The Ulsterman Report has an insightful analysis of the publishing block-buster, “Fifty Shades of Grey,” the first of a trilogy of erotic novels based on a fan-fiction take-off on the vampire-genre “Twilight” series.

I have been reading about and around this story for a while, including wading through the first volume in e-book format, where it allegedly first made its name, looking for clues to bolster my hunch that this is an elite media psyop.

I started out believing it was about mainstreaming BDSM (Bondage-discipline, Dominance-Submission, and Sado-Masochism), but  because of the virginal nature of the heroine, I saw it as a romanticizing of an abusive relationship between an inexperienced young woman and a sociopath.

That would be bad enough.

The Ulsterman report however goes further and argues that the story line is a cover, a sop to mainstream sensibilities, which is marketing it as “mommy porn”.  The report argues that Fifty Shades is actually a sick joke at the expense of American mothers and what it actually glamorizes is the pedophilic rape of a just pubescent or pre-pubescent child.

The analysis of the book’s sub-text is disturbing and thoroughly convincing, but there is yet another angle it leaves out that I will address in another post on the piece. I strongly advise anyone who has the time to put pressure on public libraries to withdraw this book from their shelves. On my part, I will also talk to local Walmarts where they are piling up this piece of dangerous propaganda, to cease and desist.

I hear that a couple of public libraries in Florida and New Jersey (?) have already done so. No need to censor it and turn the book into a first amendment issue. Let people read it privately. But it sure as heck needs to be boycotted in the public square.

Here’s the piece:

50 Shades of Grey – Pedophilia Hiding In Plain Sight

Read more in News

« Anti-Obama Book Now #2 On New York Times Besteller List

Hillary Clinton Tells Valerie Jarrett – NO THANKS »

The story of convicted child rapist Jerry Sandusky is well known.  So too is the 50 Shades of Grey phenomena, a book that has become so popular among women that some are referring to it as “Mommy Porn” for the masses.  That description is actually a lot more disturbing than a lot of folks are currently realizing.

Yes, 50 Shades is pornography. Like most pornography, the storyline is weak, the characters one-dimensional, while the sex itself graphic, detailed, but formulaic.  The underlying theme to 50 Shades is something far more sinister and appalling though than your mere run-of-the-mill porn.  It is pedophilia.  It is child porn.  Kiddie porn.

Now I know after saying that, many female fans of 50 Shades, many of them mothers, will naturally put up a defense against that kind of description.  These women, being mothers, are naturally wired to protect kids.  People like Jerry Sandusky are viewed with hatred, revulsion, and disgust.  Rightfully so.  What mother would want to condone anything having to do with the sexual abuse of children?  Of innocents?

But that is exactly what 50 Shades of Grey is really about.  It is a story of a girl being sexually molested, over and over again, by a male figure with all the power, all the control.  It is the classic abuse scenario.  And mothers are, in some cases, quite literally getting off on it, which takes the disgust of this phenomena to a whole other frightening level.

So having put that out there, and I hope I haven’t lost any of you just yet.  I owe you an explanation after having made that kind of accusation about a book some of you may be reading right now.  I’ll start with a bit of background first.

My professional experience centers around nearly 20 years with Child Protective Services.  Over that time, I’ve seen situations that do, literally, keep me up at night.  The amount of abuse that is going on in our society, that sexualization of our kids…well basically, what you hear about, what is reported in the news, that is only a small sample of just how large of a problem and the disgusting acts that are going on every day.  Kids are being raped.  Kids are being abused.  Every single day.  Over and over and over again.

I didn’t seek out 50 Shades of Grey.  It was brought to my attention by a longtime friend who is also a clinical psychologist at a university.  She’s a bit older than me.  She grew up in the counter culture era and did her fair share of experimentation of all kinds.  So she’s hardly a prude.  What she today though is a mother and grandmother.  And she’s smart.  One of the things that fascinates her is this age of cultural phenomena.  How due to technology things now spread so quickly throughout society and become the next big thing at an increasingly rapid pace.  She says sometimes this phenomena is pretty much harmless, and other times it can be very damaging to kids and or adults who begin to emulate something out of a need to belong to the “next big thing”.

Her reaction to 50 Shades of Grey though was much more aggressively negative than anything I could recall her talking about before.  It came up because I mentioned it to her offhand.  I had seen a couple mentions of it on the news and knowing her interest in cultural trends, asked her about it.  She stopped talking, looked right at me, and said the book was about pedophilia.   And it was her who then connected it to the Sandusky tragedy where so many young boys had been sexually abused. Sandusky committed his acts of crime under the cover of actually helping youth.  That is how he gained access.  My friend said 50 Shades was basically the same exact thing.  Its cover was a story of a young woman engaging is a very graphic sexual relationship with a somewhat older man.

The problem for her, and it was a BIG PROBLEM, was that the narrator in the story, was in fact, an underage girl.  My friend indicated, based on the use of language in the narration, that this girl was likely no more than 12 or 13 years of age.  I made mention that the girl in the story was actually getting ready to graduate college.  My friend, a woman with years of experience as a clinical psychologist, whose expertise I had personally witnessed a number of times over the years, shook her head and told me that she would not be able to convince me by simply talking about it.  She said I should read the book myself, but do so with the eyes of somebody whose job it had been for many years to try and protect children.  As someone who has seen over and over the signs of abuse, and the damages of abuse.   Because there are always warning signs.  I know that.  How many times have I heard people horrified in saying “I can’t believe I didn’t see that”  “How couldn’t I have known?”  Or even worse, “I knew something wasn’t right but I didn’t want to believe they were capable of doing something like that.”

I’ll try and summarize my friend’s words at this point as best I can.

“Sexual predators are cons.  They almost always have a cover.  It’s that cover which allows them access.  50 Shades of Grey is a con.  It now has access to millions of readers.  It is a story about abuse from beginning to end.  And it’s not just the abuse of a man and a woman – it’s the abuse of a man and a girl.

When you read it, look for the signs.  They are all there.

The female character has no sexual experience.  None.  She is given the age of 21, but that age is itself a cover.  Her true emotional age is much-much younger.  She has never even masturbated.  She has never even experienced an orgasm.  That alone is one of the greatest attractions to the pedophile.  That is the psychology of that kind of act.  You get off on taking purity.

But move from the fact the girl has no sexual experience whatsoever.  Now pay attention to her narrative dialogue.  Really listen to how she talks.  Again, she’s not talking like a young woman, she’s talking like a girl.  She talks about cartwheels, and skipping, over and over again it is the language and the imagery of a girl.

After that this girl has her innocence taken from her.  The abuser, the older man, makes her think its her choice.  Again, you and I both know that is one of the primary tools of the pedophile.  They create an environment where the child feels it’s their idea.  It’s what they want. But what happens after that innocence is taken away?  Then the abuser becomes more openly abusive. Controlling.  In this story he tells the little girl how to speak.  What to wear.  What to eat.  He is Daddy and she is daughter.  When you read it read it like a mother who is also a woman who is experienced with the real life tragedy of abuse.

And there is many more themes about that abuse in this book.  There is spanking and the use of Baby oil.  Why baby oil?  Think about it.  The girl wears pigtails.  She complains that he is treating her like a child.  He says she acts like a child.  There is even a scene where the abuser creates a situation to take her innocence from her again.  He rips out her tampon and engages in forceful sex yet again.  Her hymen is ripped, and the bloody remnants of it are again symbolized in an act of pedophile rape.”

She went on to say there are women now defending the book, and she understands that, but it concerns her.  A great deal, because she is absolutely convinced the book is purposely advocating the raping of a child and attempting to normalize that atrocity.

So, I left that conversation thinking maybe my friend was exaggerating.  I had a hard time believing something so popular could actually have such a sinister and revolting theme, and while I respected her expertise and experience, thought this time she had to be seeing something that just wasn’t there.

I got the book, I sat down, and I read it.

The first thing that struck me was how poor the writing was.  It wasn’t just bad.  It was horrible.  But horrible writing is no crime, (thank goodness or I would have been put away a long time ago) and it doesn’t make the content of the story evil.  But in my reading of it, just like my friend said, the theme of child abuse, of pedophilia, was right there in plain sight.  I remember being told a long time ago that sometimes the best way to hide something is in plain sight.  That is what 50 Shades of Grey is really doing.

The main character had no sexual experience.  None.  She was an innocent.  She was a kid who had just had her first drink of alcohol.  No way that was an accident by the author.  That author had to have purposely made her, despite her given age of 21, by any other measure, a little girl.  At that point, it struck me as odd.  In my business, we call that a warning signal. A sign we may have a problem.

From there, just like my friend had warned, it got worse.  Much worse.  And she was right, her telling me about it did not have the impact of me reading it myself with eyes open.  She had given me the signs to look for, and as I turned the pages, those signs confirmed it over and over again.

The narration, which is the voice of the girl talking to the reader, was the voice of a little girl.  It’s unmistakable.  There is very little emotional maturity and absolutely no sexual maturity.  She is seduced by this man in the very same way a pedophile seduces a child.  The male character is Gerry Sandusky.  He makes a show of his money, his power, the things he can buy for her, but while this is going on, we are reading the thoughts of a child.  We are reading the seduction of a little girl by a pedophile.  She is almost completely powerless.  She is naïve even for a teenager, and certainly much much more naïve than a college student.  She is incapable of even making the most simple of every day decisions and must be told what to do by her abuser, who in turn though spends a lot of time and effort convincing this child this is really what she wants.  I’ve seen this before.  Too often.  Too many times.  And it always leaves me sickened.

We are reading child pornography.  Remove the false age of the girl, which has no basis in reality, and what we are actually reading is the abuse of a little girl.

The main character is described in pigtails, given words like “Holy Cow”  “down there”, “jeez”  “double crap” she can’t operate a computer (but is supposedly a college graduate), describes skipping and doing cartwheels, repeatedly says she is made to feel like a child, has her imaginary friend (inner goddess) feels shame, is spanked and slathered in BABY OIL, told what to say, what to eat, what to do, until finally and sadly so predictably, is physically beaten.  (But she returns to him soon after, which is again, a very common theme of abuse, including pedophilia)

And beyond all of this evidence there is the fact that the male character is himself a product of sexual abuse at the hands of a pedophile.  The girl whose thoughts we listen in on as she is being abused, recognizes this aspect of the male abuser, but apparently, is too naïve or unwilling to realize she has continued this cycle of abuse herself. (Which again reinforces the idea that she is actually herself just a child)  There is no way the author did this by accident.  She puts out the theme of pedophilia openly, therefore hiding it in plain sight.

People who have had to deal with the real world of sexual abuse of children will understand this perhaps more easily than others.  How the pedophile is so often themselves victims of earlier abuse.  They enter society, they become fathers or mothers, but so often they too become abusive.  They seek out dominance, control, and the taking of innocence just as it was taken from them.  Those who were once abused, become the abuser.  It is the sad sick and tragic cycle of pedophilia.

With 50 Shades of Grey this abnormal condition is trying to be normalized.  Thanks to the insight of my friend, and my own experience,  I know it for what it truly is – a story of the sexual abuse of child, wrapped in the cliché cover story of a mysterious and troubled wealthy man.  That is another thing my clinical psychologist friend pointed out later.  Take away the aspect of money, and the character of the abuser becomes much less attractive and therefore it would have been much more difficult to pull of the deception.  Are women actually that shallow?  Yes, we can be.

But women, the vast majority of us, are not people who knowingly condone the sexual abuse of children.  We do not condone in any way, the horror that is pedophilia.

Sadly though, that is exactly what is happening with the popularity of 50 Shades of Grey.  It’s a pedophilia con.

It is one of the most horrible and sickening acts against the most powerless of our society, hiding in plain sight.

Maybe my friend put it best when we talked all of this over.  50 Shades of Grey didn’t excite her.  She didn’t find it interesting, sexy, or romantic.

50 Shades of Grey made her weep.  It made her sick.  It made her think of the abuses of all of those kids by a demented, warped monster like Jerry Sandusky, who, just like the pedophilia of 50 Shades of Grey, was hiding in plain sight.

Half-sigma, another manosphere blogger, describes how value is created by Asian employees and extracted, via “Ivy League” brand marketing, top-heavy corporate structure, and inflated management/investment banking salaries, by largely white elites.

The same thing can be said of practically everything else in the state-capitalist fiat money system:-

“A blogger called Education Realist (whom I found on Steve Sailer’s blog) wrote the following:

If you read of a school that’s suddenly moved to elite status or seen a dramatic rise in test scores (e.g., AIPCS), or heard that a test prep process has gotten out of control, it’s a sure thing that it’s become “an Asian school,” as we call them in my area. Once a school “goes Asian”, hitting a tipping point of about 40%, it’s a short step to 60-80%. Check out the top-scoring comprehensive high schools by SAT average, and the highest ones will be “Asian schools”. They end up Asian because of white flight. It’s not that whites don’t like Asians, but their kids will lose access to AP/honors courses and get lower GPAs—not because they have lower abilities, but because the white parents haven’t managed to convince their kids that the world will end of they don’t get straight As.

I love learning stuff like this from bloggers. Until now, I never really thought about how there’s an Asian tipping point in public schools. But of course, it makes perfect sense.

