It’s Reasoning Jim, But Not as We Know It By Chris Knight

     The title of this article is taken from the old 1960s early politically correct, multiracial sci fi Star Trek, with Mr Spock telling Captain Jim, that the crazy stuff they have just found is “life,” but not as we know it. That in itself is crazy, because how else can we conceptualise “life,” but in terms of what we know? It is simply a contradiction in terms. Spock’s hyper-rational irrationalism reminds me of Mr Smartie, all-meat-eater, Jordan Peterson, hero to young men with weak or no father figures. Here is a recent example of Peterson’s Spockism, that Supreme Court judge Brett Kavanaugh should immediately resign:
  https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/10/jordan-peterson-attempts-to-explain-his-call-for-kavanaugh-to-step-down/
  https://jordanbpeterson.com/political-correctness/notes-on-my-kavanaugh-tweet/

“I asked myself a question, after reading these posts: “Is there an alternative to confirming or not confirming Kavanaugh?” When a choice appears starkly binary, a third path appears impossible, by definition — but might possibly still be worth seeking. I tried to place myself in Kavanaugh’s position, while generating a potential answer (and think that I can do so with some justification, having been publicly identified as reprehensible by many people—prominent journalists, activists, and academics among them). I thought, “He can’t withdraw, prior to the nomination, because his reputation has been savaged so badly that withdrawal would not only mean loss of the Supreme Court nomination, but demolition of his entire career and future life.” So the only way for Kavanaugh was forward, through the FBI investigation, on to the nomination hearing, and the hope that he would be… what? Cleared? Not cleared, because it is too late for that, even given the favorable or at least not damning FBI report.

A large percentage of the American public does not believe that he is an appropriate choice for the highest bench position in the land (51%, according to NY Mag: https://nym.ag/2RwLUGt, citing a CNN poll). I’m not claiming, necessarily, that CNN’s poll is reliable. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that there is very widespread opposition to his candidacy, much of it generated not by people’s belief in his innocence or lack therefore but by their objection to the manner in which both parties handled the nomination process. It’s not a good thing when there is general discomfort with the manner in which something as important as the naming of a new Chief Justice is undertaken. It doesn’t bode well for the stability and peace of the state (and perhaps–perhaps–there is nothing more important to preserve than that).

So I thought, “What might I do in such a position?” Withdrawing, prior to a full investigation, did not constitute an acceptable option. But it’s not clear that accepting the position, given the scale of opposition to my candidacy (“my,” in my simulation of his situation). So what if the FBI cleared me, I received the nomination, but then decided that it might be best for medium- to long-term peace and the good of the country if someone who shared my views but who had not been contaminated, rightly or wrongly, by the horrors of the nomination process in question be put forward as a candidate in my stead? Objections to that might include:

•    Perhaps the Democrat opposition would mount a similar campaign against my putative successor. But that would provide virtually unassailable evidence for the purely manipulative and political motivation of the accusers, forcing them to duplicate their strategy a second time. That would help reveal the machinations for what they were, in a manner that would be virtually undeniable.

•    Perhaps time is of the essence, and there would be no way to place another candidate of conservative leaning on the bench before the November elections. As they say, however: “act in haste, repent in leisure.” It might be acceptable to wait a month and test the democratic waters: if the Republicans do well in November, then their moves to nominate the candidate of their choice have been fully and evidently vetted by the electorate. That’s not a bad medium-to-long-term strategy.

•    Perhaps it is necessary, as an act of patriotism, to sacrifice personal ambition for the broader welfare of the country.

•    Perhaps that would also enable “me” (Kavanaugh) to regain the moral upper hand, in some permanent manner: with my name cleared, enabled in at least some manner to go on with my life, I could clear the way for the next, hopefully less contentious candidate.”

     So, for the sake of “peace,” after refuting all of the false rape accusations, Kavanaugh should surrender! So much for an academic who is supposed to be championing men’s rights: this is little more than Leftist propaganda.
As for “peace,” the Kavanaugh debacle is part of a Leftist war to destroy the traditional West. Thus, we have seen recently a racist attack on singer Kanye West for his support of Trump. If anyone the Left saw as useful for their nihilistic cause was called a “token negro,” the heavens would shake with their righteous rage. 
  https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/10/10/cnn-slammed-full-blown-racist-commentators-call-kanye-west-token-negro/

     Peterson does not address the core issues that the Left have embraced lawlessness and violence to achieve their agenda, as seen by the claims that they have a “constitutional right” to physically confront Republicans, such as chasing them out of restaurants, with the implication that they will use violence if the Republican stands his ground, perhaps going for a gun or weapon: 
  https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/10/10/nolte-cnn-says-mobs-have-constitutional-right-to-chase-republicans-out-of-restaurants/

     Hillary Clinton has recently summed it all up,  by saying: “you cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.” In reply to this commentators, including James Wood, have said that given that the opponents of the Left believe in the Second Amendment, the right to possess firearms, Civil War 2.0 will end very badly for the Left. Of course, the military will split, but most  will not support the Left. A few stray nukes probably won’t matter too much.
  http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/james-woods-i-guess-they-want-civil-war-would-not-end-well-for-them_10102018
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcZDAibtPDQ