarespark.com/2010/06/15/the-classics-as-antidote-to-science-education/, https://clarespark.com/2009/09/15/making-mobs-with-bad-words-and-concepts/.

But there is more to say about the indignant responses to Director Comey’s apparent exoneration of Hillary Clinton. Lawyers, trained to be rational (when it suits them), can’t dissect the term “moderate” because lawyers are supposed to be disinterested parties to “the rule of law”—a notion that has been constantly reiterated since yesterday’s “bombshell” announcement.

It is not too difficult to demonstrate that it is scattered Independents and Constitutional conservatives who respect the advanced notion that there is one set of rules for rich and poor alike, but all that changed with the Progressive movement (and perhaps before “the living Constitution” became the battle cry for the compassionate elect.

AWOL Trends

AWOL Trends

Historians agree that we live in an age of irrationalism, oblivious to “traditional” notions of law and order. How to account for Hillary’s devoted following among women and young people? Although conservatives have been vocal in denouncing the “hyper-sexualization” of our post-feminist culture, such glorification of perpetual adolescence aided and abetted by malicious mischief in the mass media, I haven’t heard anyone attribute Hillary’s following to the widespread desire for conflict-free sex with as many partners as feasible, and without the possible consequences of pregnancy and child-rearing.

Indeed, for many intellectuals, Hillary is the “moderate” alternative to Dastardly Donald—the “extremist” who (secretly) hates the “man on the street.”

Moderation2

June 30, 2016

Disconnectedness

Filed under: Uncategorized — clarelspark @ 7:45 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,
painting by Mark Henson

painting by Mark Henson

When Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama makes the argument for drastic action to curtail “climate change” they will invariably deploy the term “connectedness” (implying 1. that “humanity” is “interdependent” and 2. that Mother Nature is imperiled and that all sensible creatures must take drastic measures to rescue Her: doctrines and recipes that may fit with “pantheism”).

This blog is about a disquieting dream I had last night in which the English language suddenly lost all meaning, being reduced to words that signified nothing. Perhaps it was triggered by the loss of facticity in the discourses of those “Greens” who swear by “settled science” (a contradiction in terms, as the heart of scientific method is ever “unsettled”, unlike, say, political ideologies/religions).

Or perhaps the dream had nothing to do with the latest shibboleths regarding “ecology”, but was triggered by the loss of focus and memory engendered by mass media, which never explores the connectedness of an event with history and context, but rather moves from one sensational event to another, with no overall analysis of what the series of experiences might have on various viewers or listeners. (See https://clarespark.com/2013/05/10/losing-focus-and-mass-media/.)

But above all, Hillary Clinton’s notion of “connectedness” is a feeling that evokes the “village” mentality she seeks to evoke, that fantasy of small town or family mutual caring before the anomie of the (heartless) Mammon-worshipping cities made the scene. (https://clarespark.com/2013/07/09/preconditions-for-hard-liberty/)

Or, have most words lost their meaning as “ignorant armies clash by night”?

Or, to protect my sanity, am I utterly disconnected from current events, feeling helpless to avert their threatening character?

girlwithgun

June 9, 2016

Sex and Aggression in Hillary’s following in either gender

celebrate-hippieThe theme of this blog is that free love and “the strong woman” (who prevails over men) may be more important to Hillary Clinton’s following than specific policy proposals or her character.

It is a mystery to many in the media why Democrats and Independents don’t “care” about Hillary’s past improprieties or crimes. In my view, they are ignoring the obvious: younger women are either happily promiscuous or on the marriage market often requiring a prolonged period of testing in bed. Hence, the conservatives’ taboo against abortion and contraception falls on deaf ears.

Many older married women, especially evangelicals and Catholics may object to such conduct. Indeed, the Democrat Party is not shy about emphasizing sexuality in their pitches to “the women’s vote” or to gays, including those bound permanently to domineering mothers. (https://clarespark.com/2012/10/03/the-sexual-revolution-1- and https://clarespark.com/2012/10/03/the-sexual-revolution-2/)

So much should be obvious; less clear is the role of media in elevating what critical 70s feminists called “role reversal”: if men subjugated women, the correct remedy was to beat men at their own game, and the “strong woman” came into her own: witness the superwomen so popular in mass media today. (For a stunning example in prominent feminist artist Judy Chicago, see https://clarespark.com/2012/11/15/female-genitals-as-red-flag/, whose uber-popular “The Dinner Party” failed to historicize female heroines, instead turning each one into vaginal images to be consumed by the viewer. In Judy Chicago’s oeuvre, sex becomes aggression, exemplified in her photo as “boxer.” legs spread wide apart.)

Judy Chicago Boxer

Do the numerous courses in the history of women fail to notice that although women have been subjugated throughout history, there can there be no doubt that Western women have benefited from the status revolutions conferred by such factors as Judaism, Christianity, and the Industrial Revolution.Patriarchy as it had been known for eons, was drastically modified.

We have yet to mark how much misogyny might be attributed to the growing power and influence of women in the West.

nunnery2

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.