Author: HP McLovincraft

Seeker of rabbit holes. Pessimist. Libertine. Contrarian. Your huckleberry. Possibly true tales of sanity-blasting horror also known as abject reality. Prepare yourself. Veteran of a thousand psychic wars. I have seen the fnords. Deplatformed on Tumblr and Twitter.

The Masking of the Servant Class: Ugly COVID Images From the Met Gala Are Now Commonplace

From the start of the pandemic, political elites have been repeatedly caught exempting themselves from the restrictive rules they impose on the lives of those over whom they rule. Governors, mayors, ministers and Speakers of the House have been filmed violating their own COVID protocols in order to dine with their closest lobbyist-friends, enjoy a coddled hair styling in chic salons, or unwind after signing new lockdown and quarantine orders by sneaking away for a weekend getaway with the family. The trend became so widespread that ABC News gathered all the examples under the headline “Elected officials slammed for hypocrisy for not following own COVID-19 advice,” while Business Insider in May updated the reporting with this: “14 prominent Democrats stand accused of hypocrisy for ignoring COVID-19 restrictions they’re urging their constituents to obey.”

Most of those transgressions were too flagrant to ignore and thus produced some degree of scandal and resentment for the political officials granting themselves such license. Dominant liberal culture is, if nothing else, fiercely rule-abiding: they get very upset when they see anyone defying decrees from authorities, even if the rule-breaker is the official who promulgated the directives for everyone else. Photos released last November of California Governor Gavin Newsom giggling maskless as he sat with other maskless state health officials celebrating the birthday of a powerful lobbyist — just one month after he told the public to “to keep your mask on in between bites” and while severe state-imposed restrictions were in place regarding leaving one’s home — caused a drop in popularity and helped fueled a recall initiative against him. Newsom and these other officials broke their own rules, and even among liberals who venerate their leaders as celebrities, rule-breaking is frowned upon.

But as is so often the case, the most disturbing aspects of elite behavior are found not in what they have prohibited but rather in what they have decided is permissible. When it comes to mask mandates, it is now commonplace to see two distinct classes of people: those who remain maskless as they are served, and those they employ as their servants who must have their faces covered at all times. Prior to the COVID pandemic, it was difficult to imagine how the enormous chasm between the lives of cultural and political elites and everyone else could be made any larger, yet the pandemic generated a new form of crude cultural segregation: a series of protocols which ensure that maskless elites need not ever cast eyes upon the faces of their servant class.

Keep reading

Bubble-Wrapping History: The National Archives Moves To “Reimagine” The Founding

We are living in the age of reimagination. We are not reducing police, we are “reimagining policing” … not “packing” the Supreme Court but “reimagining justice” … not embracing media bias but “reimagining journalism” … not embracing censorship but “reimagining free speech.”

Conversely, the lack of such imagination can be a career-ending flaw. As a result, many remain silent rather than question the need for the revisions that come with “reimagination.”

That dilemma was evident as a federal task force recently issued a call to “reimagine history” at the National Archives, including adding warnings to protect unsuspecting visitors before they read our founding documents. We are reimagining ourselves out of the very founding concepts that once defined us. Reimagining the founding documents comes at a time when many are calling to “reimagine the First Amendment” and other constitutional guarantees.

National Archivist David Ferriero created a racism task force for the National Archives after last summer’s protests over the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Such task forces are created with the expectation that they will find problems, and — once recommendations are made — objecting to “anti-racist” reforms can easily be misconstrued as being insensitive or even racist.

Obviously, documents and spaces can be viewed differently from different backgrounds. There is also a need to contextualize our history to deal honestly with our past. However, the “reimagination” line should not divide the woke from the wicked. Yet that is the fear for many academics who do not want to risk their careers after campaigns against dissenting voices on campuses around the country.

For example, for many of us, the National Archives’ Rotunda – containing the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights – is a moving, reverential place celebrating common articles of constitutional faith. That is not what the task force members saw.

Instead, they declared that the iconic Rotunda is one of three examples of structural racism: “a Rotunda in our flagship building that lauds wealthy White men in the nation’s founding while marginalizing BIPOC, women, and other communities.” They called for “reimagining” the space to be more inclusive, including possible dance and performance art. Even the famous murals in the Rotunda might have to go: The task force noted that some view the murals as “an homage to White America.”

The report objected to the laudatory attention given white Framers and Founders, particularly figures like Thomas Jefferson. It encouraged the placement of “trigger warnings” to “forewarn audiences of content that may cause intense physiological and psychological symptoms.”

The task force report called for “reimagining” the portrayal of founding documents on OurDocuments.gov, the website for America’s “milestone documents.” The task force objected that the “100 milestone documents of American history” included “adulatory and excessive language to document the historical contributions of White, wealthy men.”

The task force called for warnings and revision of racist language but stressed that such language “means not only explicitly harmful terms, such as racial slurs, but also information that implies and reinforces damaging stereotypes of BIPOC individuals and communities while valorizing and protecting White people.” It also called for “the creation of safe spaces” in every facility run by the National Archives and Record Administration (NARA).

Keep reading

NYC Starts Enforcement of Vaccine Mandate

New York City started enforcing a COVID-19 vaccine mandate Monday, with Mayor Bill de Blasio warning, “there’ll be consequences” for those who do not follow the rules.

The COVID-19 vaccine mandate, also known as the Key to NYC, requires people 12 and older to show proof that they have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine for indoor dining, indoor fitness, and indoor entertainment.

Under the mandate, staff at these locations must be vaccinated as well. Places affected include restaurants, bars, nightclubs, catering halls, event spaces, gyms, fitness centers, pools, theaters, museums, aquariums, and zoos, among others.

“Look, you’ve got to be safe. Wherever you go—movie theater, gym, restaurant—you’re going to be safe,” de Blasio said during a virtual press conference Monday morning.

“For those who are unvaccinated, you got to make the move,” de Blasio continued.

De Blasio announced the mandate in early August and started the requirements on Aug. 17.

The mandate requires the establishments to put up certain signage and verify customers’ COVID-19 vaccine proof, such as vaccination cards issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), New York City vaccination records, other official immunization records, the NYC COVID Safe App, or the Excelsior Pass.

According to the New York City Department of Health, establishments can make some exceptions, such as for outdoor eating, allowing customers to use the bathroom, or for other reasons that will take a small amount of time, for example, less than 10 minutes.

Thirteen agencies will send out inspectors to enforce the mandate, the mayor announced.

“What we’re going to do is have our inspectors out from 13 civilian agencies,” de Blasio said. “We don’t want to fine people. We don’t have to. We want to just get it right and keep moving forward.”

“But I think folks understand by now we are resolute. And if anyone wants to not follow the rules that everyone else has to follow, then of course, there’ll be consequences,” de Blasio, a Democrat, added.

According to de Blasio’s legal counsel (pdf), an establishment found to be non-compliant may be subject to a fine of $1,000. Repeated violations may result in increased fine amounts or other enforcement action.

Keep reading

The Other Shoe Drops: Biden Admin Announces Millions in Aid to Afghanistan

The Biden administration has just announced they will be cutting a check for $64 million in “humanitarian aid” to Afghanistan through USAID and Samantha Power.

Supposedly, this aid will go through the UN and NGOs, not through the “government”/Taliban or whoever is currently in control. Here’s Secretary of State Antony Blinken talking about it during his hearing on Zoom with Congress today.

Sorry, but I don’t trust the UN, and who knows who is in charge of some of the NGOs, so even if the money went to those folks, that it wouldn’t end up in the pockets of the Taliban, by force or by design.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) questioned Blinken on this earlier today, making the point that they can’t guarantee where that money is going–  just like they gave aid to Pakistan while that country was helping the Taliban.

Keep reading

Medical Experimentation and Collective Punishment Are War Crimes

Fake President but Real Dictator Joe Biden: “We are going to protect the vaccinated workers from unvaccinated coworkers.”  Ah, if only the “vaccinated” workers had as healthy immune systems as their unvaccinated colleagues.  Whatever the friendly U.S. government is injecting into people, it’s certainly not inoculating against or inhibiting transmission of the Fauci Virus if the “vaccinated” must walk around in bubble-boy suits for the rest of their lives.  The “vaccine” that works so nice you have to take it twice…er, thrice…er, we’ll let you know when you’ve had enough, prole!

Before “hope and change” replaced the Scientific Method, not only did the medical community know the difference between males and females, but also vaccinations actually conferred immunity.  Is there some unwritten rule that we must endure fake vaccinations during fake presidencies?  I know we live in a time when the political left redefines words daily to fit its desired propaganda objectives, but if “vaccine” now means nothing more than “an injection that may or may not prevent illness so long as the subject remains in sterilized environments and wrapped in protective headwear,” then that’s hardly different from defining “bulletproof vest” as “a garment that may or may not prevent bodily harm, so long as the wearer curls up in the fetal position and hides from danger.”  Now that Americans are being threatened with economic destruction unless they let Uncle Sam slap on some rubber gloves and play doctor, I think we know where this bowdlerization of medical terminology is naturally heading: “Vaccination, noun: The choice between letting the lying liars who run the U.S. government pump your an experimental serum into your veins or being forced into unemployment, homelessness, and starvation; also, Vaccinate, verb, a profane expletive for fornication, as in, ‘The pudding-brained Pretender-in-Chief sure vaccinated me this time!'”

