Monday, March 20, 2017

A potato home companion

Three blocks short of a full wall
So anyway, when the lovely and gracious Rogue bought me a second deck for my birthday last year, its placement created an unwieldy area that managed to collect weeds, rideable plastic toys, and chunks of dead rabbit over the course of last summer. What better place to grow potatoes? But I've decided that it's not going to be an ordinary potato bed; it's going to be a companion-planting extravaganza.

Just for fun, this bed's going to get just about every companion that promises to help potatoes: thyme (already planted, though you can hardly see them in the picture), onions, garlic, marigolds, even clover.  I already have two beds each of onions and garlic, so if these produce anything, that's just a bonus.  And I'm wondering if (or hoping that, actually) adding clover once the potatoes come up will smother out the other weeds*.  As you can see, this might be a rather difficult bed to keep weeded without having to climb into it. Unwieldy it began, unwieldy it remains.

The only companion I haven't decided on is horseradish. Horseradish is a great companion, as it allegedly helps increase the disease resistance of potatoes**. But horseradish is forever, so if I add it here, here it will remain until the end of the age. It already grows in a number of places outside its original bed, like all the other beds that have previously held potatoes.

On the other hand, even should I never be able to rid myself of it, there are worse problems than having food growing all over the place. Like having chunks of dead rabbit rotting all over the place.

* Also, since the bed is not flat, I hope a thick cover of clover will control any erosion issues that arise.
** I cannot testify that this is true, only that my potatoes have not had any disease issues in the past.

Friday, March 17, 2017

The lost sense of tragedy

Won't that be fun?
Seeing our new SecState threatening North Korea reminded me of these words penned by Robert Kaplan a couple decades ago:
Avoiding tragedy requires a sense of it, which in turn requires a sense of history. Peace, however, leads to the preoccupation with “presentness”, the loss of the past and consequent disregard for the future. That is because peace by nature is pleasurable, and pleasure is about momentary satisfaction. 
In an era of expanded domestic peace, those who deliver us pleasure are the power brokers. Because pleasure is inseparable from convenience, convenience becomes the vital element of society.
Folks are always at a loss to explain how the world stupids its way into tragedy every so often.  Try to get a well-read man to explain the logical steps from the assassination of an Archduke in Sarajevo to 1.2 million casualties in the Battle of the Somme 24 months later and he will throw his hands into the air.  Human actions are on occasion too stupid to understand in retrospect.

But that's because humans do not make decisions in retrospect.  At the risk of oversimplifying, the logical progression was that two sides saw opportunities to be gained by fighting and neither side really considered the costs of either losing or of not winning for a very long time.  Had you told the Germans that the ultimate result of declaring war on Russia would be 10% of their population dead or maimed, Turnip Winter and hyperinflation, and France occupying the Ruhr, they would never have gone along.

But neither the German rulers, nor the people who cheered the headlong rush to war, had a sense of tragedy. Instead they had the intoxicating confidence of being a newly-industrialized, newly-unified power that had kicked France's ass 40 years prior and been itching for another fight since.  The same could probably be said for the Allied nations - the end price was not considered at the outset*.

We are in exactly that same position today, and the position that Kaplan warned about in 1995. Convenience and living in the present have been the two vital elements of American culture for the past 20 years.  In all earnest, what can be said of the two-spirit, gender-non-conforming, or androgyne*** except that they have completely discarded the historical human experience?**** What can be said for the government that casually threatens other nuclear powers over social media?

We have absolutely no sense of the tragic, or even of the serious or real or true, because it's been so long since we were forced to be a serious people.  There is no penalty today for the individual acting in a foolish or discivic manner any more than there is for a congressman or president who does the same, only much more expensively. After all, at zero interest rates, new fighter jets are free. If you can be anything you want, why not be a non-binary pangender demiboy? When food, rent, health care, and education for all of them are underwritten by someone else, why not have a dozen kids with a dozen different partners? Why not drill, baby, drill on funds lent by retirement funds desperate to put off a demographic tidal wave?

