This entry is inspired by the video exchange below between Wooly Bumblebee--a superb artist in her own right who honchoes Anti-Intellectuals and is promoting this rad new site AkkadianTimes.com--and Kristi Winters. I am going to use the contrast between medium-end aircraft manufacturers Bombardier and Embraer to argue against white supremacy and other nonsense spouted by the alt-right race realist manosphere.
Before I actually get to my case study, however, I am going to have to go through several paragraphs of disclaimers. This can be viewed as a depressing sign of the times that, in 2017, one has to issue twenty disclaimers for every syllable of actual point being spoken (in contrast to the two videos from the 1980's and 1990's below wherein people of diametrically opposed viewpoints could have a civil discussion without being accused by their own side of being transmogrified by said civil discussion into Brand X, back in the day when it was understood that we are all individuals above and beyond the sum of our alliances and endorsements of others on particular issues.)
Then again, maybe having to go through several paragraphs of disclaimers is a good thing, as it makes my, one's, position abundantly clear and helps to demonstrate NYC Mayor (and lovably beloved sonofabitch) Ed Koch's statement "If you agree with me on 99% of the issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 100% of the issues, you belong in a lunatic asylum."
Nothing in this entry is to be construed, or misconstrued, as me endorsing Ms. Winters or feminism or SJW's as such. I simply do not know enough about Ms. Winters. And while there are decent feminists, such as Me Marie Henein, who successfully defended Jian Ghomeshi while Lauren Southern, John the Other, the HoneyBadgers, Davis Aurini and Jordan Peterson simply made videos, feminism still has extremist elements, latter day Fredric Werthams and Mary Whitehouses like Gail Dines (and Dines' disciple Anita Sarkeesian, the latter thoroughly exposed and debunked in Jordan Owen's superb 2015 filim The Sarkeesian Effect) for me to like the movement as a general proposition. That being said, although Ms. Winters does promote standard-issue feminist boilerplate, I have thus far seen zero evidence that she is of the Wertham/Whitehouse/Dines/Sarkeesian prohibitionist wing that would ban Gore Vidal's Myra Breckinridge, Grace Metallious' Peyton Place or the non-vanilla adult entertainment work of Nina Hartley and Lorelei Lee or Belladonna shoving a baseball bat up Melissa Lauren's exhaust pipe on account of it causing personal offence or contravening dogma.
I do not have a problem with feminists who do not get in the way of my entertainments. As well, Jordan Owen's aforementioned The Sarkeesian Effect is, as far as I am concerned, the last thing that really needs to be said about SJW feminists. This means that those who still whinge about SJW feminists, like Sargon, Vee, Vindicator, Kraut and Tea and Freedom Alternative, are like MySpace, AltaVista, AskJeeves, BlackBerry and stone-washed jeans salesmen in 2017. Of this mob, I can, at least, understand why Sargon and Vindicator think Ms. Winters (who is based in Britain, if I understand correctly) poses a threat. They erroneously think this because they are labouring under a particular limitation of freedom of speech that goes by the name the Official Secrets Act. This Act renders it illegal to discuss anywhere in the UK the identity of the person who was the actual deadliest SJW of all time, MI5 Director Sir Roger Hollis, a Soviet GRU double agent who obstructed investigations into Soviet spies and threatened Soviet defectors. Since, by law, they are forbidden from hearing of Sir Roger Hollis, it is understandable that Sargon and Vindicator think Ms. Winters actually poses a threat to them when she (and Julie Bindel, for that matter) are nowhere near the level of expertise, or of the malevolence, of Sir Roger Hollis. Vee, Kraut and Tea and Freedom Alternative do not have this excuse since the Official Secrets Act does not apply to their jurisdictions. Nor, for that matter, does Bearing, particularly not. You see, Bearing's own Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull was the lawyer who defended the whistleblower who exposed Sir Roger Hollis, MI5 SIGINT specialist Peter Wright, from extradition back to Britain. For Bearing to allege that Kristi Winters poses any kind of threat to anyone when he is fully aware of who Sir Roger Hollis was is the height of disingenuity.
