The great paleo-conservative thinker, Sam Francis, introduced the term “anarcho-tyranny” into the dissident vocabulary. He defined it as “we refuse to control real criminals (that’s the anarchy) so we control the innocent (that’s the tyranny).” For example, the streets are littered with speed cameras, red-light cameras and other surveillance equipment to tax motorists. On the other hand, if your car is stolen, the cops cannot be bothered to look for it and you have to hope the insurance company is generous.
Francis focused on crime, but we see this all over our society. Because it has crept up slowly on us, the chaos of our age just feels normal, but so does the shrinking freedom of the surveillance state. A way to see this is to think about the small, relatively easy to impose rules our government could do now, that would make life better. Yet, these modest proposals are never mentioned, much less debated. In fact, the very idea of the state imposing quality of life measures is so far outside of normal, they now seem bizarre.
For example, the scourge of mobile phones is obvious to everyone. We have people walking into traffic while texting. Every summer, we are treated to stories of people coming to harm as they try to take a selfie. Even if those are rare exceptions, driving has become a stressful adventure, because of drivers talking and texting. Spend time around the Imperial Capital and you come to hate the cell phone. This is an easily remedied problem that the government could address tomorrow, but they have no interests.
For example, the Feds could tell mobile phone makers that their devices must shut off when they detect movement. Cars with media centers have this feature, so drivers are not fiddling with the thing while driving. If mobile phones were so equipped, the number of drivers smashing into one another over texting would drop to zero on a few years. Idiots and teenagers would hate this, but so what? There’s never a need for a human to talk and text while driving. If you need to talk, pull over and have your conversation.
Now, the massive assault on privacy by tech companies could be also addressed quite simply. Your picture, your name, your financial information, all the stuff that defines you is yours. It should be treated like any other property. Google is not allowed to build a surveillance point on your front lawn. Why are they allowed to spy on you and sell your information to the highest bidder? A law that requires written permission to possess and distribute private information would put an end to the abuse of privacy.
In case you think this is impossible, keep in mind it used to exist. Credit bureaus used to need permission to release your credit history. One of the things you signed in the loan process was a form giving the lender the right to pull your credit report and call on your references. The same is true of employers. The application process included you giving them permission to call former employers. Simply restoring a basic of civil society – property rights – would put an end to most of the privacy abuse we see with technology.
To get a sense of just how far we have gone down the road to serfdom, ask a normie friend about such a proposal. Ask them if the government should require FaceBook to get your written permission to use your data. The right leaning normie will recoil in horror at the state doing anything. The left leaning normie will most likely give you a blank look, as they are unable to process the concept of privacy. The very idea of you owning you, owning your name, you image and your habits, is now alien to most Americans.
On the other hand, the idea of transparency among the ruling class has become an artifact of a bygone age. Around the Imperial Capital are thousands of not-for-profit operations that are financed by rich people. You can look up some basic information about them, but you can rarely find out who pays the bills. Take, for example, The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights. This group harasses white people and is run by a white-hating woman named Kristen Clarke. Who pays for this? It is a mystery, but it does not have to be.
Politics is now a clash between these types of groups financed by shadowy characters that none of us see. Instead we see trained actors as spokesman for these front groups that essentially operate as money laundering operations. Because the billionaire class is unable to hire politicians directly, they funnel their bribes through non-profits. Cliff Asness gets to pay Jonah Goldberg to be his mouthpiece and he gets a tax break. He’s not just a member of the over-class, he’s a philanthropist!
Cliff Asness may be a civic minded patriot, but the only reason we can know his name is he chooses to let us know it. He could just as easily have made the gift anonymously or under some other name. Unless you are into dissident politics, you would never know that every utterance of Jonah Goldberg is paid for by some billionaire with interests that may or may not be your interests. Every nickle that comes into a not-for-profit should be public information, so we can actually know who is paying the paid actors.
The point is, there are probably a hundred small things that could be done today to significantly improve life in America, for the citizens of America. The increasing shrillness of public debate is closely linked to the lawlessness of modern life. There’s a reason the state is incapable of even small reform. It goes back to what Sam Francis observed with crime. The class-consciousness of the managerial class is the same phenomenon that we see with public bureaucracy. The result is a cycle of anarchy and tyranny.
