Author Archive: Ed Driscoll

KEIR STARMER: I want 10 years in No 10 and will fight my challengers.

Keir Starmer has said he wants a decade in Downing Street and will fight anyone who challenges him for the Labour leadership.

The prime minister described his government as a “10-year project of renewal”. Asked whether he would definitely lead his party into the next general election and serve a full second term, he said: “Yes, I will.”

Unfortunately for Britain, it’s these ten years that he has in mind: Starmer wants to revolutionise Labour by taking Britain back to the 1970s.

Ironically for a man attempting to find a new vision for the future, Sir Keir’s approach looks set to haul the nation back 50 years.

We’ve been here before when it comes to Europe. The UK formally joined the European Communities in 1973, after being rebuffed twice by Charles de Gaulle, the French president. A referendum was then held in 1975 to decide if Britain should continue to be a member, with the “Yes” campaign emerging victorious.

Sir Keir insisted that he wanted to take a “big leap forward” at this summer’s UK-EU summit, bringing Britain closer to the bloc “on trade, the economy, defence and security”.

Importantly, the Prime Minister did not rule out joining the single market or customs union, which Labour previously considered red lines.

He said he would “turn our back on the arguments of the past, not open old grievances, but look forward together to how we make this country stronger and fairer”.

He is not the only one who thinks this way.

Andrew Bailey has signalled his support for the idea of closer ties with the Continent, insisting last week: “We’re an open economy, we do need allies. I think seeking to rebuild trade relations with Europe is a sensible thing to do.”

Rachel Reeves has suggested she would be happy to copy and paste EU rules into UK law, effectively ceding sovereignty to Brussels.

Yet, despite this recent enthusiasm, there is no guarantee it would work in spurring growth. Entwining Britain’s economic fortunes with the Continent 50 years ago did not trigger an immediate economic boom.

What actually happened was that the UK fell into recession shortly after, during the 1973 oil crisis when Arab oil producers imposed an embargo on countries led by the United States over their support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War.

Or as Labour — and much of the American left — looks at the 1970s, “the good old days.”

Earlier: Scenes From The Labour Party Wipe Out.

GEORGE MF WASHINGTON: Chasing Immortality in Hollywood.

The indie financier graveyards are full to the brim with the corpses of wealthy entrepreneurs, Texas oilmen and Bay Area tech bros mostly, who thought they could find immortality by beating the house in the movie business.

The movie business has always attracted the world’s biggest dreamers, and certainly no one ever comes to Los Angeles hoping to “make it average”… we come here to make it Big. But if we are going to spend our lives chasing immortality to the exclusion of all else, the question of whether or not the movie business can actually deliver that immortality becomes an important one.

Certainly Tom Cruise has achieved immortality, right? And what about Michael Jackson, who has a blockbuster movie about his life in theaters right now… surely MJ achieved immortality?

Well, maybe.

Bing Crosby was once a massive crossover star in both the movies and in popular music, just as Michael Jackson was… so much so that he was even caricatured in a 1950 Bugs Bunny cartoon aimed at kids. But ask someone under the age of 25 who Bing Crosby was and the best case scenario is that they maybe kinda mighta sorta recognize his name from the Christmas songs they hear on the radio once a year. As with Bing Crosby, it’s entirely possible that there will come a time when “Tom Cruise” and “Michael Jackson” will be names future generations may have heard before, but which no longer carry much meaning for them.

And of course the Cruises and MJs of the world make up the 1% of the 1% of the 1% of the 1%… most of us here in Tinseltown are not Movie Stars or Pop Legends, and the list of executives, producers and agents whose names are remembered long after they march off to the great movie premiere in the sky is a very short one indeed.

