an aristocracy of donkeys

a model for patronage and position

“one law for me, another for thee, it’s an aristocracy”

-kittengarten nursery rhyme

aristocracy has been the default mental setting for “intellectuals” dating back at least to aristotle and almost certainly far further.

keep that in mind as you read this:

indeed, it does seem that the left has no sense of hypocrisy whatsoever. they routinely flout the rules they seek to enforce upon others be it by flying to brazil in a private jet to pick up a climate award before bopping back to davos to make more grand plans or supporting the illegal gun ownership of an illegal immigrant illegally running a school system for american children.

i have heard many gawp in wonder about the current progressive penchant for unerringly selecting the worst, most hideous, amoral, and painful people to champion. from george the wife beating fentanyl addict arrest resister floyd to luigi to dr ian andre, it just goes on and on. and it seems especially endemic in the catastrophically captured school systems.

once, the obvious truth of “only a fool would allow his enemy to educate his children” was well known and better understood.

and today, well, here we are.

she also committed armed robbery of churches. her whole life was like this.

it seems we’re past the point of any of this being hidden anymore. it seems like that went out the window in 2020 as congress-critters, governors, and law enforcement alike bent the knee.

this outcome seems to puzzle people, but i do not think it’s actually any sort of surprise. in fact, i suspect it’s inevitable and makes perfect sense once you find the proper framing by which to explore this phenomenon.

let’s explore:

key salient:

it’s simple to model this outcome once you realize that the democrats are the party of aristocracy.

they believe themselves to be “an elite” and that “one law for me and another for thee” is the fitting rule to acknowledge this fact.

the leftist leadership constitute an aristocracy in every meaningful sense of the word and a privileged class in the literal etymological sense of “private law.”

they believe themselves to be the rightful rulers of society, the best, brightest, and most moral, those with whom no right thinking person could disagree and therefore with whom all disagreement stands as proof of not being right thinking.

they view themselves as protected but unbound by the system. they take from it rapaciously, growing rich on abuse of systems and takings of monies.

they do not build, they plunder and this legal plunder builds dynastic wealth and makes AOC and ilhan worth $10’s of millions, bernie worth hundreds, and the clintons and pelosis quite possibly billionaires.

and aristocracies can and will defend themselves with violence.

they just make up a song and dance to make the violence seem justified.

so why then to they line up behind all the miscreants?

because they believe in their own elitness and also in the inferiority of others.

and so they engage in patronage.

you do not get any because you are self-supporting. it is this precise ability that makes you anathema to them. you don’t need them. you’d be better off without them. they are, in fact, in your way and stealing from you.

so they go looking for someone else.

they believe those they mascot to be an underclass that cannot be held to the standards to which they seek to hold you. such underclassers often fail to self-support, are prone to or willing to engage in dependence, and generally struggle to make their way alone.

the aristocrat’s inherent prejudice and elitism is spun into virtue through systems of philanthropath favoritism to buy alliance.

offer such a group free stuff and expansive privilege, render them also protected but unbound, and they will support you as your vassals.

this is, in effect, a mercenary army of dependents purchased with the very rights and the property of builders it will be used to keep in line and disenfranchised.

the reason this always winds up feeling like a war is that it is.

it’s the use of force to take the liberty and property of some and bestow it upon others.

scrape the lipstick off the pig, and that is the unvarnished nature of the beast.

the whole of this ideology is rooted in inequity.

when you steal or break the law, it’s a crime, when their voter clients do, it’s not.

everything about their worldview resides in nested systems of privilege and they feel no qualms whatsoever about rigging the game so that they sit atop them.

they see this as just, moral, and proper.

DEI, trust the experts, credentialism, semiotic war to ascribe virtue and vilify others:

it’s all one system of “i can do this but you cannot because i am better than you” coupled to “i shall decide who gets the jobs and places at university because (wait for it) i am better than you and know how the world should be.”

the presumption of the right to force everyone else into this vision is the axis mundi of the movement.

once you believe this, all the rest is permissible, even laudable.

for their own good.

this results in two tribes, one above, one below each of which is protected but unbound by the legalism that wears the skin of what was once an opt in social contract but has now become avolitional. you cannot opt out any more than you can shun others. that’s the point of eliminating free association, commerce, and choice.

then each side attacks the center because the center is where the plunder is.