Because there's no penalty for stupid, and because stupid is more fun than is serious, the stupid will accelerate until we are very painfully reminded what it is that makes certain actions stupid in the first place.

Trump seems to want to blunder us into a war in southeast Asia just as badly as Hillary wanted to scheme us into one in eastern Europe.  No one, most especially those whose job it is to consider these things, counts the costs of such lunacy. It's been so long since we've paid costs that we've forgotten that they exist.

They do.

* Except the US.  We jumped in so that we could centralize political, eceonomic, and cultural power in Washington. There is a reason today that most of what's called "the news" is about government**. Wilson would have killed a lot more than 100,000 doughboys for that.
** the rest, of course, is about people who sing, make-believe, or play games for money.
*** three of the 58 gender options available on Facebook.
**** Well, you could say that they are batshit insane, which is doubtless true of the few that are not simply pretending to be for attention.

Friday, March 10, 2017

Spinach on Lockdown

My, what a beautiful half-row of spinach.

The early-planted spinach, what is left of it, will surely face a test tomorrow night when the temperature drops into the mid 20s.  And I say "what is left of it" because it faced a much larger challenge than a little frost.  Digging Dog™, unable for once to secure a cow leg bone for burial, instead interred into the middle of the spinach bed a stuffed puppy that Mr. Charisma received from his birth mom and subsequently left outside.

It provided rather a surprise for me, actually. I noticed a lump in the middle of the bed and reached into it to grab the bone I expected there.  Instead of grasping something solid, my fingers wrapped around something soft and squishy.  In such cases the mind immediately reacts by flashing pictures of half-rotted, maggot-infested rabbits and the like.  I pulled it out anyway, then went about the task of creating a few more 2'x2' wire tops for this set of 4 beds.

The wire proved a real advantage in replanting. I usually do a few rows and then scatter some seed between them. Rows in a bed are silly, but they help get an even coverage. However, with the grids provided by the fencing as a guide, I simply dropped three seeds in each hole. It should result in less thinning while avoiding bare patches.

Once the spinach comes up*, Digging Dog™ will leave the beds alone.  Until then, the spinach, leaf lettuce, and romaine beds are on lockdown.

* a couple weeks, as I replanted it during the thunderstorm yesterday. 

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Calling the top

Hang on Janet, hang on tight
Peter Thiel says the voters' bull's got a long way to run:
Investor Peter Thiel— who stumped for President Donald Trump at the Republican National Convention and has remained close to the president ... is beginning to agree with a colleague on this thesis: "We're now in a bull market in politics," he said.
"I'm not sure this is a good thing," said Thiel. "But it is a fact that maybe politics is becoming more important, it's becoming more intense, the range of outcomes is becoming greater, and that we're in a world in which there's a bull market in politics that's getting started."
While I agree that politics are becoming more intense and that the range of possible outcomes is growing, count me as one who thinks those facts imply we are a lot closer to the end of a bull market in politics than the beginning.

It's always interesting to watch larval historians come to grips with the ubiquity of religion in the Late Middle Ages. In some ways it's completely out of their experience.  You had mandated feast days and fast days and tithes and special diets and all manner of demands on the people to do this and pay that and go see this and support this vagrant.  And few questioned the system's legitimacy even as they loathed or mocked the corruption of nearly everyone involved in running the system.  But then you have them compare it to democracy and the lights come on.

That religious superstructure of authority grew and grew and grew until we reached what might be called "Peak Church" a couple decades before Luther.  Finally, it broke out in heresy trials, subjugation, complete economic and social control, and then finally all out war that devastated whole nations. Ubiquity marked the end of the bull market in religion, the whole creaking edifice was eventually destroyed.