As long as we’re considering technical definitions, maybe it’s time to consult long-standing international agreements on the protection of human rights and the prosecution of war crimes.  As its first stated principle outlining the bare minimum required of medical professionals “to satisfy moral, ethical, and legal” duties, the 1947 Nuremberg Code states clearly:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.  This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

Let’s put aside whether, in their rush to “vaccinate” the world, medical bureaucrats have sufficiently “enlightened” patients as to all the health hazards that might be reasonably expected to come from an experimental treatment because the usual long-term studies that track potentially harmful side-effects of new treatments over the course of ten or more years were thrown out the window so governments could quickly jab their citizens without much scrutiny.  Long-term harm?  Only the future will tell.  

Rather, let’s highlight what the Nuremberg Code says about consent: it must be free from “force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion.”  Does this set off any alarm bells for ethicists concerned about not following in the footsteps of Nazi medical science or treating civilians as guinea pigs for experimental research?  Is it possible that Herr Biden’s angry threats against healthy citizens for not partaking in his medical research might amount to “duress” or “coercion”?  Let’s see — jab this in your arm, or we will fire you, render you unemployable, threaten the financial survival of you and your family, and maybe leave you destitute and homeless.  Ding, ding, ding!  Talk about “overreach”!  Surely, threatening people with economic destruction if they won’t submit to medical experimentation is the exact kind of government “force” (or mandate) the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg was trying to prevent in the future.  Surely, “vaccine” mandates explicitly designed to outlaw “freedom or personal choice” should be scrutinized with an eye open to the human atrocities of the past.  Yet here we are, seventy-five years later, and medical experimentation is back in style.  Maybe the New World Order the globalists keep forcing down our throats is once again written in German, even if “President” Dummkopf speaks only gibberish.

Keep reading

German man raided by police after calling politician a “dick” on Twitter

Six police officers in Hamburg, Germany, raided the house of a man who insulted a politician on Twitter using a phrase that refers to the male genitalia. The raid was heavily blasted on social media as classic overreach by German authorities.

A little over three months ago, a Twitter user who goes by the screen name “ZooStPauli,” described Hamburg’s interior and sports minister Andy Grote as “pimmel,” (a “dick”) in a reply to a post by the minister. On early Wednesday morning, six officers raided his house to search for evidence.

“My house was searched at 6:00 this morning. Six officers in the apartment,” ZooStPauli tweeted on Wednesday. “They know there are two young children living in this household. Good morning Germany.”

Keep reading

It’s Time to Acknowledge Anti-White Racism

Recently, Michael Tesler commented on “The Rise of White Identity Politics.” Tesler’s analysis draws on years of research into racialized politics, and he shows convincingly that there is a rise in white identity politics and that this rise is tied to “perceptions of anti-white discrimination.” However, when trying to explain why perceptions of anti-white bias might also be on the rise, his analysis falls flat. Supposedly, it has something to do with Republicans and Donald Trump.

Never once does the author speculate whether “perceptions” of such discrimination might be on the rise because anti-white racism is becoming increasingly common. In other words, perhaps white Americans are accurately perceiving a real phenomenon that is now pervasive in schools and the workplace.

Anti-White Racism, by Definition

As any student of George Orwell knows, no authoritarian government can ever gain complete control unless it commandeers people’s thinking through the manipulation of language. Thus, the dystopian powers in “1984” deliberately turned the meaning of words upside-down in a process known as double-think.

The same process is happening today with the words used to discuss racism. In true Orwellian fashion, Ibram X. Kendi (pictured) insists that the only way to fight racism is to embrace racial discrimination in perpetuity. This “anti-racism,” as he calls it, is as likely to stamp out genuine racism as Orwell’s Ministry of Truth was apt to stamp out falsehoods.

In order to understand what is going on, we must call to mind the traditional definition of racism: the stereotyping, denigrating, marginalizing, or excluding of persons on the basis of race. Look up any definition of racism prior to the racial awokening taking place in the last decade, and it will be: 1) race neutral; and 2) involve some act of free will—relating to word, deed, or belief.

The definition of racism has undergone a radical change in a short time. According to the new eighth-grade curriculum for the Albemarle County (Va.) School District, racism now means: “The marginalization and/or oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people.”

Perhaps the most jarring aspect of this new definition is that it is no longer race-neutral. It is now impossible, by definition, for white people to be the victims of racism. The definition itself constructs a “racial hierarchy” whereby only people of color may be victimized, and only “white people” may marginalize or oppress.

But there is something even more insidious about the new definition. Since the “marginalization and/or oppression of people of color” is no longer committed by word, thought, or deed — but is based instead on an inescapable “socially constructed racial hierarchy” that always “privileges white people” — it means that white people are engaging in racism simply by being white (and hence privileged) within this impersonal system of marginalization and oppression.

A person of color is a victim of racism, by definition. A person identified as white is a racist, by definition. Therefore, not only does the new definition fail to capture the full meaning of racism; the definition is itself an example of the anti-white racism being taught to our children.

Keep reading