The business of Hollywood is, as Jerry Maguire once said, “an up-at-dawn pride swallowing siege.” It is a 24/7/365 business in which agents and managers get calls (and texts) from their clients late into the night and then again first thing in the morning long before most Americans’ alarms have even thought about going off. It is a business where American studio movies shoot in Budapest and Bratislava, where night shoots go from dusk-till-dawn and production craftsmen don’t see their own beds for months at a time. And where studio executives stay up into the wee hours pouring through scripts in a futile effort to stay one step ahead of the development flood. And in all this mania and mayhem, there is often very little time, to say nothing of headspace, to chase the one kind of immortality that is actually real and measurable.

As Kyle Smith wrote in his 2019 article, “The Great Forgetting:”

These days, in a cultural sense, the only two pre-1960 singers who still linger in the memory are Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley. Bing Crosby, as Terry Teachout recently pointed out in Commentary, has more or less disappeared. A case could be made that, in addition to being one of his era’s most popular singers, Crosby is the single most popular movie star in Hollywood history. Certainly he is in the top ten. Today he survives in the memory of specialists and historians and suchlike boffins. To the broader populace, the words “Bing Crosby” no longer have meaning.

Looking back on his four decades as a movie critic, John Podhoretz points out that even if you go back only to the 1980s, hardly anything survives. People still talk about Back to the Future and Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Princess Bride (but not E.T., the biggest hit of the decade). Rain Man not only swept the Academy Awards in 1988 but was the biggest hit of that year, selling the equivalent of $380 million in tickets in today’s dollars. Bring up that movie in a classroom today and I suspect the reaction will be the same as if you brought up Mickey Rooney or Shirley Temple. Step forward, 1990s movies, and report to the vaporization facility. You’ve got a few years left, but only a few.

Ironically, modern-day Hollywood seems like one of the worst places to chase immortality. And in any case, Mark Manson wrote in his 2016 book, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, “when our immortality projects fail, when the meaning is lost, when the prospect of our conceptual self outliving our physical self no longer seems possible or likely, death terror—that horrible, depressing anxiety—creeps back into our mind. Trauma can cause this, as can shame and social ridicule. As can, as [Ernest Becker, the author of The Denial of Death] points out, mental illness. If you haven’t figured it out yet, our immortality projects are our values. They are the barometers of meaning and worth in our life. And when our values fail, so do we, psychologically speaking. What Becker is saying, in essence, is that we’re all driven by fear to give way too many f*cks about something, because giving a f*ck about something is the only thing that distracts us from the reality and inevitability of our own death. And to truly not give a single f*ck is to achieve a quasi-spiritual state of embracing the impermanence of one’s own existence. In that state, one is far less likely to get caught up in various forms of entitlement.”

ONE OF THE WAYS YOU CAN TELL THAT LEFTISM IS A RELIGION IS ITS RELIANCE ON SHUNNING APOSTATES:

As Glenn noted in the very early days of Instapundit, “As the old saying has it, the left looks for heretics and the right looks for converts, and both find what they’re looking for. The effect is no doubt subliminal, but people who treat you like crap are, over time, less persuasive than people who don’t. If people on the Left are so unhappy about how many former allies are changing their views, perhaps they should examine how those allies are treated.”

THOMAS HAZLETT: Ted Turner, Entrepreneur of His Age.

In 1970, cable TV service was essentially outlawed in 90 percent of American households. The powerful VHF stations, dominated by the NBC-CBS-ABC triopoly, ruled the world. Weak UHF stations were virtually worthless, given their stunted reception under FCC rules, though cable operators wanted to retransmit their signals to homes in crystal clarity.

Turner’s simple vision was to think of a world with such stupid rules gone. Then a nothingburger outlet in Charlotte could be delivered via cable, ending its “UHF discount.” Then a losing proposition like WTBS could bounce its product to 30,000 communities via satellite, produce its own popular programs, and compete head-to-head—against the choice set of My Mother the Car, Hello Larry, or SuperTrain—in households everywhere.

Turner picked just the right time. What the TV insiders (and Malcolm Gladwell) decried as a sop to Turner was officially labeled the “deregulation of cable TV” at the Carter-era FCC. As The New York Times softly described them, these 1980 rulings “reversed 15 years of emphasis placed by the commission on protecting broadcast stations from significant inroads by the cable companies. They opened the possibility that broadcasters and cable TV outlets would be able to compete more equally for viewers and advertisers.”