Today we find ourselves scratching our heads over how our Catholic next door neighbors would have ever burned us at the stake for not putting ashes on our foreheads the fortieth day before Easter. I suspect that in a few centuries, more than a few people will wonder the same thing about our democratic politics.  Replace 'tithes' with 'taxes' and 'priests' with 'lobbyists' and it becomes obvious that our modern society is as saturated with politics as the Middle Ages ever was with religion. Our nation's richest counties all lie around our national capital. Our companies pay billions of dollars to hire people to ask for indulgences, or fund the campaigns of those who can grant them directly. We don't make pilgrimages to Rome to hear the Pope, but our hairdressers must make annual pilgrimages to Topeka to hear some social work graduate drone on about diversity -- which we call continuing education -- lest they be legally forbidden to practice their art.

We spend hours every day thinking and talking and arguing about what we ought to collectively do about this problem or that. We think it ludicrous that theologians might have argued over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, yet computer programmers sit around a table and in all earnest argue about what to do about North Korea's nuclear weapons - even as they forget we "did something" about them 20 years ago - or how to keep the polar ice caps from melting.

We are in politics as Medievals were in religion: like a fish in water.

And the religious system went on and on and grew and intensified, sucking more and more of the wealth and production from society until it could not be collectively afforded anymore.  Its peak is the place where the range of outcomes became greater - i.e. where a break in its steadiness and consistency became evident - and they got a few centuries of religious persecutions and wars, and the Pilgrims got Plymouth Rock and the Indians got casinos.

Politics in the modern sense - defined here as the assertion that "politics is the art of the possible" and we need to collectively do something about everything - really got rolling in the Progressive Era of the late 1800s. It was then that we as a nation consciously decided that we were going to mold ourselves and our environment into something new through legal incentive and coercion*. We were going to professionalize our barber shops and de-worm the Southrons and civilize the Irish**. We were going to apply the principles of science to society***, and ban alcohol and buying a car on Sunday and make all the children go to approved schools for 186 days a year from the ages of 7 to 16. And we have been growing the beast, tax by tax and regulation by regulation, ever since.

Our government - the voracious product of our politics - has bankrupted our nation, our people, even our money. Still it announces grandiose plans to make us even greater than before using money it creates from nothing but upon which our children will make perpetual interest payments to those who did nothing to earn them because the law, passed by representatives of the people, says they must.

That sounds a lot like the bell ringing at the top to me.

* The Pilgrims, of course, did the same on a smaller basis, but they didn't ask the peasant pilgrims for input.
** and use a few dozen poor black men for syphilis experiments.
*** Progressives are understandably loath to claim eugenics as their baby, but in the first third of the 20th century, eugenics was a progressive idea with intellectual cachet.

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Prepper Fail, Volts and Amps Edition

Out of date, out of luck
Our power went out even before the storm arrived.

Which is actually no big deal.  The kids were in bed, so we really didn't need it*. And our electric service is much improved over the past 10 years. When we first moved in, if someone farted in Redfield our power would be out for 12 hours.  Now outages are few and far between and seldom last as long.  So I went to sleep thinking it would be back on by morning. It wasn't.

And that's no big deal, either.  To deal with such a case, we have half of our house** wired for generator power.  I have a big long cord that plugs into my electrical box on one end and the generator on the other, and a couple switches to flip, and I can run the house that way so long as I have gasoline.  Which I do.

So I got up with the sun, put my hoodie on, flipped all the switches, plugged the cord into the electrical box, fed the other end outside, filled the generator and started it, then went to plug the cord in.  Nope.  The rounded prong that's supposed to point inward is facing outward and the others are all too close together***. I turn the plug this way and that. Nope. Stare stupidly at it as if that will change something. Nope. It appears that that I am undone. We will not be running the well pump via generator today.

The part of the story I have neglected is that I burned up my 15-year-old generator last summer and we bought a new, bigger one. And as the Lovely and Gracious Rogue was looking it over in the store, I asked if it had one of those round plugs.  Yup. Buy it. Assemble it. Run it.  But I didn't hook it up to the house until 6:30 this morning. Why bother?

