Are you Human?

I ask because for well over a century Liberals have used a very curious phrase "to be fully human". What a strange turn of phrase! If you are human, aren't you already fully human? Not according to Liberalism.

Liberalism seeks to create the Autonomous Individual, a person who is totally free and who possesses unlimited potential.  The Autonomous Individual is fully human!

You and I are not fully human because we are flawed, we are held back because we are defined by our race, ethnicity, nationality, sex, religion, class, amongst many other things, all of which stop our potential. We are neither free nor do we possess unlimited potential. That is why Liberalism put's so much importance into the idea that we are all equal. Because if we are all equal then we can be free, free from our race, free from our ethnicity, free from our sex, free from our religion, free from our class. We would become equal with everyone else, we would be made free of those things that hold us back, we would be made free of those things that divide us.  We would be empty vessels with unlimited potential. 

We could then choose our own ethnicity, our own race and sex, we would be empty vessels that would need to be filled. We would also need to be totally free. To be totally free we cannot have commitments or loyalties, they do not make a person free!

To be totally free we must not have nations to be loyal too, we must not have any form of group loyalty. There can be no loyalty to race or class or sex or family, all of these things are things that keep us committed and being committed makes us unfree. They must all be done away with. The Autonomous Individual only has one loyalty, to Liberalism of course.

To be quite blunt, being fully human sounds quite inhuman and it sounds that way because it is. The Liberal idea of making us into Autonomous Individuals is not a perfect world, it is a hell on Earth. Fully human...no thanks I'll stay flawed.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future

Another Article You Might Like?

Childrens Rights, Do Children Have Rights

The Thirty-Fifth Month

I cannot believe it's the 11th again and that I have only done 3 posts this month!

While I am happy with what I have written I really thought I would get more done this month. Things at work have slowed down but I'm still trying to catch up with the rest of my life and anything I do means I cannot do something else. There is only so much time and I only have so much energy, sad but true. I really need to get back on track as I have many more ideas for posts. I have also been meaning to reply more to those who post comments, I really appreciate your thoughts and comments.

It takes me about 3 hours to write a post, my monthly update doesn't take that long at all, around 30-60 minutes. It takes about 3 hours as I find other things I need to do (in other words I procrastinate, which normally helps), I think about what I'm writing, I reread, I rewrite, reread, rewrite, as many times as I think I need to. I also need to be properly rested or it becomes quite a trial to write. Normally writing is enjoyable even though it requires discipline, stamina and imagination.

My best day this month was the 15th January when I had 104 visitors, my only day over 100!

My worst day this month was the 2nd February when I only had 43 visitors.

11th January-11th February

Entry Pageviews United States 967 Australia 265 Russia 110 United Kingdom 64 Germany 62 Ireland 58 France 48 China 28 Canada 26 Ukraine 26

11th December-11th January

Entry	Pageviews
United States	1073
Australia	271
Russia	82
United Kingdom	66
France	47
Germany	46
Ireland	35
China	32
India	28
Canada	20

Russia, Germany, Ireland and Canada are all up, the Ukraine is back in the top 10.

The United Kingdom and France are basically the same.

Australia and China are slightly down, the United States is quite down, to have it under 1000 is quite disappointing.

India has left the top 10.

I have also had visitors from the following countries Luxembourg, Belgium, Denmark, Finland,Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Poland, Czech Republic, Serbia, Romania, Turkey, Syria, Israel, U.A.E., Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines, Sudan, Kenya, South Africa, New Zealand, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina.

I hope to see you all again soon!

Mark Moncrieff 

Liberalism, Transgenderism and the Olympics

In November 2015 the International Olympics Committee (IOC), released a report IOC consensus meeting on sex reassignment and hyperandrogenism. It's only 3 pages long and quite readable, despite  the title, I recommend reading it.

The report treads a fine line between trying to be inclusive and trying to maintain standards. That all people should be able to participate in sport and that "The overriding sporting objective is and remains the guarantee of fair competition.". The three most interesting parts are here:

E. To require surgical anatomical changes as a pre-condition to participation is not necessary to preserve fair competition and may be inconsistent with developing legislation and notions of human rights.

F. Nothing in these guidelines is intended to undermine in any way the requirement to comply with the World Anti-Doping Code and the WADA International Standards.

G. These guidelines are a living document and will be subject to review in light of any scientific or medical developments.

E means that if you say your a particular Gender, then you are and G uses the dreaded words "These guidelines are a living document". So that means you can expect each and every Olympics to become a fight over whether a particular Transgender person is really what they say they are. It also means that this document is not the final word, it is simply a staging post. So while this document is probably as sensible as it can be, it will be used to push for further change in the future.

Further down it says this:

1. Those who transition from female to male are eligible to compete in the male category without restriction.

2. Those who transition from male to female are eligible to compete in the female category under the following conditions:

It's probably not that big an issue for women who say they are now men to compete against men. However it is interesting that there are 4 criteria for men who say they are women. It is here that the real (by real I mean practical) problem arises. Men are much stronger and faster than women so when a man says he is now a women he has an enormous advantage. If a country or a person is so consumed with the desire to win at all costs then this leaves the way open for legal cheating.

Soon you will start to see female records being broken left right and centre. We will all be told it's because female athletes aren't holding back now, their training is that good, they are that dedicated and motivated. We will be told that we must spend more on female sports because they are doing so well That women should get the same prize money as men as their just as good. And rarely if at all will we be told that Erica used to be Eric.

If these records are broken too quickly there will be a backlash, if however they occur in 15 years time then people most likely have been seduced by gradualism, the idea that over time people just get used to things, even crazy things. Then most people will simply go along with it.

But over time this will start to break the idea of the Olympics, Faster - Higher - Stronger. Because as people lose confidence that the Olympics are the best they will turn off, they will not want to compete, watch or finance the games. For Liberalism this a good thing. Competitors compete for their country at the Olympics and they win prices. Modern Liberalism isn't too keen on either idea, people should compete for their personal glory and ambition, not for their country. Furthermore graded prizes are not the idea of Equality, it would be better if each person was rewarded for attending not for proving that they were better then others.

Real athleticism is not what Liberalism wants because it shows the idea that all people are equal to be a lie. Maybe Liberalism will be able to make the Olympics an unprincipled exception, but Transgenderism doesn't point that way at all, it points to more Liberalism ideology. Put simply the Olympics cannot survive too much of that.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Lawrence Auster January 26 1949 March 29 2013