Gladwell finished his exposé by condemning Ted Turner as a business simpleton. “Turner has played embattled entrepreneur, television savior, right-wing point man, and—for his own whims—communications peacemaker. What he really wants to do is make a lot of money.”

Yes. That’s the beauty of the system.

In his sweeping 1980 book The Third Wave, Alvin Toffler predicted the coming world of “The De-massified Media:”

All these different developments have one thing in common: they slice the mass television public into segments, and each slice not only increases our cultural diversity, it cuts deeply into the power of the networks that have until now so completely dominated our imagery. John O’Connor, the perceptive critic of The New York Times, sums it up simply. “One thing is certain,” he writes. “Commercial television will no longer be able to dictate either what is watched or when it is watched.”

What appears on the surface to be a set of unrelated events turns out to be a wave of closely interrelated changes sweeping across the media horizon from newspapers and radio at one end to magazines and television at the other. The mass media are under attack. New, de-massified media are proliferating, challenging—and sometimes even replacing—the mass media that were so dominant in all Second Wave societies.

The Third Wave thus begins a truly new era—the age of the de-massified media. A new info-sphere is emerging alongside the new techno-sphere. And this will have a far-reaching impact on the most important sphere of all, the one inside our skulls. For taken together, these changes revolutionize our images of the world and our ability to make sense of it.

Ted Turner, with all of his manic energy and his goofy and contradictory political views got there early and created the media world of the 1980s. And helped preserve the media world of the past, to boot:

MAKE LA GREAT AGAIN:

Tweet concludes, “I wish I lived in LA just so I could vote for him.”

But in 2026, is that really an issue?

Related: “Spencer Pratt and The Art of Persuasion,” a Scott Adams-style look at Pratt’s campaign techniques.

NOT TO MENTION DECADES WORTH OF MEDIA BIAS*:

When Obama says, that the GOP should be “the loyal opposition,” hoping that they’ll blindly go along with their nearly 120 years of power grabs is what he’s referring to.

* As Tim Groseclose observed in his 2012 book, Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind,  “Groseclose contends that the general leftward bias of the media has shifted the PQ of the average American by about 20 points, on a scale of 100, the difference between the current political views of the average American, and the political views of the average resident of Orange County, California or Salt Lake County, Utah.”

MUCH MORE LIKE THIS, PLEASE:

Tweet continues, “That’s what America First actually feels like when you stop punishing energy producers and start rewarding hard work again. We spent years watching kids get hooked on fentanyl or buried in student debt for useless degrees. Now we’re giving them calluses, purpose, and a future they can build with their own two hands. This is the country I want my kids and grandkids to grow up in.”

DISPATCHES FROM THE “IT’S (D)IFFERENT WHEN WE DO IT” PARTY:

NEWS YOU CAN USE: “Remember: They’re not trying to kill you because you’re a ‘White Supremacist.’ They’re CALLING you a White Supremacist so they can justify killing you.”

L.A. DEMOCRATS MAKE SURPRISE IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION TO SPENCER PRATT CAMPAIGN:

STEVE HAYWARD: The Sun Sets on Great Britain.

But it was the second aspect of Trump’s speech that contained multiple layers and triggered the Left even more:

The American founding was the culmination of hundreds of years of thought, struggle, sweat, blood, and sacrifice on both sides of the Atlantic…. Before we ever proclaimed our independence, Americans carried within us the rarest of gifts: moral courage, and it came from a small but mighty kingdom from across the sea. For nearly two centuries before the revolution, this land was settled and forged by men, women who bore in their souls the blood and noble spirit of the British. Here on a wild and untamed continent, they set loose the ancient English love of liberty and Great Britain’s distinctive sense of glory, destiny, and pride, and that’s what it is: glory, destiny, and pride. The American patriots who pledged their lives to independence in 1776 were the heirs to this majestic inheritance.