* * * https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/08/10/am-i-more-nordic-than-members-of-the-alt-right/ * * *
Talk about sins of the farther or more like great,great, Grandfarther :-b
Ismael Reed, Nordic Resister?
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/08/10/am-i-more-nordic-than-members-of-the-alt-right/
Middle-eastern men have not been emasculated like our Western men.
In the vein of Swift I modestly propose we eat the Bureaucrats.
Not the actual people, but their pensions & other holy bennies. We could do it by simple lottery. We could make them turn on each other & determine their own cohort victims.
We could even air it on PayPerView.
I’d pay to see Rod Rosenstein chasing Jeff Session through the fetid halls of the DOJ trying to arm-twist him into taking it in the pension, for the ‘good’ of the Upper DOJ Echelon.
Anywho, we select a random number of victims from each GovBur Silo and eat their entire pension…. What great fun! We could have a party, or we could all get new cell phones on the Gubmint Swamp Folk Pensions…..
Anarcho-tyranny was the standing rule in the Soviet labor camps. The thieves, rapists and murderers worked deals with the guards and lorded over the Article-58s, the “politicals.” If you had dignity, and sought to preserve it, you were doomed; you had to learn the game – fast – or you died. This was all policy, of course.
Our rulers want to break us. We’re the kulaks now; we are the zeks in a few more years.
“Break the body, break the spirit, break the heart.” – a slogan, if we may believe the dialogue of Stanley Kramer’s film ‘Judgement at Nuremberg’ – of the camp officials working the beat in the labor camps of Hitler’s eastern territories.
They don’t want us dead, not yet anyway; they want us to lick their boots first.
From “We are the World, We are the Children” to open and shameless calls for extermination of the ideologically backward… from the same people, mind.
They’re the children, alright; the children in ‘The Village of the Damned’.
Folks, sorry to repeat myself, but the Zman is trolling us with the cellphone thingie.
He’s forcing us to look at how libertarian issues work in the Diversity.
(Private/public usage, and private data versus public data)
Damn Jesuits and their critical thinking!
Here’s another modest proposal. Facebook, Google, YouTube and Twitter (the FAGOTTs) combined account for over 60% of the social networking market. This level of concentration of market power is a felony under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 (one of the few Progressive Era innovations to have any merit). No new legislation is required. The Executive branch just needs to exercise the power it already has (just as on immigration).
In January 2021 immediately after his second inaugural, our God-Emperor should instruct Attorney General Ann Coulter to commence prosecutions of the FAGOTTs under the Sherman Act. The goal should be to ruin the shareholders of these enterprises and place the remaining wreckage under FedGov control as public utilities, applying the First Amendment free speech rules to them.
Our God-Emperor would be hailed by right-thinkers everywhere as a second coming of the original trust-buster, Teddy Roosevelt. By the end of his second term, the tyrant Lincoln’s face would be replaced on Mount Rushmore by a bust of Donald J. Trump.
Great points Z-man, but I think you understand our culture well enough to know that most folk don’t give a fig for their own privacy, let alone their neighbor’s. As outlined by others, everyone is opting to carry big-brother surveillance around in their pocket without a care in the world. A great many people pay big bucks to join “gated communities” with a myriad of neighborhood fatwahs against this and that. People choose to live in houses constructed about 15′ apart, where you can’t even cook a steak on the grill without peering neighbors. Generally speaking, I think the American population is moving away from rural (most private) to suburban/urban areas. The greater the population density, the less consideration of others.
I’d like to see your ideas implemented at the rural county level … if there’s going to be a renaissance of decency it’s going to have to start there. But here I live in a county eaten up with meth-heads and similarly addicted to i-gadgetry. That’s why I found acreage without cell coverage, planted a garden, bought some cattle, and took up the great hobby of hand-loading.
If people can’t figure out how to do these things: not have a cellphone (or leave it at home), stop taking meth, stop subjugating themselves to the tyrants who seem to run condo associations and gated communities – well then I don’t think there is a single shred of hope any of this will ever resolve itself.
I see people bitching in the comments about “individualism”. Guess what : individualism also involves individual RESPONSIBILITY. Nobody is going to solve your problems for you – without first making sure it benefits them. That’s the vital piece of social logic that a good many people here seem to miss.
Everybody wants somebody else to magically resolve the problems – it’s never going to happen.
