Good Question

From Insty:

…also: “Whom do you vaccinate first?” [takes off Grammar Nazi armband]

That irritant aside, the question is a good one and is especially troubling in a case such as now, when the quantities are likely to be quite limited at first — especially when viewed against the global population of some six billion.

I’m going to be completely on the side of civilization here and say that whichever country developed the vaccine should have first call on the stuff (the dreaded “nationalist” worldview, fuck off, snowflakes).  The fact that Brits, Americans or Europeans (i.e. Western civilizations) would end up being likely ahead of the hapless denizens of sub-Saharan Africa or Southeast Asia… c’est la vie.  So that’s easy:  Western civilization (as the creators) benefits its members first, the rest later.

Let’s look at the situation within two countries who might develop the vaccine (needless to say, at huge cost in terms of research).

Ordinarily, vaccinations start either with children or with the most in need of vaccination — i.e. the populations at greatest risk from whatever pox is being vaccinated against.

Doesn’t work today, though.  In the first place, kids are the ones least at risk from Teh Chinkvirus, so there’s no need to start with them.

Of course, the population group most vulnerable to death from the Chinese Pox is that of the elderly;  but in today’s culture, where we Olde Pharttes are but a step or two away from being shoved onto ice floes by politicians and State institutions (cue:  granny-killer NYGov Cuomo and Britain’s NHS), there would be fainting fits all over the place at the thought of “wasting” the vaccine on people who don’t have long to live anyway.  So those two groups are, arguendo, excluded.  Which leaves the rest.

Then the “meritocracy” argument begins.  In Britishland, it’s easier at least for the first half-dozen or so available doses:  the Queen, and those members of the Royal Family closest to the line of succession.  [cue the Socialists’ and republicans’ grumbling]

Over Here… well, that’s a little problematic, isn’t it?  The thought that a President (any President) should get the first shot is justifiably abhorrent to us egalitarians, ditto any members of government — and of Congress, we will not speak.  (“Fuckem” would be the most common sentiment, I suspect, and rightly so.)

Then we come to the closest group we have to British nobility:  Teh Rich.  Uh huh.  In twenty words or less, explain to me why Bill Gates, some Saudi “prince” or that asshole who runs Google are any more deserving than the guy behind the counter at your local 7-11.  [hands out popcorn]

And the same is true for anyone else whom society may deem “special” and worthy of being at the head of the line.  The thought of Kim Kardashian being more worthy of the vaccine than, say, my Son&Heir… [hands out more popcorn]

The simple truth is that nobody “deserves” to get the vaccination ahead of anyone else:  not in the U.S.A., anyway.  So what’s the solution?

Actually, the answer is really simple:  hand the job over to Social Security.

Social Security numbers are arguably the closest thing we have to a national ID (I know, I know), and it would be the work of a few hours to create a lottery system which would rank the universe of SocSec numbers into some random order which would leave the delivery of vaccinations to pure chance.  Unfortunately, this would exclude all those in this country who are here illegally and thus don’t have a Social Security number, but I see that as a feature, not a bug.

When it comes to survival, life in Earth is pretty much a crapshoot anyway, so why should this situation be any different?

All Hell Diversity

So much for the Great Diversity Experiment:

As the world watched in awe five years ago, new faces were welcomed into Germany with balloons and banners proclaiming ‘We love refugees’.
More than a million strangers headed there from faraway lands at the height of Europe’s biggest migration crisis since World War II hoping for a new life in the West.
In a rallying cry to her nation, the German chancellor Angela Merkel declared in the autumn of 2015: ‘We can do this. We are strong and can manage it.’
Even as Mrs Merkel’s historic speech was broadcast on German TV, reports flashed up on the screen that trainloads of men, women and children were clamouring to be let in at her borders. And they were.
In astonishing scenes a few days later, thousands of bedraggled, tired migrants turned up at railway stations in German cities to be met by local children blowing soap bubbles and handing over teddy bears as the country threw off its dark, xenophobic past to become the humanitarian face of Europe.
But today the celebrations for migrants are over in this powerhouse of the European Union.
Many of the foreigners who entered Germany in those heady days are being forcibly sent home to Africa, south Asia, the Middle East, Russia and the Balkans on secret flights, marshalled by security officers, after being frogmarched to airports from their beds by armed police.

