Uhmm, no Mr. Gosling — it was an American acheivement

Nasa/Getty Images

Well, the Postmodern Outrage phrase for this week is: "The Western world is evil because _____."

All right. Let's just shuffle the Outrage deck here. The answer is: "Trump." Ah. Not that one again—there sure are a lot of Trump cards in this deck. Here, let me shuffle again. Here we go. This one just says "Flags."

Last week the movie "First Man" premiered. It's about Neil Armstrong and the moon landing. If you were to close your eyes, and I say "moon landing," odds are I can guess what images will come to mind. The American flag on the surface of the Moon. We've all seen that footage countless times. Landing on the Moon was no doubt a remarkable human achievement. It's also, inarguably, an American achievement. To say otherwise would be a denial of history.

RELATED: Brad Meltzer explains why Neil Armstrong is the hero we need right now

The movie "First Man" entirely omitted that moment. Which is just as much about artistic laziness as it is about historical importance—they could've done so much with that moment, from a creative perspective. Oh well. It's a movie. We should know what to expect from Hollywood by now. Shrug. Move on. Let the Left find something to be outraged about. It never stops there, though, not anymore.

Ryan Gosling made it clear that the omission of the planting of the flag was intentional because the moon landing was less an American accomplishment than a human accomplishment and that Neil Armstrong didn't see himself as an American hero.

Marco Rubio chimed in: "This is total lunacy. And a disservice at a time when our people need reminders of what we can achieve when we work together. The American people paid for that mission on rockets built by Americans, with American technology & carrying American astronauts. It wasn't a UN mission."

There's a reason there aren't any Italian flags, Brazilian flags, Ugandan flags, or Pakistani flags on the Moon. It's foolish to ignore that while, yes, the Moon landing was a human achievement, it was also the result of a distinctively American time in history. A film about the life of Socrates wouldn't ignore that he was Greek, or remove his nationality, "for the sake of universality." It's a matter of historical accuracy. But there's also the subtle political nonsense lurking behind it all.

There's a reason there aren't any Italian flags, Brazilian flags, Ugandan flags, or Pakistani flags on the Moon.

The movie's director Damien Chazelle made the following statement:

"To address the question of whether this was a political statement, the answer is no. … This film is about one of the most extraordinary accomplishments not only in American history but in human history." Fair enough.

It's hard to imagine that the director is not making a political statement. Here's a preview of his political beliefs as represented on Twitter: "We're living a historic moment. Things don't often come this clear-cut. Anyone in a position of power who stays silent is complicit."

Here's another one: "The Trump administration is openly endorsing Nazism and white supremacy. It's that simple."

"That the epic moral failure we're witnessing now will inspire a new activism. Might be naive. But in the meantime, I'm gonna try to do whatever I can. I gotta believe every little bit helps. Spread the word. Donate to @BLMNational , to @ACLU , to the @NAACP, to @PPact , to @swingleft. And call on the GOP as passionately as possible: impeach this loathsome misogynist racist."

It's fair to say that we can guess where he stands politically. I'd guess that if he were making a movie about Che Guevara, he'd gladly jam it with adoring images of Marxism.

He added that the focus of the film is Neil Armstrong, who is known—more than anything in his existence—as the man who planted the American flag. So that explanation is also a little hard to believe.

Then, Neil Armstrong's sons chimed on: "This story is human and it is universal. Of course, it celebrates an America achievement. It also celebrates an achievement "for all mankind," as it says on the plaque Neil and Buzz left on the moon. It is a story about an ordinary man who makes profound sacrifices and suffers through intense loss in order to achieve the impossible. … We do not feel this movie is anti-American in the slightest. Quite the opposite. But don't take our word for it. We'd encourage everyone to go see this remarkable film and see for themselves."

Fair enough. And, there is something to this. We run the risk of committing the same Outrage as the Left. But at the same time, it's not good to completely surrender to anti-American, anti-Western propaganda. We need to be able to call it out when we see it.

As I mention in Addiction to Outrage: "If we are to save our way of life, we must find our way back to what brought us all together in the first place. It is vital to understand that the Constitution didn't grant us these rights, it simply recognized, acknowledged, and codified their existence as a means to ensure everyone understood the government did not have the power or authority to deprive us of those things."

Their goal, which is distinctively Postmodern, is to strip all things of meaning. God, gender, nationality.