+1 again carlsdad. What’s with the lefties in this comments section, eh?
Thank you, calsdad.
I never cared for Voltaire, but his tale ‘Candide’ always stuck with me. We’re just people, in the end, and that means that we have to eat, so we plant gardens; we’re born, we live, and we die.
Live the way you think life should be led. That’s your ‘vote’. You are entitled to nothing more than that.
Given the extremities of our current ‘crisis’ it seems at times that simply lying in a field on a summer night and looking at the Moon is a ‘radical act’, to be banned eventually by Facebook.
For example, the Feds could tell mobile phone makers that their devices must shut off when they detect movement.
I think you probably realized by now this isn’t a great idea (not everyone who is moving is driving a car). But as the recent victim of vehicular ramming by a ditsy girl who was almost certainly texting at the time of impact, I join in the sentiment that “there oughta be a law”.
How about a law like this: anyone involved in a collision gets their phone history searched for activity at the time of the incident. The police just get to see meta-data for transmissions around the time of the accident. In other words, time and type of phone activity, not content. In addition, the law specifies stiff penalties for texting while driving. I think that would help prevent some avoidable accidents.
I’m pretty sure that distracted driving laws already exist in most if not all jurisdictions. The fact of the matter is that there’s probably a hundred reasons why somebody would just ram into your car. Fell asleep, on drugs, drunk, leaned down to pick up a dropped cigarette, ashes flew into her eye while smoking a cigarette, car out of control so she threw her hands up and started screaming (hands off the wheel – yes I actually saw a woman do that)…… etc.
Are we supposed to make SPECIFIC laws against each and every one of these things? It sounds like stupidity to me – and tyranny. But yet that is what mad mother types have been engaged in for DECADES now. The fact that people spending time on this site don’t recognize this trend as part of timeline that got us to our current condition really makes me question the mental state and motives of those people. It’s exactly why I accuse them of being leftists. Because that’s where the mental condition comes from. Like I said in the other post: you worship at the same church – you’re going to get accused of belonging to the same denomination.
I don’t know what all states do about accidents – but in my state insurance gets involved. And one driver is the “at fault” party. If the ditzy girl rammed your car – that sounds like a definitive “at fault” condition for her. In that case – the insurance company is going to get involved – her rates are going to go thru the roof, she’s also going to get surchages – and if she does it enough times – she’ll lose her license. So she’s not getting away scot-free. None of these make it any better for you – since you’re now screwed no matter what because nothing really backfills the time you lose and the dollar loss to your property.
But Federalizing things with more inane laws is a BAD deal all around. And I really question the underlying mental thought process and motivations of people whose go-to argument is “we need another law”.
So in our nation with a literacy rate somewhere around 70-75%, on par with Guatemala and Central African Republic, full of brainwashed idiots, many of them drug-addicted to street dope or prescription drugs, you want to do away with laws and instead have people hit each other in the head or administer beatings as a way to keep order? I’m so glad Trump is slashing regulations and I see the need to get rid of *many* unnecessary laws that came to be over the years, but I think you take things to the point of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Not sure if you were referring to one of my comments, but when I speak of “behaviors” being outlawed, I’m talking about things like, for example, capping usury at 10% across the nation so that it’s illegal to charge 30% interest rates like they do these days. Or doing away with the Federal Reserve and building decentralized block-chain systems instead that can’t be manipulated by the elite and cause so much damage to working people. This way we’re not chasing the people heading up the banks so we can make an example out of one of them while the industry continues the problem behavior, but instead outlaw banks from doing such things in our country and have very stiff penalties for anyone caught doing them. I’m talking about elite behaviors or actions. Not some idiot doing stupid things while driving.
The idea being to avoid having modern anti-semitic pogroms by enacting laws against the destructive activities that make gentiles so angry that are perpetrated by small groups of elite people usually involving an inordinate number of jews.
carlsdad is right on this point. More rules & laws lessens personal responsibility. They’ve actually done studies on this, believe it or not. Ron White said it best…’you can’t fix stupid’.
So in our nation with a literacy rate somewhere around 70-75%, on par with Guatemala and Central African Republic, full of brainwashed idiots, many of them drug-addicted to street dope or prescription drugs, you want to do away with laws and instead have people hit each other in the head or administer beatings as a way to keep order?