* * *

BrunoBrazil writes:

Sigma, what the heck do you have against asians that have their noses to the grindstone, work hard, grind to tests, become betas with average families and suceed in situations where people from other ethnicities fail? As far as I can see, it is at least a culture that doesn´t promote eliteness, but makes socially adjusted individuals who are much better off than whites or blacks in the same context.

I don’t have anything against. Asians. I enjoy calling out SWPLs for their racist and hypocritical behavior.

But as I previously explained, Asians are acting against their children’s interests with their Asian parenting style:

The Chinese parenting style will no doubt produce workers who are good value creators, and their corporate employers will love them, and they will be paid far less money than the value they create, the excess value being transferred to white people who got into better colleges because their curricula vitae had more leadership and sports activities, and with those more prestigious educational credentials they got into higher paying value transference career tracks like investment banking and upper level management, and now enjoy the value created by those Chinese cubicle employees who are doing the real work and the real value creation.”

Don Boland, a lecturer at the Center for Thomistic studies in Sydney, Austrialia, argues that the errors of post-Christian society far exceed the errors of post-pagan society:

In his book “The Well and the Shallows” G. K. Chesterton has a chapter entitled “Sex and Property”. In it he says: But even the stink of decaying heathenism has not been so bad as the stink of decaying Christianity. The corruption of the best. . .

He was referring to public sexual immorality as it manifested itself in the ancient world and as it was in his time beginning to manifest itself in the modern world. Gross and obscene as the pagan practices may have been, Chesterton sees reason to compare them favorably with the modern. Thus he says: In one way all this ancient sin was infinitely superior, immeasurably superior, to the modern sin.

What is this way in which, despite its decadence, the ancient was superior to the modern worship of sexual pleasure? The answer follows on immediately: The ancient sexual perversity, as all historians agree, was connected to the cult of Fruitfulness… Hence, Chesterton observes; It was at least on the side of Nature. It was at least on the side of Life. The modern “sexual revolution”, however, has completely severed the natural connection of sexual pleasure with life. It has been left to the last Christians, or rather to the first Christians fully committed to blaspheming and denying Christianity, to invent a new kind of worship of Sex, which is not even a worship of Life. It has been left to the very latest Modernists to proclaim an erotic religion which at once exalts lust and forbids fertility.

He goes on to add: this unnatural separation, between sex and fruitfulness … even the Pagans would have thought a perversion. Today, this perversion even to the dissolute Pagans has become so widely accepted and practiced that it is claimed to be as “natural” as sexual intercourse which is apt, barring natural impediments, to produce offspring, and any moral denunciation of it is beginning to be treated as perverse, even by legislators. One can only contemplate with dismay how this socially “moral” turnaround must end.

Chesterton noticed this unnatural separation that characterizes the modern attitude to sex in the early part of the twentieth century. The subsequent years between then and now have seen the gradual re-education of society’s attitude to sex so that its divorce from any natural connection with the continuation of human life is made as complete as possible. The introduction of the contraceptive pill played a decisive part in this disconnection process.

The educators in de-perversion having done their job, in relatively recent times social sexual practices have followed suit till we have reached the stage where “sex” between consenting adults, of whatever degree of depravity, is not only looked upon as “normal”, but is also given social respectability and legal recognition.

This, however, is not an isolated phenomenon. As the title of his article indicates, Chesterton sees that something analogous has happened in relation to our attitude to property or wealth. Put shortly, it is that our desire for wealth too has been separated from its natural end. In moral terms this means that, just as the propagandists for the new sexual morality have exalted pure lust as the rationale for engaging in sexual relations, so have the proponents of the new economic morality elevated pure greed or avarice to be the primary motive for engaging in wealth-getting.

How can this occur? Obviously, at root there is moral fault. But there is no moral fault or sin without a corresponding mental error. This latter is what we are mainly concerned to analyze here. Chesterton thus says: In both departments [sex and property] there is precisely the same fallacy; which it is quite possible to state precisely. The reason why our contemporary countrymen do not understand what we mean by Property is that they only think of it in the sense of Money ,,, in the sense of something which is immediately consumed, enjoyed and expended; something which gives momentary pleasure and disappears.

That is to say we have ignored the proper purpose of wealth, to satisfy our natural needs and rational wants, and gone for the pleasure that accompanies the possession of property, as if this could satisfy by itself. Now there is nothing wrong in enjoying one’s God-given wealth, provided it is being used for what it is created for, namely, to satisfy our desires for material goods within reason, or in accordance with nature. This pleasure in possession of wealth is epitomized in the possession of money, as it can stand for all wealth. But what happens is that money, being a pure means, disconnects us even further from the natural end of wealth. So we can be deceived into seeking to have money for its own sake, or simply for the pleasure attached to having much wealth.

Chesterton thus continues the analogy: Now the notion of narrowing property merely to ‘enjoying’ money is exactly like the notion of narrowing love merely to ‘enjoying’ sex. In both cases an incidental, isolated, servile and even secretive pleasure is substituted for participation in a great creative process; even in the everlasting Creation of the world.

Pleasure, as Aristotle noted, is not something bad but good. But it does not and cannot stand alone; it complements some naturally good act. It is not, therefore, properly an end in itself. If we try to possess it without respecting the natural end of the act to which it belongs it vanishes as something without substance, without any support. To pursue pleasure for its own sake is to pursue a delusion, and to achieve not pleasure but misery, which accompanies the unnatural disorder put in the place of the natural order of things. The sweet smell of natural goodness turns quickly into the stink of decadence, though for a time the person concerned may “enjoy” the sickly odor of decay.

What the pleasure of possession thrives and survives in is the achievement of the natural and creative ends of wealth and production. They do not understand that we mean by Property something that includes that pleasure incidentally; but begins and ends with something far more grand and worthy and creative.

Chesterton then makes an interesting observation about Communism and Capitalism. The modern mistake regarding sex and property is not peculiar to the capitalist West. For, it is an attitude that has its roots in the decline of Christian civilization and the rise of the modern secularized world.

The same basic attitude towards enjoying money is noted by Chesterton to be just as much present in the communist society as in the capitalist. From the first, it is admitted, that the whole system was directed towards encouraging or driving the worker to spend his wages; to have nothing left on the next pay day; to enjoy everything and consume everything and efface everything. That is to say Consumerism was a matter of deliberate policy.

Indeed, many would think that Chesterton goes too far in saying that Communism ironically took to its logical extreme, and implemented by force, what is inherent in the psychology of Capitalism about the pursuit of pleasure and money, but is there left, at least in theory, to the initiative of individuals to realize. The two sinister things [the mistaken modern beliefs about sex and property] can be seen side by side in the system of Bolshevist Russia; for Communism is the only complete and logical working model of Capitalism. The sins are there a system which are everywhere else a sort of repeated blunder.