A conspicuous lack of courage, “glory, destiny, and pride” marks Great Britain’s current retreat from its historic confidence and greatness, as Trump has candidly declared in other settings recently. While he referenced Churchill in this speech, surely some listeners had to recall his recent remarks that when it comes to Kier Starmer, “We aren’t dealing with Churchill anymore.”

His reference to Churchill and his close cooperation with FDR in World War II contained a subtle point that verges on the esoteric. After a typically Trumpian recollection of his mother, who came from “the very serious Scotland…where they had their greatest of warriors,” he circled back to King Charles, noting he had been the longest-serving Prince of Wales in British history. What few listeners likely remembered was that Churchill and FDR launched their World War II grand strategy on the decks of a British battleship, Prince of Wales.

Here, perhaps, only World War II history geeks will recall that the Prince of Wales was ignominiously sunk off Singapore in the earliest weeks of the Pacific theater, rolling over to port (that is, its left side) before slipping beneath the waves. Today, Britain is listing heavily to port and is in danger of drowning on account of its lack of courage.

On Friday, Mark Steyn wrote “The Future Shows Up,” noting that despite gains made by Reform in last week’s UK elections, “Last time round, ‘independent Muslims’ won thirty-one council seats. Yesterday, they won 208. How many next time? As my former GB News colleague Colin Brazier observed:”

“Unlike me, [Brazier] presents as very moderate and reasonable, but he takes demography seriously, and, unlike most of the British media, he knows what yesterday’s results are telling us about where we’re headed,” Steyn adds.

Exit quote: “To put it another way: for two decades now, we have been told — sotto voce — that the reason hundreds of thousands (likely millions now) of schoolgirls have to be gang-sodomised, urinated on and doused in petrol in towns up and down England is because the Labour Party needs the Muslim vote. Alas for the nominally ruling party, the Muslim vote no longer needs Labour.”

RAGE AGAINST THE DEMOCRAT MACHINES:

Tweet concludes, “There’s literally zero reason for cities like Memphis or St. Louis to still have city councils or mayors that serve as nothing more than patronage machines to prop up Leftism in a state where it would otherwise cease to exist. Dissolve the city councils, abolish the office of mayor, and have the Governor directly appoint a Viceroy to rule these cities with an iron fist.”

HOW IT STARTED: An Ecological Kristallnacht. Listen.

—Al Gore, the New York Times, March 19th, 1989.

How It’s Going: David Marcus: New York Times announces the end of the climate change hoax.

For almost the entirety of the half century I have lived on Earth, I have had experts, teachers, politicians and activists hectoring me about how climate change is going to destroy the planet. But this week, in The New York Times, of all places, is evidence that climate alarmism is finally cooling down.

“Democrats Do Not Have To Campaign On Climate Change Anymore,” blared the headline, this week, as author Matt Huber argues that voters are rather turned off by the subject. I would like to suggest that this is because it is the single most expensive lie in human history.

Of course, there’s two reasons for the change of heart by the left. One is that AI is Silicon Valley’s latest bright shiny object, replacing virtual reality in the late 1980s, and the World Wide Web during the next decade, and AI requires power and lots of it. And the other is purely tactical:

KURT SCHLICHTER: Democrats Say ‘Heil Platner!’

That’s Excuse Number One, that he’s a half-wit. Excuse Number Two is, “Well, I was in the military, and you know how they are, and I just kind of fell in with that bad crowd.” Yes, he’s blaming the military for his Nazi tattoo. The guy is adding blue falconry to his lengthy list of personal failures. I spent 27 years in the military and never met one single guy with a Nazi tattoo. Maybe I just didn’t get around as much. Maybe we didn’t run in the same circles. Or maybe he’s just That Guy, the problem child dirtbag that every single unit has, and who everyone wants to throw a blanket party for.