I wonder why?  Oh yes, because they can’t or won’t assimilate, their crime rates are astronomical, and far from being the fuel that would help Germany’s economy, most are pretty much acting as brakes, being totally dependent on Germany’s generous welfare state.

Who could ever have thought this this would happen?

Well, most of us, as it turns out;  only we were called “racists” and “fascists” or worse, for the sin of being realists and not starry-eyed dreamers in thrall to the “magic dirt” theory of socialization.

As for “being frogmarched to airports from their beds by armed police”, I just wish we could do the same to our ingrate immigrants, but no doubt someone’s going to have a problem with me saying that, too.

Pussification Chronicles Part 1

Here we go.  As part of the free service you all get from this blog, here’s a new department.  At various intervals as they occur, I’m going to display examples of Extreme Pussification — whether applied to a person, a country or an institution or a combination of all three doesn’t matter.

Herewith a couple of examples:

We all know that since hooking up with Duchess Caringslut, the Royal Ginger has continued to abase himself — giving up hunting, drinking, eating meat, and many more of those fine activities which help us to differentiate real men from girlymen.  Here’s his latest PC blowjob:

Prince Harry has backed the moves to ban Swing Low, Sweet Chariot from rugby games due to its association with slavery.
He has sung the rugby anthem many times since childhood and he is a fan and patron of the Rugby Football Union (RFU).

Not for much longer, I’ll bet;  unless the RFU also loses their balls and keeps him on.  But here’s the good part.

The song was written by a freed Oklahoma slave named Wallace Willis.

So here we have a song commemorating freedom from slavery, but its very association thereby taints it?  A whole bunch of stupid is contained in this bullshit, and Harry is a spineless, testicle-free fuckwit.

Here’s another example, this time of institutional pussification:

The curator of [the Houses of] Parliament’s art collection said the presentation of their artworks is being ‘reevaluated’, as many statues and paintings have a ‘racist history’ and were bought with wealth from the slave trade.
The Palace of Westminster lobbies, which are open to the public, are lined with artwork featuring 18th and 19th Century politicians, many of whom were connected to the slave trade.
Melissa Hamnett, the head of heritage collections and curator of works of art, said officials are looking at the presentation of the collection in light of the Black Lives Matter movement.

Just wait till the Italian Government orders the Coliseum torn down because it was built completely by slave labor — and if you think I’m exaggerating…

Ultimately, of course, it is impossible to remove (or the modern word, “de-couple”) Western Civilization from slavery:  all the ancient societies used slavery to one extent or another in the construction of both their buildings and their societies.  Was that a bad thing?  Of course.  But is that an excuse to do all the vile nonsense — pulling down statues, removing works of art, defacing memorials etc. — that we are being “asked” to do by the Bastards Of The Left and their helots in BLM?

That ought to be a rhetorical question, of course, but it’s best not to leave anything unspoken in this modern age of historical ignorance, so “NO!” has to be shouted out, and loudly.

More examples of pussification as they occur.  To echo Insty:  I may need a bigger blog.

Replacement Judges

I see that SCOTUS libjudge Ruth Ginsburg is in hospital again.  I’m not going to do what the Left does, and start gleefully death-wishing her, but at the same time we need to be cognizant of the fact that at some point we’re going to need a replacement for the old Trot.  But I am heartily sick of judges who appear conservative, but who when appointed to SCOTUS suddenly turn into Ginsburg Lite (e.g. Roberts and Kavanaugh).

So to add to the list of whomever God-Emperor Trump has on his prospect list, allow me to add these thoughts on the qualified candidates.

  • I want a fire-breathin’, gun-totin’, huntin’ and fishin’ red-blooded judge who doesn’t care much for modernity.
  • I don’t just want him to be a Constitutional constructionist — I want him to think that most Constitutional Amendments with a number greater than 10 should be fair game (especially the fucking 16th and 17th).
  • When listening to lawyers debate any People vs. [government] or vice versa cases, I want the first question put to the government’s lawyer to be:  “Show me where in the Constitution it says the government can do exactly that.”
  • I want his guiding principle to be the question:  “What would Jefferson, Adams or Washington think of this situation?” and direct his clerks to find the relevant writings to support the answer.

Feel free to add your proposed litmus tests to the above.