But perhaps Chesterton was more perceptive than most. Certainly, Capitalism in the West, hardly able to resist the temptation to regard the sudden and unexpected demise of Communism as confirmation of the truth of its liberal ideology, seems to be drifting more and more towards the same sort of totalitarianism, as if driven by an inexorable internal logic.

The psychology of sex, despite the apparent difference in its political “management”, is also noted by Chesterton to be something common to both the modern West and East. But it will be noted that exactly the same spirit and tone pervades the manner of dealing with the other matter. Sex also is to come to the slave merely as a pleasure; that it may never be a power. He is to know as little as possible, or at least to think as little as possible, of the pleasure as anything else except a pleasure; to think or know nothing of where it comes from or where it will go to, when once the soiled object has passed through his own hands. He is not to trouble about its origin in the purposes of God or its sequel in the posterity of man. In every department he is not a possessor, but only a consumer;

There is no difficulty in recognizing this as also a description of the self-made slave of sex in the Western world. Chesterton thus sums up with a hint of what all this has led to – the culture of death instead of life:

Thus there is an exact parallel between the two modern moral, or immoral, ideas of social reform. The world has forgotten simultaneously that the making of a Farm is something much larger than the making of a profit, or even a product, in the sense of liking the taste of beetroot sugar; and that the founding of a Family is something much larger than sex in the limited sense of current literature; which was anticipated in one bleak and blinding flash in a single line of George Meredith; “And eat our pot of honey on the grave.”

Don Boland

G.K., an Indian-American “manosphere” blogger at The Futurist analyzes the financial crisis in terms of feminist social engineering, in the following excerpt, part of a long, provocative post on yet another bubble that might be in the process of popping – the bubble in misandry:

“The ‘Mancession’ and the ‘Sheconomy’ : I would be the first to be happy if the economic success of women were solely on the basis of pure merit.  For many of them, it is.  But far too much has been the result of not market forces or meritocracy, but political graft and ideology-driven corruption.

In the recent recession and ongoing jobless recovery, the male unemployment rate continues to be much higher than the female unemployment rate.  If this was simply due to market forces, that would be fine.  However, ‘feminist’ groups have lobbied hard to ensure that government stimulus funds were steered to boost female employment at the expense of assistance for men.  The leftist Obama administration was more than eager to comply, and a forcible transfer of wealth was enacted, even though it may not have been the best deployment of money for the economy.

Maria Shriver, a woman who has the most fortunate of lives from the vast wealth earned first by her grandfather and then by her husband, recently published ‘A Woman’s Nation : The Shriver Report’, consisting of gloating about how women were now outperforming men economically.  The entire research report is full of all the standard bogus feminist myths and flawed statistics, as thoroughly debunked here, as well as the outright sexism of statements like ‘women are better managers’ (imagine a man saying the reverse).  Furthermore, the report reveals the typical economic illiteracy (evidenced by, among other things, the ubiquitous ‘women are underpaid’ myth), as well as belief that businesses exist to act as vehicles of social engineering rather than to produce a profit.

All of this bogus research and organized anti-male lobbying has been successful.  As of today, the male unemployment rate is worse than the female unemployment rate by an unprecedented chasm.  The ‘mancession’ continues as the US transitions to a ‘sheconomy’, and among the millions of unemployed men, some owe prohibitive levels of ‘child support’ despite not being the ones wanting to deprive their children of a two-parent household, landing in prison for lack of funds.  Furthermore, I emphasize again that having 10-30% of the US male workforce living under an effective 70% marginal tax rate will kill their incentives for inventing new technologies or starting new companies.  It is petty to debate whether the top federal income tax bracket should be 35% or 39.6%, when a slice of the workforce is under a 70% tax on marginal income.  Beyond the tyranny of this, it also costs a lot of taxpayer money to jail a growing pool of unemployed men.  Clearly, moving more and more men out of a tax-generating capacity and into a tax-consuming capacity is certainly going to do two-fold damage to governmental budgets.  The next time you hear someone say that ‘the US has the largest prison population in the world’, be sure to mention that many of these men merely lost their jobs, and were divorced against their will.  The women, in the meantime, are having a blast.

The Government Bubble : While public sector vs. private sector workforce distribution is not highly correlated to gender, it is when the focus is on women earning over $100,000 or more.  This next chart from the Cato Institute shows that when total compensation (wages + benefits) are taken into account, the public sector has totally outstripped the private sector this decade.  Has the productivity of the typical government employee risen so much more than that of the private worker, that the government employee is now paid twice as much?  Are taxpayers receiving value for their money?

It goes further.  The vast majority of social security taxes are paid by men, but are collected by women (due to women living 7 years longer than men on average).  That is not troubling by any means, but the fact that women consume two-thirds of all US healthcare, despite most of this $2.5 Trillion annual expenditure being paid by men, is certainly worthy of debate.  It may be ‘natural’ for women to require more healthcare, since they are the ones who give birth.  But it was also ‘natural’ for men to finance this for only their wives, not for the broader community of women.  The healthcare profession also employs an immense number of women, and not just in value-added roles such as nursing, but even in administrative and bureaucratic positions.  In fact, virtually all government spending except for defense and infrastructure, from Medicare to Obamacare to welfare to public sector jobs for women to the expansion of the prison population, is either a net transfer of wealth from men to women, or a byproduct of the destruction of Marriage 1.0.  In either case, ‘feminism’ is the culprit.

This Cato Institute chart of Federal Government spending (click to enlarge) shows how non-defense expenditures have steadily risen since 1960.  The decline in defense spending, far from being a ‘peace dividend’ repatriated back to taxpayers, was used to fund more social programs.  No one can seriously claim that the American public receives better non-defense governance in 2010 than in 1960 despite the higher price, and as discussed earlier, most of this increase is a direct or indirect result of ‘feminism’.  When state and local government wastage is added to this, it would appear that 20% of GDP is being spent just to make the government a substitute for the institution of Marriage, and yet still has not managed to be an effective replacement.  Remember again that the earnings of men pays 70%-80% of all taxes.