So much of Postmodernism resembles Circle 0 of Dante's Inferno, home to the Neutrals, those who never chose good or evil during life, who are so pathetic that they're waiting outside the gates of Hell for all eternity. They chase a "whirling banner" that can never contain meaning, disdainful of rules and order, and devoted to annihilation. Their goal, which is distinctively Postmodern, is to strip all things of meaning. God, gender, nationality.

Like the Postmodernists, the Neutrals have no regard for history. Neutrals stand beneath a blank flag. A flag is meant to be unique; it is an object emblematic "of allegiance and of loyalty." A flag, like the people and culture it symbolizes, has to stand for something.

There is no Postmodernism flag. It's a movement that actively avoids anything that would belong on a flag. To postmodernists, flags represent systemic oppression or outdated norms or corny solidarity. As such, postmodernism attacks the structures of society and reality. It seeks to obliterate all authority, at all costs, using lies and faked outrage.

Let's all stop and listen to the advice of the former stripper turned rapper

Emma McIntyre/Getty Images for iHeartMedia

Twitter stopped convulsing long enough yesterday to adjust their Trump Outrage from hamburgers to former-strippers. Yes, with the help of a news media desperate to outwit President Trump, the outrage machine tossed their fury about Trump serving McDonald's at the White House. Within minutes, that space was filled by the incoherent ramblings of a woman whose claim to fame is that she raps shallow, outlandish things and rarely wears actual clothing. If you just woke up from a coma, none of that will make any sense to you, but I'm afraid this is the world you've returned to. I'll explain more here in a minute.

If you turned on the news yesterday, you probably saw the same three or four stories on repeat. The government shutdown, of course. Something about the Mueller probe, of course. But you were also treated to scathing political opinions of a cultural bigwig. Was it Noam Chomsky? The Pope?

RELATED: Kanye is right

Nope. Think lower down the pyramid of insightfulness and merit.

Beto O'Rourke?

Lower.

A convict?

Still lower, actually.

Hillary Clinton?

You're moving in the right direction, but, if you can believe it, still lower.

Cardi B, the former-stripper-turned-mostly-unintelligible rapper who has taken the throne as the Queen of Rap, a position which actually has really high turnover rate. Her music brings joy to many people. That's wonderful. Why should we stop everything to hear what she has to say about politics?

Why was Cardi B front and center on CNN and MSNBC? How did her 4th-grade-reading-level rant send Twitter into a tailspin? Why do we need to know her opinion on the government shutdown?

If you want to see a rapper with courage, look to the astonishingly unpredictable Kanye West.

For some reason, our televisions swarmed with the rude, sassy, finger-snapping routine of a highly-privileged rapper. Instantly, it became clear that she clearly spent more time jamming bright-green eye shadow into her face than she did actually thinking about the validity of her words. The political equivalent of a broken toilet plunger expressed a widely-held Liberal opinion of President Trump (She was so passionate though!), and even took it a step further—as the Left seems fond of doing lately—and called half of the country racist or ignorant or something. And everything I just said is way more articulate and coherent than anything that Cardi B has or will ever say.

Most of all, her rant was nothing close to the courageous battle that MSM and Twitter have portrayed. If you want to see a rapper with courage, look to the astonishingly unpredictable Kanye West. Say what you want about the guy, it takes a lot of guts for him to put on the Trump hat. That's courage. That's conviction. Although, I have to say, I'd rather get my political opinions from people who actually know what they're saying.

Silicon Valley has turned into a real-life gameshow of wealth and absurdity. Yet poverty ravages parts of the San Francisco Bay Area so badly that there are piles of literal human poop on the sidewalks. People starving, people dying. Then, a few miles away, two cats live the life in their own personal apartment. You might wonder if this is news or not, and I'll tell you it is. It's a perfect fable for our times. Charles Dickens couldn't have written a more jarring story of excess. I'll tell you the rest in a minute…

Imagine it. A 72-inch 4K Ultra HD Television connected to gadget you've always wanted. The Bose soundbar has a subwoofer. Every time something happens on the screen the walls shake. The channel changes erratically. On the couch, a cat swipes at the remote for the AppleTV. Surely the owner is annoyed by the way the screen jumps from action scene to baseball game to commercial to QVC? Not at all.

RELATED: What the 💩 is going on in San Francisco?

As reported in the Mercury News:

The rent is taken care of by 43-year-old Troy Good, who saw the studio as a solution to a pressing problem: what to do with his daughter's beloved cats, which he couldn't abandon but also couldn't house in his new apartment.