the fundamental fight is takers vs makers, coercive prerogative over liberty, and serfdom over citizenship.

it always and inevitably revolves around ideas like “merit vs privilege” and seeks to move to some sort of framing akin to “from each according to their abilities and to each according to their needs” as justification for the entitled to take from the rest and for those who produce nothing and trade in political favors to grow fat upon the builders.

this really explodes with elite overproduction of midwits and sub midwits given degrees but not educations and airs but not intellect or drive. they become the always-on disaffected ready to attack meritocracy because they’re bad at it. this is why the en-midwitification of college has been so damaging.

when fully 1/3 of people with graduate degrees have IQ’s under 90 (and i’ll bet you tuna to tuppence that this concentrates heavily in education majors) you have a group with heavy debt, low intellect, and high expectations. they are thrilled to become middle-management commissars because such status is a way for them to rise. they support the regime that gives them position and power.

this flows all through the herd of sheepskin sheep. you connvince the 50th to 70th percentiles they are all 80th and 90th percentile people, and their simmering anger is your lever to move them. their incapacity colliding with their ego is a form of dependence. bingo, one more client group and one inculcated to want to be you middle management as long as you give them the occasional turn holding the whip hand.

aristocrats fundamentally stand in opposition to meritocracy. it can be no other way. it threatens both their position and their ability to dispense patronage to compel loyalty.

so they must vilify it. once aristocracies claimed divine right and justification by bloodline, now they have to get more creative.

appeals to justice and equity are just hollow mouth noises uttered to disingenuously justify privilege. they “know” they deserve this and do not really care what it takes to get there.

they see no issue with their own gang engaging in rape or murder.

they are protected by the guns and laws they will not extend to you because “we are special.”

the lies they tell you are justified because the ends of getting you to recognize this “natural order” justify the means.

it’s just pursuit of power, privilege, and patron status by people who obsessively see the world only in terms of such relationships.

they are the elite and unbound by your proletarian morals.

their clients are incapable of being bound and so get special privileges because “they don’t know no better.”

and the rest of us get trapped in the middle, bound by social contract, empathy, and a sense of fair play that is absent from the two groups attacking from either side.

it’s marxism and aristocrat 101: you bind the middle by offering the bottom special privileges if they in turn support your own and then setting the groups at war, electoral or cultural or otherwsie.

and so of course they always pick the worst clients.

the selection bias is ingrained. they need to mascot someone who can be captured by patronage and dependence.

and that is never the builders.

and so of course both groups rail about the unwinding of this regime and a return to the idea of merit.

merit is their kryptonite. their alliance is forged in flouting it and seizing property and privilege.

they oppose merit because in a meritocracy, they would not rule.

so, of course it’s hypocritical and dishonest.

and of course they do not care.

but the truth is the truth and as these narratives of persecution fall increasingly upon deaf ears, the regimes that enriched and ennobled this cast of grifters and oppressors and hid them behind meatwalls of useful idiots will fall.

they are now endlessly getting cornered in awful positions, supporting murderers, rapists, deviants, the actually insane, and threatening to shut down the government if we stop paying for healthcare and food for illegals brought here to skew the census and voter rolls.

there is nowhere left to hide and the awful awfulness of this is on increasingly incessant and vivid display.

let’s pretend for even an instant that a hapless lightweight like jasmine crockett could ever have risen to the front of a political movement not rooted in the promotion of idiocy. let’s pretend for a minute that she has a genuine bone in her body instead of being a spokesmoppet for political patrons seeking to stir the pot.

even then, just listen to the woman.

listen to the desperation and hallucination of her world view, all the false facts and framings.

it’s gorgeous. you could not build a more effective spokesperson to lose the center for the left, one more obviously dishonest and dangerous.

i have never in my life seen a group more desperate to tattle upon itself, to tell you through its accusations that of which it itself is guilty.

this is the last bastion of their privilege, one they are too far gone in echo chambers to realize that they have lost.

they are sure that they possess a right to be the only ones speaking, to set the narrative and cancel the counter narrative, that they have a monopoly on truth, that they will be believed.

the very free speech they seek for themselves becomes self-indictment. they simply cannot help themselves.

the left are having an extended “let them eat cake” moment of being so hilariously out of step as to mistake strychnine for salt as they seek to flavor their offerings.