As well, while I do not ascribe to grand notions of patriarchy, I do recognise that there remain barriers to women in the workplace. USAF Major Mary Jennings Hegar, who holds the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Purple Heart and drove a MEDEVAC G-Car in Afghanistan, details the discrimination she endured at the hands of male ossifers. Colonel Martha McSally, a USAF A-10 driver who sued Rumsfeld to exempt US servicewomen in Saudi from having to wear the hijab, today hosted a conference for young female leaders in her current capacity as a Congresswoman from Arizona, with the hashtag #breaktheglassceiling. Some would say that the fact that I use Major Hegar and Colonel McSally's ranks and decorations constitutes "an argument to authority." So be it. Colonel McSally, like Steve Bannon, is a Republican. Colonel McSally was the first female OC of the 354th Fighter Squadron, logging 225 combat hours driving an A-10 over Afghanistan. As far as is known, Bannon was a surface warfare ossifer in the 1980's who does not have the Combat Action Ribbon, just like a more obscure alt-right race realist constantly brags that he is a "trained infantryman," neglecting to point out that he spent the entirety of his career stateside as a regimental mess attendant at the precise time when 20% of his regiment was deployed. Bannon and said "trained infantryman" without a CIB are what are known as REMFs. I'll listen to what combat Veterans like Major Hegar and Colonel McSally have to say over what any REMF has to say.
Now, a further disclaimer, one more related to the subject at hand, which is race. In the above video, Wooly and Ms. Winters talk about white privilege and the systematic oppression of minorities, specifically about how minorities are profiled by peelers and shop owners in a manner that whites are not. I came at my understanding of minority issues in a manner most different than that of most. I was ill as a child, knowing as many doctors as I did teachers and classmates. You cannot be a Premier League champion in bed, but one thing you can do is read. I read a lot, including Wilbur Smith, Rider Haggard and John Buchan. This means that while most North Americans, both Black/African and white, tend to see Blacks/Africans and whites as monoliths, I know there are far too many differences within each group that happens to share a degree of pigmentation to permit for any general conclusions to be made based on shared pigmentation alone. Beyond elements of a shared pigmentation, the type of Blacks/Africans Tommy Sotomayor routinely condemns, the "hoodrats," have nothing at all in common with Jennifer Teege, Opiyo Oloya, AMISOM or the King's African Rifles. To be honest, the "hoodrats" Mr. Sotomayor condemns are basically fourth rate knockoffs of ZANLA, with all of Robert Mugabe's attitude, but with none of his organisational ability.
I fully accept that North American police are racists who hate Blacks/Africans. There is an unofficial NYPD site, alternatively incarnated as The NYPD RANT or THEE RANT where MOS, hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet, openly refer to Blacks/Africans as "savages" and "a failed race." These are police officers actually trumpeting their racism for all the world to read, as opposed to racism being inferred from police-on-Black shootings, the latter which I would attribute more to the fact that North American police tend to be ticket dispensers who happen to have ceremonial revolvers, as opposed to professional police like the Royal Ulster Constabulary, Koevoet, and France's GIGN and RAID. That being said, having read extensively about Africa long before I met Blacks/Africans in America in large numbers, I always have the comparison to conditions in Africa in the back of my mind when the topic of race in North America comes up. I do not like the fact that North American police officers are racists who treat Blacks/Africans with contempt, but I do not view this phenomenon in isolation. Even The Detroit News has recently reported on the famine in South Sudan. It is highly impolitic to say, but, personally, I consider the famine in South Sudan to be the situation of greater magnitude.