Now, there’s a third possibility, and it’s not really an excuse. It’s that he is lying. He totally knew what Der Tramp Stampen was and liked it and got it on purpose and only covered it when he got recruited for this Senate campaign, but before it became known. Being entirely consistent with his entire worldview, this explanation seems the most likely one. After all, he’s a big fan of Hamas, and Hamas feels about Jews like…well, Graham Platner feels about Jews. By the way, this is the first time I mentioned his name, yet you knew exactly who I was talking about—the guy with the Nazi tattoo.

Don’t be stupid, be a schmarty, and read the whole thing.

UPDATE: Today Maine, tomorrow the world? In a concentration of camp, the Bulwark sees an even bigger kampf for the totenkopf man: The Bulwark Floats the Idea of Graham Platner Running for President in 2028.

(The underlying article is behind a heavily guarded and barbwired paywall, appropriately enough.)

THE UNLIKELY LINK BETWEEN NUREMBERG AND THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA:

Hungary is a country still feeling the long aftershocks of World War Two and the Holocaust. Those shocks seem clearer than ever after the years I have spent researching The Nuremberg Women, my new book on the trials. We all have an image of those trials in our head: the famous men judging and being judged in the courtroom, immortalized in photographs, or in Laura Knight’s painting, which is on permanent display at the Imperial War Museum. Women are pushed to the margins. But so many intriguing women played their part, from Knight herself to Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier, the French Resistance hero who gave the most devastating testimony of the trial.

Anyone who launches a new book is hoping desperately that no other big cultural event will come along and eclipse it. So imagine my horror when I checked the publication date of The Nuremberg Women – April 23 – and realized I was going head-to-head with the premiere of The Devil Wears Prada 2. A film about Vogue may not appear to overlap with a book about the first trial for international war crimes, but I have my fears.

That’s understandable. One story is about a ruthless totalitarian feared by all. The other is about Hermann Goering.

Speaking of whom: Judgement of Nuremberg and Russell Crowe as Hermann Göring.

COME AND SEE THE VIOLENCE INHERENT IN THE LEFTISM:

DIVERSITY WAS THEIR STRENGTH:

Exit quote: “Import the third world, get third world elections.”

As Ezra Levant tweets, “I think this is the first time a Liberal MP who brought in 5 million migrants has ever had those migrants affect his life.

DREW HOLDEN: A COVID Autopsy, Part 2: ‘Should coronavirus lock down protesters waive their medical care? Some medical ethicists think so.’

NBC was on the story, too: “Conservative activist family behind ‘grassroots’ anti-quarantine Facebook events: A family-run network of pro-gun groups is behind five of the largest Facebook groups dedicated to protesting shelter-in-place restrictions.” The takeaway was clear: rather than these protests reflecting the desire of real people to leave their homes for the first time in over a month, protests, to the media’s telling, were just a collection “of fringe activists and ardent Trump supporters.”

Stories like this (and there were many) from NBC make one wonder what today’s legacy media would’ve said about the American Revolution. Would that pursuit of freedom have gotten the same scare quotes: “Armed militia members, other protesters demand ‘freedom’ from Michigan Gov. Whitmer’s stay-home order

Maybe protestors should be kicked out of hospitals if they get sick, so life-saving ventilators can be reassigned? The Philadelphia Inquirer asked and answered in what was billed as a straight-news piece, titled “Should coronavirus lock down protesters waive their medical care? Some medical ethicists think so.”

Despite this, liberal outlet The Nation went even further, alleging that the legacy press was in fact critical of lockdowns in a piece titled “The Press Is Amplifying a Dangerous Know-Nothing Ideology: The anti-lockdown protests aren’t the first time the media has been swindled into cheerleading an extremist faux libertarianism.” Merely talking about the protests, apparently, was a bridge too far. Repeating a now-common refrain, the outlet lamented that “While the absolute numbers involved in the protests are tiny, their effect—when amplified by the credulous, cheerleading tone of the coverage—is massive and dangerous.” As ever for the media, protesters weren’t just wrong, but evil.