Well, apparently in the last 15 years or so, the style among electricians has become a 120/240V 20A plug instead of the 125/250V 30A that my electrical box, my cord, and my old generator use. So I need to get my box rewired (probably) to match the new standard. Fail.

But I hear now that a pole has snapped somewhere near Redfield and the power should be back on by noon. And if that's the case, no harm will come to my steaks, or at least no thawing.  So if nothing untoward comes of it, I guess we'll just call it a dry run, a test.  And stuff is allowed to go wrong in a test.

It just needs to be right on the final exam.

* I enjoyed re-reading The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe with a flashlight no little bit.
** The half with the freezer, fridge, pellet stove, well pump, etc. 
*** Not unlike the guy in Johnny Cash's One Piece at a Time, who tries to assemble a car he has stolen bit by bit over a 30 year career at GM.

Monday, March 6, 2017

Winter Grapes revisited

I awoke Saturday morning to find that five of those seven or eight pathetic sticks I stuck in the dirt five weeks ago had suddenly sprouted. So working from the assumption that what is happening above the soil is being mirrored beneath it, I will have at least 5 new Concord grape vines to transplant in a few weeks.

So the lazy way to start grapes from cuttings is working at at least a 60% rate. I can live with that, especially since I've got another experiment (cuttings in water) running a couple weeks behind, and another batch of 8 cuttings I just planted yesterday.  By April I expect to have at least a dozen new vines that can start making the makings of jelly.

And not a moment too soon, it seems.  The original concords are about 20 years old, and one of them all-but-died last year, which led to me looking for ways to propagate it. Well, the other looks to have the same issue this year -- its main stock is completely rotted in the center.  So those two will probably get ripped out this fall, or even earlier if it looks like they won't produce this year.

And that's ok. Even though the younguns won't produce anything until next summer, we've got enough jelly on hand to get by until they do.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Objective right versus left

The heart of the wise inclines to the right,
but the heart of the fool to the left.
-- Ecclesiasted 10:2
bkm notes:
it's almost tautological that having a "reason" ( that is, to reason in a logical fashion from a set of premises ) means that you have at least attempted to reach an "objective" conclusion. 
*drums fingers on table* 
you ...  you're just trying to make me think harder, aren't you?
Perish the thought.

Perhaps I am misunderstood. Let me try it this way: is there anything about a particular argument by which one can judge whether it is left or right without regards to the self-identification of people who hold it?*

For example, many of the feminists of the 19th century were opposed to abortion. Today, feminism is considered left and pro-life is right, but can they be so-named in another historical context? By what standard?

The reason gays had been in the closet for nearly a century was not because of the religious right - it was the original Progressives who suppressed the Lavender Menace. So is opposition to public homosexuality left or right? Can it be so named by some standard outside of what those who held it called themselves?

That's more along the lines of what I'm looking for.

But since you're putting your thinking cap on, I've a proposed exercise:

The modern nuclear family exists as it does in a real sense because of certain technological, political, and financial incentives. We have not always been able to shovel grandma off to a little cell where she gets to play keno with other abandoned people until she dies**.

Now, we would probably consider policies that strengthen the nuclear family "right," at least as opposed to the modern solar system family of mom with a bunch of different-sized planetoids circling her at various distances. But what about compared to the extended family, that multi-generational family that lived in the same home? Would purposeful policies that had the effect of promoting that to the detriment of the nuclear family be considered 'right' or 'left'? And why?

UPDATE: I found this quote on Infogalactic*** kind of funny:
Eatwell argues that the 'extreme right' has four traits: "1) anti-democracy; 2) nationalism; 3) racism; and 4) the strong state". The 'New Right' consists of the liberal conservatives, who stress small government, free markets, and individual initiative.
So the Right is for a strong state but small government thereof, racism and nationalism but individualism as well, and is democratic in everything except actually voting****. Makes sense, I guess.