One reason I am impolitic enough to say this is as follows. Blacks/Africans in South Sudan do not have ways out which are available to their North American counterparts. Wooly and Ms. Winters speak in the above video about police profiling minorities, something Mr. Bumblebee has also addressed. Many denizens of THEE RANT and many retired (i.e., pensions secured and safe from white shirt house mice retribution) North American police constables will justify profiling and stop and frisk, while active white shirt house mice (i.e. police chiefs, commissioners, Captains, Lieutenants) will waffle about when asked if there is an official departmental policy regarding profiling minorities. The very same white shirt house mice make no secret of the fact that they openly profile 1%er MC's (referred to by sensationalist media as "outlaw bikers.") Indeed, these white shirt house mice get media stenographers--who had just been spied on by them--to "write" glossy picture books containing no new information on 1%ers, all in an aim to tell the public they are profiling the 1%ers. Yet, very often, not one 1%er is arrested at an openly announced, highly public Club gathering. This is because 1%ers are fully aware that they will encounter peelers looking to nick them and, as a consequence, make damn sure not to have or do anything that will get them nicked, a practice they have been assiduously following for decades. I find it difficult to understand why anyone cannot adopt this best practice.
Long story short, while I refuse to make blanket statements about a vast group of people who happen to share a degree of pigmentation and while I admit that North American police openly parade their racist hatred of Blacks/Africans, that does not mean that I am an uncritical admirer of Blacks/Africans, or that I deem everything to do to be best practices. I specifically doubt the bona fides of the #BlackLivesMatter lot. #SOMEBlackLivesMatter would seem a more appropriate title, since #BLM was nowhere to be seen last year when Chris Brown was beseiged by police on the word of a vindictive ex, or when Birth of a Nation (in which he also played Nat Turner) producer Nate Parker was accused of rape despite being acquitted in court.
I am of a similar nuance when it comes to Fred Reed, who segues directly into the actual topic of this entry, how the comparison of Bombardier to Embraer is a case study against the claims of white supremacy. I admire Mr. Reed's writing style and his literary persona, while I despise his serial disparagement of Blacks/Africans. At the same time, Mr. Reed is a serial disparager of Donald Trump, particularly when it comes to matters Latino. In particular, Mr. Reed has argued against IQ-obsessed race realists by, inter alia, pointing out the example of Brazilian aircraft manufacturer Embraer as evidence that Latin Americans are not, by any stretch of the imagination, "inferior" to the race realists and white supremacists. My case study expands on Mr. Reed's point. However, some preliminary notes are necessary to make sure everyone reading this is up to speed.
In the civilian aircraft-manufacturing world, America's Boeing and the European Union's (specifically France and Germany's) Airbus have a duopoly that blocks smaller competitors from breaking into the market. Two of these smaller competitors are Canada's recently taxpayer-subsidised CEO bonused Bombardier and Brazil's Embraer.
Canada's Bombardier sells its stock on the markets, but the controlling stocks are the Class A shares, owned by the family and its close associates. These Class A shares each have ten votes, while the ordinary Class B shares available to the common serf only have one vote apiece. Of Bombardier's Class A and other shares, the company's own website says,
As stated in the 2015 Management Proxy Circular, as at March 9, 2015, Mrs. Janine Bombardier, Mr. J.R. André Bombardier, Mrs. Claire Bombardier Beaudoin and Mrs. Huguette Bombardier Fontaine controlled, indirectly through holding companies, 79.29% of the Corporation's outstanding Class A shares, 0.08% of the outstanding Class B subordinate shares and 54.35% of all the voting rights attached to all issued and outstanding shares.
In other words, 54% of Bombardier is controlled by Québecois who are blood relatives, who also control 79% of those shares which have ten votes. On these numbers alone, in other words, Bombardier is a microcosm of what Steve Bannon, Richard Spencer, Millennial Woes, Sargon and Kraut and Tea think the Western world should be. 63% of Québecois share Bannon, Spencer, MW, Sargon, Kraut and Tea, Vee and Freedom Alternatives views on race, supporting either the pro-union white nationalist alt right race realist Parti Québecois or the anti-union white nationalist alt right race realist Coalition Avenir Québec. An independent white nationalist alt right race realist Québecois, union supremo Bernard "Rambo" Gauthier, literally calls Syrian refugees "feces" and allows his FaceBook to be a haven for Islamophobia, leading to a police investigation, while his mob harasses and threatens parents who want to volunteer to brighten up their children's schools.