This was all until protests were about something far more important to the legacy press than the separation of powers or individual freedom: racial justice. You probably don’t need much of a reminder how the press vouched for these lockdown-busting protests, but just in case:

Read the whole thing.

WHY A DUCK?

Classical reference in headline:

THE HOPE GOES ON FOREVER AND THE VIBES WILL NEVER DIE:

Few things were more inevitable than an Obama musical. What better way to commemorate the Hamilton presidency than with a vibes-drenched, profanity-laced sing-along for liberals who stopped being proud of their country on Nov. 8, 2016? That was the day Eli Bauman resolved to start writing what would become 44: The Musical, which began a limited run in Washington, D.C., last month after stints in Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York.

You might be surprised to learn that 44 was created by a white male Millennial nepo baby. Bauman is the son of Jon “Bowzer” Bauman—best known as the greaser frontman for doo-wop revival group Sha Na Na. His cousin, Eric Bauman, chaired the California Democratic Party until his resignation in 2018 due to sexual misconduct allegations.

* * * * * * * * *

Bauman, who worked on the 2008 Obama campaign before going to journalism school, has described 44 as his “best answer” to an “inexplicable” question: How did we get from Obama—hope and change, soaring rhetoric, epic vibes—to Donald Trump?

There have been many attempts to answer this question. Very few have incorporated a live R&B band, a slutty Sarah Palin telling Katie Couric to “suck my d—,” and a racy scene in which Barack and Michelle Obama croon about being one another’s “freak dot gov” while making “White House love.”

In other words, 44 is a relatively good answer to the question of how we got from Obama to Trump. Certainly not in the way it was intended, but that’s how it goes sometimes. Obama and his swooning fans presumably envisioned a Lincolnesque figure who could inspire a nation with words. Now he’s just another celebrity we hear about every now and then. But nostalgia is a powerful drug. To revel in what could have been, irrespective of what actually was.

Incidentally, a subtext of the Spencer Pratt campaign is reminding Los Angelinos of their craziest voting choices over the past decade, even beyond the disastrous Karen Bass. The AI video of “Pratt Summer” is a sendup of one of Kamp Kamala’s stranger messaging choices in 2024, and he isn’t afraid to reference someone who benefited from 2008’s mass formation psychosis on the left:

Which was one of the mile markers on the road to Trump:

BHO, THE ANTI-WASHINGTON:

UPDATE:

MORE:

 

YOU DON’T HAVE TO LIVE LIKE THIS, L.A.:

 

OUT ON A LIMB: “An enlightened society would not say that your skin color is an immutable characteristic as an indicator of your political persuasion.”

Related:

CHRISTIAN TOTO: Goodbye, Stephen Colbert – ‘The Vax Scene’ Cringe-fest.

Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show” exits stage far Left on May 21.

Good riddance.

It’s not kind to celebrate a show’s demise, especially since it means the people working on it will be looking for work along with its host.

“The Late Show” has been a drag on the culture for some time, and its demise is a net positive. Colbert and company have spread many false narratives, dividing the country in the process.

That’s why we’re starting a new series featuring the worst “Late Show” moments over the years.

● Cringe interviews

● Shameful sketches

● Political buttocks smooching of the first order

Read the whole thing, but Colbert’s 2015 love fest with Trump is fascinating considering the subtext behind it:

Flashback:

[To take Jeb Bush] down, Clinton’s team drew up a plan to pump Trump up. Shortly after her kickoff, top aides organized a strategy call, whose agenda included a memo to the Democratic National Committee: “This memo is intended to outline the strategy and goals a potential Hillary Clinton presidential campaign would have regarding the 2016 Republican presidential field,” it read.

“The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right. In this scenario, we don’t want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more ‘Pied Piper’ candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party,” read the memo.

“Pied Piper candidates include, but aren’t limited to:
• Ted Cruz
• Donald Trump
• Ben Carson
We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously.”

“They Always Wanted Trump,” the Politico, November 7th, 2016.