The left has finally found a perfect Trojan Horse through which to expand a tyrannical state.  ‘Feminists’ can lobby for a transfer of wealth from men to women and from private industry to the government, while knowing that calling any questioner a ‘misogynist’ will silence him far more effectively than their military fifth columnist, environmentalist, and plain socialist brethren could ever silence their respective opponents.  Conservatives are particularly vulnerable to such shaming language, and most conservatives will abandon their stated principles to endlessly support any and all socialism if it can be packaged as ‘chivalry’, the opposition to which makes one a ‘misogynist’.  However, there is reason to believe that tax collection in many parts of the US, such as in states like CA, NY, NJ, and MA, has reached saturation.  As the optimal point has already been crossed, a rise in tax rates will cause a decrease, rather than an increase in revenue, and the increase in Federal tax rates exactly one year from today on 1/1/2011 is likely to cause another recession, which will not be so easily transferred to already-impoverished men the next time.

When men are severed from their children with no right to obstruct divorce, when they are excluded from the labor market not by market forces but rather by social engineering, and when they learn that the society they once believed in and in some cases joined the military to protect, has no respect for their aspirations, these men have no reason to sustain such a society.

The Contract Between the Sexes : A single man does not require much in order to survive.  Most single men could eke out a comfortable existence by working for two months out of the year.  The reason that a man might work hard to earn much more than he needs for himself is to attract a wife amidst a competitive field, finance a home and a couple of children, and ultimately achieve status as a pillar of the community.  Young men who exhibited high economic potential and favorable compatibility with the social fabric would impress a girl’s parents effectively enough to win her hand in marriage.  The man would proceed to work very hard, with the fruits of his labor going to the state, the employer, and the family.  80-90% of a man’s output went to people other than himself, but he got a family and high status in return, so he was happy with the arrangement.

The Four Sirens changed this, which enabled women to pursue alpha males despite the mathematical improbability of marrying one, while totally ignoring beta males.  Beta males who were told to follow a responsible, productive life of conformity found that they were swindled.

This superb article explains how men who excelled under the societal rules of just two decades ago are often left totally betrayed by the rules of today, and results in them refusing to sustain a society heavily dependent on their productivity and ingenuity.  Rather than restate the case, go over and read that article, from which I will quote a few sentences.

“The media is now denouncing Sodini as a monster, which he is, but he is a monster that could only be spawned by a monstrous society. The sort of society that could send a hardworking, honest man down the path of insane, murderous rage is not only a society that will not survive, but doesn’t deserve to.”

“A man like George Sodini, who listened to his cultural elites and followed their dictates to the letter only to get swindled, had no reason to love America. In fact, he had every reason to lash out at the society that screwed him over and make its denizens feel some of the pain that they had inflicted on him.”

“You could stop this madness tomorrow by refusing to follow your vaginas straight into the arms of scumbags, and actually live up to your claims of wanting nice guys – but I doubt you will. You’ve made your bed, ladies – now sleep in it.”

Comment:

Mark Ames has a perceptive analysis of the Sodini shootings at eXile that isn’t too far from this manosphere analysis.

I get a kick out of reading what are called “conspiracy” sites and trying to figure what their angle is.

Not all of them do have an angle, of course. Some are actually well-researched and largely truthful websites, even if the evidence on them would not meet academic approval.

The nature of the subject makes that difficult in many cases.

But there are times when they peddle some laugh-out-loud error that needs to be administered a good hard kick.

One such boo-boo is on Henry Makow’s more-than-somewhat misogynistic site.

This is not to trash the site. I find a lot of very interesting information on it. A recent piece on theosophy and the Indian independence movement, for example, highlights a whole bunch of interesting associations among independence activists and leaders.

But Makow’s narrative, his history of the independence movement, like his history of banking, is simply not accurate.

In fact, it’s wildly off-base on important things. And that undermines not only his credibility, but the credibility of anyone else offering alternative views of history that cover the same ground.

That’s the problem.

Again, I’m not trashing Mr. Makow or his viewpoint.

And I sincerely respect these kinds of popular conspiracy sites, however bizarre or ludicrous they might seem to the official media or to academia.  No matter what the motivation that lies behind them, my reasoning is that if they do nothing else, they help to loosen the grip of official historical dogmas on the mass mind. This is enormously important.

Births are always accompanied by a lot of hollering and mess.

From the cumulative efforts of thousands…if not millions…. of sites like this, something new, some new consciousness is being born.

A new consciousness that undermines the stultified hagiography and propaganda served up to us by the state, academicians, and the media.

That is why, errors and all, these new populist web histories are intellectually and psychologically freeing.

Nonetheless,  in the interests of not veering off into lunacy, the errors should be noted and corrected.

I’m thinking especially of the piece on the Indian independence movement, but I’ll dissect that at another time. It will take too much time now.

Here, I’ll content myself with this small gem, from an article on the Beatles:

“John Lennon sings ‘gai guru deva’ (all hail to the devas). In Theosophy, a deva is a spiritual entity, i.e. demon, which exists behind the scenes manipulating and directing human behavior. Luciferians believe they are possessed by these entities when they rape, torture and kill innocent victims.”

I hope no one gets their introduction to Hinduism from the Beatles, but if they do, the phrase is “Jaya Guru Deva.”

That translates into “Hail to the teacher (the guru), the divine.”

A deva is literally a god, but can be translated here as divine.

The guru is your spiritual master, the one who keeps you on the straight and narrow.

Most gurus (apart from the glitzier ones catering to the West or various charlatans) follow ancient traditions reaching back directly to the Vedic past, that were handed down to them by their gurus.

Anyone who taught any new-fangled innovation would soon be caught out by other gurus in that tradition.

What do gurus teach?

The scriptures (the Vedas and commentaries on them), meditation, control of the breath and the senses, spiritual practice. If the guru is a guru of dance or music or yoga, he will teach those disciplines.

Nothing to do with theosophy or demons raping or killing anyone.

It would take five seconds to find that out on the net today.

Ye gods!

Update:

I’m marveling at the hypocrisy of the mainstream media in trashing Gandhi as a pedophile, when there is not a jot of evidence that he had sex with any of the post-pubertal women who attended him.

Gandhi was renowned for talking about every single thing he did and thought, so his words can easily be taken out of context and used against him.

Yet on Gore Vidal’s actual documented promiscuous pederasty, about which he talked volubly and publicly, for his open and proud support for removing all age-of-consent laws (whatever you think about them), and on his well-known support for NAMBLA  (the pro-pedophile advocacy group) there is complete silence in the mainstream media.

Why? Because Vidal was one of them.

But why the adulation for Vidal in the alternative media?

Because he was antiwar.

A good enough reason.

But, still, any genuine assessment of Vidal’s life and work should put his antiwar statements into context. Where they become much less admirable.

Vidal was anti-war, because America was involved in war, and, first and foremost, he hated things that were quintessentially American and middle-class.

So he hated Christianity and  Judaism and monotheism itself.

He was a militant atheist who wrote books that didn’t just criticize but mocked figures sacred to Christianity, making Jesus into a kind of buffoon.

With the  sado-masochistic sexologist and pedophile-enabler Alfred Kinsey, whom he admired, he mainstreamed homosexuality and pan-sexualism, including pederasty…in keeping with his love for the Greeks. He believed in global warming and gun-control. He loved Hillary and Bill Clinton, thought Obama too good for Americans, name-dropped incessantly, and adored the Kennedys.

He had good words for blacks and women, because they were ideological allies, not because he was anything but naturally misogynistic and implicitly Eurocentric.

He claimed to hate  “identity,’ but like most people who attack “essences” on ideological grounds, he was notably ready to adopt the language of identity whenever he wanted – referring to Obama as a “slave,” calling himself a “fag,” calling Buckley a “crypto-Nazi,” calling Polanksi’s victim a “hooker,” and indulging the racial paranoia most characteristic of liberals – fear of “Asiatics” or yellow domination, as he put it.

He claimed to loved humanity, but in fact hated a large number of human beings around him, being notoriously unable to say a good word for his rivals.  He once called humanity a virus and believed  reducing the human population was the most important task at hand.

He was liberal in calling other people names. He just didn’t want to be called that one name that tormented him.

Tellingly, there was nothing new about Vidal’s critique of America. It was a reworking of Ezra Pound’s criticism, with which he was surely familiar, both as an erudite man and as a member of an aristocratic Southern family, in which such criticism was widespread. Vidal also lived for a large part of his life in an Italian town  not too far from Pound’s Italian home.

Vidal’s critique of America didn’t hurt him one bit. There was no courage involved in making it. In fact, it made him a member in good standing in the elite, cosmopolitan, European circles in which he moved.

Antiwar writing did nothing to set him back either socially, professionally, or personally. It only helped him. It was even a kind of therapy for the psychic wounds he wore on his sleeve.

To make him out to be a kind of Western Solzhenitsyn is really quite thick. Solzhenitsyn suffered. He lived for a decade in the Soviet gulag and then he had cancer.  He belonged to no popular circle and even when he was a critic of communism, never became a friend to the West on that account.  Solzhenitsyn rose above the binaries of modern propaganda and state-craft.

Vidal, on the contrary, was firmly a part of it. He was a leading spokesman of one pole of it.

This is a man, after all, who was close friends with Larry Flynt (the pornographer and documented child abuser) and with Hugh Hefner (the founder of Playboy), as well as with Alfred Kinsey.

He was, in brief, a perfect tool of Foundation-funded ideology.

Vidal would have taken up any dogma  that would express his hatred for hetero-sexual white Republican America (that is, his family).  Most importantly, he would have taken up with anyone and anything against the monotheism of that group.

In him the political WAS the personal, even if he was unaware it was.

His fundamental problem was with the concept, not even of monotheism, but of a divine giver of moral law, indeed, of any kind of moral law that would judge his actions.

He wasn’t sorry about things he did to people. He just wanted to create an alternate universe in which there would be no judgment of his actions.

A universe in which he was good and God was evil.

A thorough-going hedonist, materialist and atheist, he hated the notion of a moral law which might find him wanting, as it finds all of us.

Only he differed in this from most of us.

Instead of correcting himself, he made it his aim to set right his creator

ORIGINAL POST

I posted Johann Hari’s piece (Huffington Post) on the strange way people are defending pedophilic molestation, when an artist in involved. It refers to Vidal’s defense of Polansky’s rape of a 13 year old girl.

Hari’s piece is especially interesting as he’s gay and admits to having been approached by an adult when he was a teenager.

VIdal’s defense deserves a little more attention, in light of claims that he was a vocal supporter of NAMBLA (the North American Man-Boy Love Association), which was founded in 1978.

SIDE NOTE:

I posted the piece twice, as well as a link to NAMBLA’s papers (you can google for the link) that shows that Gore Vidal spoke out against an anti-gay  witch-hunt (in the PC version of the story) at a meeting of a group (the Boston-Boise committee) that later went on to found NAMBLA. That’s not the same thing as being involved in the founding of NAMBLA, so I made a correction to my original post and added the link.

At that point, my blog broke. I called in to technical support, who told me that a couple of files had been corrupted, apparently by someone who’d hacked the blog.  The technician restored it and I noticed that the Hari post, as well as the correction about NAMBLA had both disappeared. I reposted them, and voila, the blog promptly broke again. I tried asking for a restore again, but it didn’t work, so I tried deleting my post and the link to NAMBLA. That seems to have worked. No idea what that was all about….

Anyway, check out the Hari piece…it’s from a while back.

POST CONTINUES

To return to the NAMBLA allegations, if you google the magazine Pan, you can find a statement that only Allen Ginsberg, the poet, spoke out publicly in favor of NAMBLA at the time it was created.

Conservapedia refers to Vidal’s support of NAMBLA, with a link to an interview in the Paris Review in 1978. But I couldn’t find anything of the sort in the only interview of Vidal’s I read there (I didn’t read all the pieces referring to him, so it might be there somewhere).

I did find this (http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Great_moments_in_politics.pdf) enthusiastic endorsement by Vidal of the gay magazine Fag Rag, created by the founder of the outfit (the Boise-Boston committee) that created NAMBLA.

Also, see the Fag Rag interview (1974) in “Conversations with Gore Vidal,” ed. Peabody and Ebersole, 2005. Vidal and the interviewer are quite unambiguous about his (Vidal’s) preferences::

Vida: “I don’t flatter the young, either as a writer or a performer (LR: sexual performer, from the context LR: correction: actor). And I don’t flatter them sexually. That doesn’t mean I don’t like them.”

And from the same interview, discussing the meaning of the word “jam,”:

Vidal:: “Jam was a much used  word. Kind of trade, but not really trade. Pretty hard to get. Perhaps when the fact was removed, the word withered away too. No one seemed to be impossible. “Jam” referred only to boys. “You’ll find “jam” in the City and the Pillar, I think. I think I did a little glossary in there in my World Almanac way. “Dirt” was a word. That was for a bad piece of trade. I’m supposed to have coined the phrase, “Last year’s trade is this year’s competition.”

And then comparing his sexual interactions with the young with those of Paul Goodman:

Vidal: “I think flattery has a lot to do with his sexual techniques. It has nothing to do with mine.”

See also this comment in The Telegraph:

” Certainly, he tells Fag Rag in 1974, “the quality of trade has fallen off”. When he was young, many construction workers, firemen and cops “would sell their ass for a period of their lives”. Vidal’s life and work prove that some guys have all the luck.”

“Young” does not necessarily mean underage, of course.