Here's what the landlord had to say about it:


These 2 cats rent an apartment in San Jose youtu.be


The story would be cute if it weren't so ridiculous.

Somehow it's cute and dystopian. In San Francisco, $117,000 is considered "low income." It has been consistently ranked the most expensive city to live in America. Walk around San Francisco and you'll see ridiculously wealthy people trying to angle their Lamborghinis up the steepest hills you've ever seen, revving into corners like they're driving disposable bicycles.

Somehow it's cute and dystopian.

At the same time, San Francisco, like much of California, is in the throes of a full-scale crisis, rampant homelessness. Piles of human feces and heavily-used syringes cover sidewalks and benches. Parts of the city are unnavigable because of the tents and the mentally-ill people crowding the streets or underpasses or bus stations. Poverty like you wouldn't imagine.

Yet a few miles away, two cats are living in a $1,500-a-month apartment because their 18-year-old got some kittens, named them after characters from Bob's Burgers, made them an Instagram account, then went off to college. What choice did she have?

The great beyond. What does it hide from us? Do unknown lifeforms linger in the dark? In other words, was David Bowie right? Is there life on Mars? The head of Harvard University's Astronomy Department contends that, yes, there is. Well, not that there's life on Mars. I'll explain in just a minute.

In an academic article for the Astrophysical Journal Letters, Dr. Avi Loeb, the head of Harvard University's Astronomy Department, claimed that an alien probe entered our solar system. He claimed that it is masked as the space rock Oumuamua (Ow-moo-ah-moo-ah), "the first interstellar object to enter our solar system." It turns out that "space rock" is way more than a musical genre.

RELATED: Science saves us again: Octopuses are really aliens who crash-landed on Earth

In his own words:

Considering an artificial origin, one possibility is that 'Oumuamua is a lightsail, floating in interstellar space as a debris from an advanced technological equipment.

His evidence? pointed to the space rock's abnormal acceleration, activity which he gathered via the Hubble Space Telescope.

He added that "the lightsail technology might be abundantly used for transportation of cargo between planets."

Sounds a bit like Star Wars, no? Or are you more of a Star Trek fan? Either way, it's an odd thing to hear from the head of Harvard University's Astronomy Department. Typically, we hear these sorts of things from the darker corners of the History Channel.

Well, I'll say that, at this point, I'm not really surprised. It's 2019. I'm not surprised by anything anymore.

"I don't care what people say," Loeb said. "It doesn't matter to me. I say what I think, and if the broad public takes an interest in what I say, that's a welcome result as far as I'm concerned, but an indirect result. Science isn't like politics: It is not based on popularity polls."

Honestly, I believe the guy. Well, I'll say that, at this point, I'm not really surprised. It's 2019. I'm not surprised by anything anymore. Heck, I welcome alien lifeforms. Maybe they can give us some advice on how to get our world together.

The third annual Women's March is approaching, and the movement has shown signs of strife. It's imploding, really. An article in Tablet Magazine revealed deep-seated antisemitism among the co-chairs of the movement, which is funny for a movement that brands itself as a haven of "intersectionality." The examples pile up, and just yesterday there was another. I'll tell you about it in a minute.

The Women's March has been imploding, and it started at the very top. Four women have come to represent the diverse face of the movement, the co-chairs: Tamika Mallory, Carmen Perez, Linda Sarsour, and Bob Bland.

RELATED: LEFTIST INSANITY: Woman attacked at women's rights rally for exercising her rights

Increasingly, we've learned that anti-Semitism is common among these women.

Teresa Shook, who founded the Women's March has repeatedly asked them to step down: The co-chairs "have steered the Movement away from its true course. I have waited, hoping they would right the ship," Shook wrote. "But they have not. In opposition to our Unity Principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti-LBGTQIA sentiment and hateful, racist rhetoric to become a part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs."

Tamika Mallory gave us the latest example, by continuing to stand by Louis Farrakhan. Check out Tamika's arrogant, nonsensical response. But the real problem came at the end of Mallory's rambling non-answer.



Women's March Leader Tamika Mallory Doubles Down On Love For Louis Farrakhan youtu.be


Later this week I'll go over the entire controversy on Glenn TV. It's harrowing, really. For now, I'll leave you with this. Critics of 4th wave feminism have argued that the radical identity politics of the left will lead to the exact kind of mistreatment that feminists claim to be against. That argument has been written off as using the slippery slope fallacy. But, as we see with the Women's March, it is in fact a brutal reality.