Read what you wrote dear to see the irony of what you said…Here is a hint are those people following the law right now… Would doing away with that law have any affect on them…Now don’t get me wrong I’m all for Malum in se laws but the malum prohibitum laws need to be cut way down…
I’m referring to outlawing elite actions such as excessive usury and central banking systems. Laws that would support different systems and frameworks from the current dysfunctional, corrupt ways. Probably most laws applying to little people could be repealed and everything would go along just fine.
@calsdad
Government is great at creating problems so you give them more power to provide a solution that in the end just creates more problems and oppressed you in the process…Some people will never learn will they Brother…
SELLING people their own shackles and chains.
Yes, and better still: enslaving people by giving them FREE things.
They sell us cell phones that offer a choice of exactly two operating systems–Android (controlled by Google) and Apple. Both require you to set up accounts with their respective “app stores” that compromise your privacy; both include software that spies on you outright. My cell phone is my enemy; I hate it. It nestles in my pocket like a parasite, like a tick burrowing into my flesh, sucking my blood. But it’s so convenient!.
“Free” services are something I’ve always avoided, but it seems most people don’t see the trap. (Hint: if it’s free, you are the product.) So I don’t use free email or “cloud” storage. But I do use the web, knowing that just about every site has embedded code that wants to betray my personal information to their Masters. Sure, I run in high paranoid mode with script blockers and not accepting cookies from strangers, but I know that the best I can achieve is not to be among the slowest zebras in the herd.
As a society, we’re not dealing with the recent technology very well. We need a carefully thought out framework of laws to maintain our freedom and dignity in this brave new world. I’m not optimistic: most people don’t see the danger, or think in simplistic terms like “the government has to take over the internet”. We have to re-think the entire concept of “freedom”: what does it mean in the electronic age? What do we want it to mean?
“Idiots and teenagers” … Zman, you’re a beaut!
And another member of the can’t walk and chew gum crowd is heard from……….
Sorry – but the “Have the Feds mandate cell phones won’t work when they’re moving” thing is just typical left wing behavior.
Why is it when I read the comments section here and read a number of the columns I get the sense that a good part of the population here is just a bunch of ever-so-slightly disaffected leftists? Could it be because of suggestions like that?
I’ve been talking on cell phones in my car since 1992. So far – I haven’t crashed a single car because of it. Run over a single pedestrian , run over any animals, driven 40mph in the left lane in 80mph traffic – or any of the other stupidity you typically see from cellphone obsessed drivers.
First off – there’s a little thing called Bluetooth. Maybe people need to learn how to use it. Simply TALKING and driving shouldn’t be an issue. People do it all the time when the car is full of passengers. They sing to the radio. Are you suggesting we should outlaw talking and driving? Good freaking luck with that.
Why do I say your suggestion is typical leftist behavior? Because it is. You see one little thing wrong – and suddenly it’s a Federal case that demands a national law to ban it. You forgot the “for the children” thing BTW – maybe you’re getting old.
I’ve also been riding a motorcycle since I was 12 years old. If you’re scared of other people on the road – it’s not something I would suggest trying. People do stupid shit when they’re driving a car. They were doing it before cell phones ever became popular. I’ve learned to adapt. So far at least – I haven’t been run over, hit , or run off the road. And I still don’t want to Feds sticking their noses into even more shit they’ll just screw up.
If you’re really that scared of other drivers on the road when you’re surrounded by a big metal box – maybe it’s time to take the bus.
GPS systems in automobiles now turn off when the car is in motion. It’s highly annoying. Even with a passenger in the car trying to use the GPS – you can’t enter a new address without stopping the damn car. It’s just fucking stupid. Before they did this I was perfectly capable of entering things into the GPS in the car – while it was in motion – without crashing it or killing anybody. You know what I do now? I disable the feature. It’s available if you know where to look – or you install an aftermarket system to get around the factory bullshit.
Non functioning GPS and non functioning cell phones while in motion – is just more nanny state horseshit. What about people on subway cars? What about passengers in your car? What about people on buses? What about people on airplanes? Any effort by the government to mandate “no talking while in motion” would basically screw everybody just to stop the misbehavior of a few people. Which is exactly why I call this leftist behavior – because it’s exactly what they’ve been doing to this country for at least a century now.
Someday maybe we can talk about how back in the 90’s they were screaming about putting airbags on motorcycles. Pure stupidity.