Additional evidence of Vidal’s extreme promiscuity include his admission that he’d had more than 1000 partners before he was 25, his collaboration with Albert Kinsey in Kinsey’s controversial research into human sexuality, his documented preference for anonymous interactions at bathhouses or with prostitutes, even while being almost completely celibate with his partner of fifty years, Howard Auster (also, Austen).

Vidal called Kinsey the most important man of the decade on BBC and stated publicly that he had collaborated with him in his research.

While academic pedophile advocates and pan-sexual activists continue to defend Kinsey,  new research and interviews with adults used in the Kinsey experiments when they were children show show that Kinsey did not simply analyze the reports of one paedophile; he was encouraging and organizing paedophilic abuse and rape,  even corresponding sympathetically with Nazi paedophile, Fritz Von Balluseck, who abused hundreds of children when he was a commandant in Poland during the second world war. Balluseck was later convicted of the murder of a child.

It is now clear that Kinsey himself was a sado-masochist who routinely coerced colleagues into his sexual experimentation, filmed them in his attic,  and used his persona as a research-scientist as cover for his 24/7 obsession with every variety of sex.  He is reported to have included the sexual diaries of the notorious occultist Aleister Crowley and the ongoing molestation of children by around nine paedophiles (including Balluseck) in his work.

This is the man to whose research Vidal contributed. This is the man whose views on sex Vidal also said were very much like his own.

What were those views? Human sexuality, to Kinsey, has no more moral component in it than the coupling of any other creature and should thus be regarded as benign in all its variations. These dicta can be seen on NAMBLA’s website, and Kinsey is seen by its members as a god-father.

Kinsey, like Vidal, was a strong atheist, materialist, and hedonist.

There is nothing in the Kinsey experiments that relates sex to procreation or motherhood.

The Kinsey-Vidal world view is expressed in Vidal’s attitude toward most of his partners, except for Auster, and is  illustrated in a 2008 interview published in the Independent:

There are rumours that you have a daughter from a relationship with a woman living in Key West, Florida [in the 1950s]; are they true?”

“Possibly. I don’t believe so. The father was either me or a German photographer. I believe the mother is dead. The child was a girl. Every Christmas, I would receive ‘ a picture of them all around the tree, and there’s the little girl, looking like me. I could have a daughter, yes.”

“Have you tried to contact her?”

“No. Why would I?”

“Because you might have a sense of responsibility, which, in the age of DNA…”

“I sent her mother money for an abortion. Which she used to go to Detroit, where she found a rich man.”

In the play Terre Haute, the writer Edmund White, also gay and a friend, referred to Gore Vidal’s support for and interaction with Timothy McVeigh as a “raging crush”. Apparently, Vidal accepted the description before the play came out and then afterwards tried to sue. Nothing came of it but the two friends broke off after that.

McVeigh was of course in his twenties, but the incident does suggest that in at least some cases Vidal’s political positions had for their source his sexuality.

Given all this, there may well be truth to the allegations of support/involvement in NAMBLA at a time when Vidal definitely belonged to the set of openly homosexual (in his case, pansexualist) advocates of radical sexual liberation.

At least publicly, NAMBLA focused mostly on eliminating all age-of-consent rules and catered more to pederasts than to pedophiles, as commonly understood. It would certainly be right up the alley of an open and radical activist, as Vidal was.

Vidal himself said that he had done everything except incest and folk-dancing, a typically clever line.

Whatever the case,  Vidal’s Polansky comment is more revealing than anything else than can be said on the subject, in its dismissive coldness and fundamental misogyny.

[Just saw this line of his – about Obama’s speech-making ability: “Slaves have a hard time making poetry, unless it’s got a beat.”]

That being so, there’s probably no sense in tarring a dead man with matters from his private life, since just as cogent criticism of him can be made simply on the basis of what he said over and over quite publicly.

Still, aristocrat, Democrat icon, and populist hero that he was..and apparently still is… this blog might not be the best place to make them now.

Company overview of The Aspen Institute, from Businessweek.com

The Aspen Institute says it is an international non-profit educational institution focusing on discussion and inquiry into global issues. It offers leadership seminars, policy studies, and fellowship programs and has campuses in Aspen, Colorado, and Wye River, Maryland. It also has international partners in Aspen Institutes located in Berlin, Germany; Rome, Italy; Lyon, France; Tokyo, Japan; as well as in Gurgaon, Haryana, India. A key partner of the Indian Aspen Institute is The Confederation of Indian Industry. It offers programs that help develop business leaders and foster social change. I noticed one program related to climate change and sustainable development.

The Aspen Institute was founded in 1950 and is headquartered in Washington, District of Columbia.

Indians on the Board of Directors have been highlighted:
Aspen Institute, The INSIDERS ON BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Name (Connections) Relationships Title Age
Walter Isaacson   167 Relationships Trustee, President and Chief Executive Officer 55
Peter Reiling   90 Relationships Executive Vice president for International and Policy Programs and Trustee —