(So far, the PQ, CAQ and "Rambo" Gauthier all sound like people after Bannon's, Spencer's, MW's, Sargon's, Kraut and Tea's, Vee's and Freedom Alternative's own hearts. That is where one would be wrong, at least in the case of the former four, which the PQ, CAQ and "Rambo" Gauthier would have declared persona non grata in Québec, as they tried to do with Paul McCartney, for the "crime" of being/speaking English. Given Québec's well-documented--as in by their own historians--history of sympathy for the Axis powers, I have no doubt that Kraut and Tea, Vee and Freedom Alternative, as citizens of Axis nations, would be red carpet-welcome in Québec. Such is the nature of white nationalist alt-right race realism. It universally despises non-whites, but only likes selected segments of even those it deems "white.")
Embraer, by contrast, is owned by a variety of shareholders, both public and private, and the company prides itself on expanding the voting rights of ALL classes of shareholders. If one looks at this link, one can reasonably surmise that a good number of Embraer's shareholders are Brazilian. Steve Bannon, Richard Spencer, Millennial Woes, Sargon and Kraut and Tea, one can also reasonably surmise, do not regard Brazilians to be "white."
There is another huge difference between Bombardier and Embraer. Bombardier, seeing as it has had little to no success in cracking through the Boeing-Airbus duopoly, dabbles in military aircraft. What kind of military aircraft does it put out? A medevac plane which looks like it is smaller than the converted C-130 and C-17's the USAF use. A maritime patrol/search and rescue plane that does not offer much that the tried and tested P-3 Orion does not already have. An ISR (ELINT-gathering) bird, which does not look as impressive as the tried and tested Growler and ATL-2. To be fair, Embraer also produces birds in many of these categories.
What Bombardier does NOT have is a military aircraft that appears in this Air&Space magazine article on the subject of light, low-cost, low-maintenance Combat Air Support (CAS) birds. As far as CAS goes, the aforementioned A-10 Warthog has no equivalents. It is, as Major Hegar describes in her book (she wanted to fly one but was sweet-talked into becoming a G-Car driver by a superior ossifer who needed G-Car drivers), basically an airplane designed around a cannon, whose wide wingspan makes it a stable firing platform capable of laying down ordnance on Brand-X with surgical precision. It also has something an Airbus does NOT, which is an option, should the bird lose hydraulics, to engage manual reversion and fly the bird in safely just by the cables linking cockpit controls to the external control surfaces.
The A-10 is technically without peer in the CAS category. It is also not cheap to obtain and not exactly easy to maintain, particularly if you are the air force of a country that does not have a sufficient flight line infrastructure, either training- or facility-wise. That is why, in the Air&Space magazine article linked to in the first sentence of the previous paragraph, some third world nations--and the US Air Force and Navy looking for a less costly solution to CAS in anti-partisan wars only to be blocked by Senator John McCain on behalf of more established contractors--are looking for lighter framed CAS, essentially crop-dusters modified for the CAS role. Bombardier did not notice this. Embraer did. Hence why it came up with the Super Tucano, specifically mentioned in the aforementioned Air&Space article as having been tested, and in service, in Colombia, a country long at war with FARC partisans.
Why Bombardier failed to pick up what Embraer did about the demand for light CAS birds, I do not know for sure. However, contrasting Bombardier's incestuously white Québecois majority ownership with Embraer's diverse-by-design ownership, I would not be entirely in error to surmise that Embraer's inbuilt diversity allowed it to see things in a way that parochial Bombardier simply was unable to, leading Embraer into a market where it can successfully compete and excel while Bombardier just makes its Pepsis to the constellation of Cokes already available.