* I am attempting to avoid the circular argument that certain positions are defined as right-wing because right-wingers hold them, while defining those people as right-wing based on the right-wing positions they hold.
** after which we all gather to tell each other how much we miss her.
*** copied from Wikipedia with minimal editing.
**** what is the free market but a man voting to buy a pound of steak from Australia rather than 2 pounds of hamburger from California?

Monday, February 27, 2017

When do the fun times start?

Remember that time Obama got
something right? That was awesome.
David Stockman says, 2 weeks:
“I think what people are missing is this date, March 15th 2017. That’s the day that this debt ceiling holiday that Obama and Boehner put together right before the last election in October of 2015. That holiday expires. The debt ceiling will freeze in at $20 trillion. It will then be law. It will be a hard stop. 
The Treasury will have roughly $200 billion in cash. We are burning cash at a $75 billion a month rate. By summer, they will be out of cash. Then we will be in the mother of all debt ceiling crises. 
Everything will grind to a halt. I think we will have a government shutdown. There will not be Obama Care repeal and replace. There will be no tax cut. There will be no infrastructure stimulus. There will be just one giant fiscal bloodbath over a debt ceiling that has to be increased and no one wants to vote for.”
In all probability, the GOP is just going to raise the debt ceiling.  Oh, sure, they'll fuss.  A few will fret.  Others will loudly mumble and one or two will rub their hands together and cluck. Then even if all the Democrats vote against it*, the GOP will quietly include an increase - or maybe even an elimination - in some midnight bill that will be signed before you finish your second cup of coffee the next morning. An increase in the debt ceiling is the closest thing to a fait accompli you will ever see in national politics, because the GOP understands what Stockman is saying and has no intention of letting that happen.

The reason the GOP advocates for a balanced budget amendment is that it's the easiest way to ensure that a balanced budget never occurs. They can pose as the fiscally responsible party while relying on the Constitution's cumbrous political processes to ensure they are never called to account.

If the GOP actually wanted a balanced budget, they could have it in two weeks. All they have to do is nothing.  If the government can't borrow, it must balance its budget.  It can only spend what it brings in. The problem is solved. It's simple.

Simple but not easy. And because it's not easy, we will continue the easy path until a solution we would not choose is forced on us.  We are riding this coach to the end of the line, folks, and everything between here and there is posturing.

Does the end of the line start March 15th?  Count me as one who doubts it very much unless it's completely by accident.

* As they should.  As the 'out' party it is now their turn to do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Of Stonehenge and the right

Peas don't Judas me.
Tom Bridgeland notes:
Regarding planting now. There is a reason all those old stone age agricultural cultures had something like Stonehenge. They couldn't risk wasting their seed by planting too soon, in years like this one that try to trick us with 60-degree weather in February. Plant-freeze-plant-freeze-oops I'm out of seed. Now we starve.

So they kept track of the equinoxes so they'd know when it was really late enough to plant.

It's nice to live in times with feed-and-seed stores! 
Yes, it is. And that's one of the reasons that I emphasized in The SHTF Stockpile that the time to do all that silly stuff, like planting in February in Zone 6, is now.  Because we can still afford to make mistakes.  Big mistakes.  I planted 200 onion bulbs yesterday.  What's the downside? I might have to spend another $5 at WalMart to replace them.

That's today. Now, the reason the druids used Stonehenge was to buttress tradition.  We plant this on that day, and that on this day. Why? Because we planted that on that day once and half the people starved.  Innovation brings variability of results, and when you live on the edge, you cannot afford that variability.  The Romans considered civilization the act of doing well what your fathers did before you.  They were only innovators when faced with absolute destruction if they continued the same path.