Other Board Members on Board of Directors
Name (Connections) Relationships Primary Company Age
William Mayer   266 Relationships Park Avenue Equity Partners, L.P. 67
Henry Catto Jr.  116 Relationships Catto & Catto Insurance Company 75
Lester Crown   257 Relationships Henry Crown & Company 83
Merv Adelson   206 Relationships Avalon Digital Marketing Systems Inc. 78
Paul Anderson   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
William Davis   90 Relationships WLD Davis Holdings, LLC —
Patrick Gross   186 Relationships Taleo Corp. 63
Sylvia Earle Ph.D.  198 Relationships Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies 72
Mercedes Bass   90 Relationships Sid R. Bass Associates L.P —
Nina Houghton   90 Relationships Wye Institute —
David Koch 155 Relationships Koch Industries, Inc. —
James Ferguson   154 Relationships Vion Pharmaceuticals Inc. 82
Stephen Carter   90 Relationships Yale University —
David Gergen 184 Relationships John F. Kennedy School of Government 66
Timothy Krauskopf   171 Relationships Round Lake Designs LLC 42
Andrea Cunningham   119 Relationships ZeroOne – the Art and Technology Network 49
Elaine Greenawalt   90 Relationships Princeton University —
Frederic Malek   178 Relationships Thayer | Hidden Creek 71
John Mascotte   130 Relationships The Continental Corporation 64
Charles Powell   257 Relationships Textron Inc. 67
Karl Muhr   142 Relationships Austrian Airlines AG —
Elinor Munroe   91 Relationships Elinor Bunin Productions, Inc. —
Lynda Resnick   132 Relationships Roll International Corporation —
Vin Weber   220 Relationships Lenox Group Inc. 55
Donald Roth   90 Relationships Music Associates Of Aspen, Inc. —
Albert Small   123 Relationships Southern Engineering Corporation 82
Berl Bernhard   333 Relationships DLA Piper US LLP 78
Alice Young   114 Relationships Kaye Scholer LLP —
Francis Cundill CFA  90 Relationships Mackenzie Cundill Recovery Fund (Can) —
Madeleine Albright 189 Relationships The Albright Group LLC —
Tarun Das   118 Relationships Confederation of Indian Industry 69
Prince Bandar Ibn Abdulaziz   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Michael Eisner   180 Relationships The Tornante Company, LLC 65
Henry Gates Jr.  271 Relationships Harvard University —
Alma Gildenhorn   109 Relationships John F. Kennedy Center For The Performing Arts —
Sidney Harman   176 Relationships Harman International Industries Inc. 90
Ann Hudson   90 Relationships Javelina Partners —
Bonnie McCloskey   90 Relationships Cornerstone Holdings L.L.C. —
Leonard Lauder   203 Relationships Institute for the Study of Aging, The 75
Ann Richards   188 Relationships Public Strategies, Inc. 74
William Nitze   111 Relationships The Gemstar Group, Inc. 65
Lloyd Schermer   92 Relationships Lee Enterprises Inc. —
Andrew Stern   138 Relationships Service Employees International Union, Pension Arm —
Thomas Pickering   118 Relationships Business Executives for National Security 76
Roderick von Lipsey   107 Relationships Goldman Sachs Private Wealth Management —
Frederick Whittemore   180 Relationships Chesapeake Energy Corporation 78
Mortimer Zuckerman   522 Relationships Boston Properties Inc. 70
Robert Malott   173 Relationships FMC Corp. 81
Ann Korologos   167 Relationships Harman International Industries Inc. 66
Jack Valenti   167 Relationships Legend Ventures, LLC 86
Clare Munana   90 Relationships Ancora Associates, Inc. —
L. John Doerr III 221 Relationships Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers 57
Gerald Greenwald   124 Relationships Greenbriar Equity Group LLC 72
Jerry Murdock Jr.  122 Relationships InSight Venture Partners 48
Carl Bildt   91 Relationships Akin Gump Global Solutions 59
Michael Powell J.D.  164 Relationships American Tower Corp. 45
Stephen Friedman   274 Relationships Crestview Partners, L.P. 71
W. Hipp   143 Relationships Liberty Corp. 67
Gerald Hosier   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Robert Hurst   526 Relationships Crestview Partners, L.P. 62
Anne McNulty   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Roberto Meza   113 Relationships Agrícola Industrial Salvadoreña, S.A. —
William Donaldson   146 Relationships Aetna Health Management, Inc. 76
Jay Sandrich   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Alan Fletcher   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Melva Bucksbaum   127 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Ann Friedman   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Marc Nathanson   148 Relationships Mapleton Investments 62
Jacqueline Novogratz   189 Relationships Acumen Fund —
Anna Smith   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Shashi Tharoor   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
William Joy Ph.D.  90 Relationships Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers 53
William Budinger   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Leonhard Fischer   119 Relationships Cartica Capital LLC —
Mircea Geoana   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Arjun Gupta   286 Relationships Telesoft Partners 44
Yotaro Kobayashi   252 Relationships Sony Corporation 74
Elisabeth Lulin   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
James Manyika   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Queen Noor   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Margot Pritzker   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Isaac Shongwe   114 Relationships Letsema Holdings Ltd. —
Giulio Tremonti   90 Relationships Aspen Institute, The —
Jerome Huret   90 Relationships Nortel Networks Corp. 65
Eleanor Merrill   90 Relationships Capital Gazette Communications, Inc. —
Olara Otunnu   123 Relationships Carnegie Corp. of New York —
Michel Pébereau   269 Relationships Galeries Lafayette SA 66
Robert Steel   134 Relationships Goldman Sachs Group Inc. 56
Jamshyd Godrej   161 Relationships Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. 59

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2009/tc20090610_155027.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_technology

The Hindu Online has a piece by an independent consultant on what happened to the power grid on July 30 and 31.

“Demand-supply mismatch has been endemic, going by the reports of hearings being conducted by the regulator on the subject of grid indiscipline. Another uneventful night would have passed, had it not been for a trigger — which in this case was the reported tripping of a loaded line (400 kV Bina/Agra/Gwalior).

Further loss of load in a scenario where there already exists oversupply, overfrequency, (and presumably over-voltage) proved to be the proverbial last straw. Frequency went beyond trip settings, resulting in a series of generator and line shutdowns, known as a cascade tripping, because each tripping worsens the operating parameters for the surviving plant and has a snowballing effect.

So before we proceed to the events of July 31 (which were of a different type) we first need to identify the issues from the grid failure of July 30. These are broadly as follows:

Underdrawal vis-a-vis schedule by the constituents (States) at the time of the incident.

Excess generation vs schedule by the generators

Actions if any taken by the Northern Load Despatch Centre (NLDC)/Regional Load Despatch Centre (RLDC) to correct the imbalance.

Reason for tripping of the line/equipment which triggered the grid failure.

For a demand/supply mismatch which resulted in a grid frequency of 50.4 Hz it is certain that there was violation of grid discipline by some or all sections of the constituents, and/or failure of the NLDC/RLDCs to correct it in time.

The event of July 30 was a matter of ‘oversupply’ and not ‘overdrawal’ as widely reported in the media and by Power Ministry spokesmen, though the eventual outcome was the same — a grid collapse.

…AND THE SECOND

Having said this we can now turn to the events of July 31. It is difficult to piece together with any degree of exactitude the events leading up to this failure, but one thing is clear — there was excess drawal vis-a-vis schedule by certain constituents at a time when the grid was in a fragile condition, and a trigger event like a line/equipment tripping took place, thus exacerbating an existing demand- supply mismatch.

The lessons from both events are the same. Persistent underdrawal or overdrawal in disregard of LDC instructions amounts to grid indiscipline and needs to be firmly dealt with. Likewise, oversupply by generators, or failure to meet schedules also amounts to failure of grid discipline.

The action or otherwise of the NLDC/RLDCs is the next contributory factor, and all of these combine to produce catastrophic failure when a crucial line trips due possibly to poor maintenance, or some other random cause.

Therefore, State and generator discipline, and grid maintenance and operation all need more attention. All this is well within the competence of our power sector professionals and regulators, provided, of course, that they are not subjected to political interference.

The intent of the Electricity Act, 2003, is quite clearly to distance the Government from day-to-day operations of the power sector. A beginning can be made by further empowering the load despatch centres and making them independent of their respective State governments.

Respected professionals like those from Powergrid can be fully relied upon to take care of our grid and ensure reliable power supply, as they have done for the past 11 years.”

(The author is an independent consultant. blfeedback@thehindu.co.in)