Now perhaps that plays a little bit into the distinction that bkm draw for left vs. right:
Internationalist vs Nationalist <<< the only aspect of Fascism which is 'Rightist'
Democracy vs Representative Republic vs Aristocracy / Monarchy
Communal ownership of production vs Free Market
communal responsibility / guilt vs individual responsibility 
Except in the second case,  which is coincidentally the one I find the most arguable, one of our choice is considered left and the other is considered right.  What distinguishes the choices? In many ways, the left is a mere innovation, while the right is a mere tradition.

For example, let's take the third, socialism, or the communal ownership of the means of production.  Such an idea is unheard of throughout most of history, and not only because there were so few means of production.  Even (and perhaps especially) under monarchy, every "thing" has been owned by a specific person*. It was not until

a) 'government' developed as a concept separate from the person of those who ran it, and
b) real problems arose under capitalist production,

that someone said, "What if we organized things a different way?" and went about making laws to impose it.  Capitalism and the market are, in that sense, organic. They arose without externally imposed organization. But socialism is an innovation, like planting in February, where some smartass said, we can do this better. So why does the conservative** prefer one over the other? He can give all kinds of reasons, but many of them are simply that he's comfortable with it - that's why he's not opposed to wage laws, even though he was when they were an innovation.

The first is the same - no one naturally thought "we are the world."  Globalism is an intellectual innovation arising from

a) real-time, long-distance communication,
b) affordable long-distance shipping,
c) the fungibility of labor, and
d) the horrors of WWI and WWII, which showed a real downside to nationalism.***

Nationalism is far more organic, people speaking a single language and (until recently) sharing the same religion, joining under a flag.  But it's still somewhat contrived - the reason northern bankers wanted to preserve the Union was mostly because they knew it would be more powerful together, and they wished to direct that power.

There are plenty of other innovations as well - I'm thinking currently of the Sacred Mystery of the 57 Genders as taught on college campuses across the fruited plain.  It's an innovation we can get away with because it's not like planting in February. There is no immediate feedback that will kill us all.  That's why I'm convinced that we will suffer all manner of sexual and social innovation right up until the point where we get real, natural, negative feedback.  When is that? No idea. But it's left-wing for a reason.

So that does beg force the question, is there anything objective about the right/left paradigm, or is it merely a matter of the innovation versus convention?  And if there's no more to it than that, can we really criticize conservatives for embracing innovation once it becomes convention, even if that takes no longer than the few months between debt ceiling increases?

* We will leave aside for the moment those nomadic tribes with no concept of the ownership of land, which is mostly a modern myth created by the socialists anyway.
** The right-winger who gives the same reasons but consistently opposes even the smallest encroachment on them should be believed when he gives his reasons.
*** What the downed pilot in Red Dawn said of the USA and USSR was surely true of Germany and Britain at the turn of the twentieth century: "two biggest kids on the block, sooner or later they're gonna fight." And they're bringing some cool new toys.

Friday, February 24, 2017

Catching up on the mail

I'm Spicy
Might as well share a few items, since otherwise it's all quiet:

What do you think of the Milo situation?

I don't really.  Having not mentioned him before doesn't mean I don't know who Milo is, I just don't see the attraction of right wingers to him, unless it's in the same sort of "he's our shield*" as their attraction to Herman Cain. I guess I lack the political celebrity gene or something.

What he said is no different from what others say, including Bill Maher, who is claiming credit (I guess) for taking him down. And in this case our modern lack of perspective works against Milo - it was not long ago that good European peasants were married at 12 or 13 and often because of pregnancy. He's being dogpiled because the Safe Space crowd hates his guts, but I suspect he'll be fine in the end.

Is Pizzagate real?

Doubtless the Podestas have bizarre taste in friends and art, but it's hard to tell if they are just being "edgy" or if it's indicative of something worse. Lots of people play with secret evil - you remember how every respectable man used to be a Freemason?  I'm glad the home gaming console killed that organization.

Someone with an actual torture chamber in his home would not likely call it by that name in an email. You call your torture chamber "the fun house" and your home gym "the torture chamber." Especially if you're old, fat, and fighting hypertension.

Does that mean that there is or isn't a pedophile ring being run from the basement of a DC restaurant? I have no idea.

Your memes are so dank and spicy.

Thank you.

Why did you remove Vox from your blog roll?

I don't read him all that much anymore.  Vox is a genius. And by that I don't mean we always agree (we don't) or that he's never wrong. By genius I mean that he'll say "because X, Y" and most people will go "Dude, that makes no sense." But it makes perfect sense, you just have to skip ahead 10 steps like he's doing.  You never see that sort of thing from "really smart" people like Obama. Obama never surprises you, because he's not really that smart. Vox is really that smart.

Still, having read Vox for 15+ years, and not having much interest in his current intellectual trajectory, I removed the link because I don't use it anymore.

We saw leaves on the trees in Kansas.

You should have dropped in. I'm planting potatoes, onions, and peas this weekend.  Spinach and lettuce are already coming up, as are the HR and the garlic.  We may get frost in March and so I may need to cover them a couple times, but my yard turned green this week and so I might as well go for it.  I really hope frost does not impact the pears and apples, as they are flowering as well.

Have you read Gorilla Mindset?

Son Lupus really liked it and bought it for me.  I've started it a few times but really can't relate to it. I've just never told myself I couldn't accomplish something, and so have no need to talk to myself in the mirror. Weird like that, I guess.

Are you still a  fan of Trump?

I was never a fan of Trump. I very much like some things he's doing and some of the people he's surrounded himself with. Others, meh.  People who think he's a moron are the kind of people who think Obama was really smart (see above).  I do hope that he's able to accomplish a lot of what he wants to do. And I am in awe at his ability to trigger snowflakes. The man is truly a god-tier troll. His party, however, remains a den of snakes.

Why aren't you "alt-right?"

I'm not a fan of identity politics. If we disagree on policy, we can possibly reach a compromise.  But if I'm to believe x because I'm white and you believe y because you're black, then there's nothing to do but fight it out.

I did rather laugh at one tweet, however, that illustrates the left's horrified reaction to alt-right:

>Progressive left: everything is about race.
>alt-right: OK, everything is now about race.
>Progressive left: Nooo! We don't mean for you guys.

Alt-right is the natural reaction to the SocJus left stuffing all white people (especially normal white men) into a box. And then hitting that box repeatedly with a stick.

Alt-rightists would argue that identity is the wave of the future, that it's inevitable. But if that's the case, it does not need my support**. I also suspect that there are some surprises coming that will make the best-laid plans of both left and right come to naught.

Like what?

We still have a financial collapse in our future, possibly combined with an energy crisis and few cold and rainy decades. I do not think we'll be all that worried about 'safe spaces' in a few short years, though systemic oppression may pass from the fevered imaginations of liberals into cold, hard reality. Nobody fusses about being misgendered in Argentina.

Have we reached "peak trans"?

Dear God, I hope so. There is no doubt in my mind that our collective confusion and hysteria about gender and race are supernatural. But count me as one who thinks it can only prosper because a critical mass of people have literally nothing they need to be doing.  If that changes, they'll change (or die, I suppose).

How many people are in your house?

Nine at the moment. Four with my name and five (aged 4, 3, 2, 2, 7 mo) with other names. That number will probably decrease by two in the near future. The lovely and gracious Rogue is a saint.

What is your favorite holiday?

The Feast of St. Dagobert.  It's a history thing. you wouldn't understand.

* "I'm not racist/antisemetic/homophobic. One of my heroes is a gay, Jewish homosexual who tells me about all the foam parties he throws with Ugandan rentboys and once pointed out that MyFitnessPal has calorie counts for semen." 
** nor does it mean that identity will be primarily racial, rather than linguistic or religious or, if things get bad enough, clan-based. And even if it is racial, it does not mean that the generic American "white" is going to remain a race.  "Let's not kill these Slavs because they're so white," said no German, Celt, Latin, Greek, Finn, or Iberian ever.