We already live under a nanny state tyranny. It’s what has led DIRECTLY to the current day screaming about Nazis under the bed. It’s a quasi-religious quest for “safety” at the expense of literally EVERYTHING else. The whole underlying basis of the leftist nanny state we live under is a quest for “safety”. Before the current day psychosis it was a never ending stream of laws banning this and that and everything under the sun so religious safety nirvana could be reached. That psychosis is why they’re constantly screeching about guns.
Sorry – I’m not buying. And when they force it down my throat – I’ll just do it anyway. More nanny state laws just add to the leftist tyranny you complain about here daily. Given the current level of freak out coming from the left – I don’t trust them with anything any more. Not one single goddam new law banning ANYTHING. Because they’re absolutely sure to go way too far with it.
This country would be far better off with no airbags in cars, no gun laws, no mandatory seatbelts, no ABS brakes, no child seats, no government food pyramid, no mandatory diversity hiring practices, no OSHA, or any of the other myriad laws making people complacent and feeling “safe”.
We did just fine as a civilization before we had “safety standards”. Probably because it FORCED responsibility and an actual thought process. We can’t have people actually thinking shit out though can we – they might question the narrative if they were actually forced to look around and THINK about their safety. You know – things like ” hey wait a minute – how come every time something blows up it’s a Muslim” – or – ” hey wait a minute – how come the black crime rate is so freaking high”.
My favorite was the short lived fantasy under the Carter regime that all faxes could only be sent to post offices who would call you to come pick them up.
Land of the Flea, home of the Plague.
What??? I’m too young to remember that. When fax machines were new the fedgov wanted them treated like telegrams or something? Disseminating them was suggested as being the USPS’s responsibility??
Hey, Boomer Time, most of the GenPop has an IQ hovering in the 90-105 range.
They ain’t you, Special Snowflake, and can barely handle either talking coherently on the phone or driving safely, and the two together is out of their capability range.
Ironic you label much of the commenters here as “liberals,” then you post as the epitome of the rootless, cosmopolitan, egalitarian, Lockean Muh Individualist.
Hell, you could be Zombie Thomas Paine or Lil Benji ChickenHawk, with their love of Enlightenment era Muh Classical Liberalism, with that mindset.
Just repeat after me, “Israel is our greatest ally, diversity is our strength.”
I honestly don’t know what the hell you’re talking about and I doubt you do either. Quite frankly I’m sick and tired of being told I can’t do things because genpop is too stupid to handle day to day life. You know what fixes that problem? Beatings. Beatings are something everybody can understand. There was a time when beatings could actually be administered without ten levels of law enforcement descending from the heavens to stomp on your ass and make everybody feel “safe” again. If they did show up – and you pointed to the dent in your car and the other driver talking on the cellphone – they’d likely say ” I hope you didn’t hurt your hand sir”.
You know why I call the “let’s have the Feds make a law” types leftists? Because they are. The constant drumbeat of “let’s make a law” has been in place for DECADES. It’s the precursor to the exact thing being ranted about here constantly which is the progressive lefties have now gone after what they perceive to be hate speech – all so they can be safe in their own delusions. The quest for safety started in the physical world – and now it’s moved to the philosophical and the world of the mind. And it’s the same people doing it. During the Prohibition Era it was women, when they went after the drunks it was the MADD types, then it was mad mothers against guns – now it’s pussy hat marchers.
Same people, same underlying religious belief system – and all looking for the same final result.
You worship at the same church – then expect to called a member of that denomination.
If you can’t figure that out then you might want to include yourself in 90-105 IQ demographic you’re complaining about.
Nailed it Zero. I was about to light this dude on fire but you beat me to it.
False Equivalency, it’s what’s for breakfast! Because YOU are a high functioning autist doesn’t mean everyone is. In point of fact, as I mentioned in nearly the first comment here, since your 1993 sail foam days IQs have dropped precipitously.
Your 10 paragraph wall of text simply tells me you live in a very well constructed reality totally divorced from the objective reality the rest of us live in. You are a MUH Libertarian. Let’s entrust a nation of dinuds, and muzz with all the acoutrements of a highly advanced European civilization including very high trust privileges.
What could go wrong? Hey Shitavious! Here is your select fire M4, your turbo-charged bike, no helmet required. Oh and here is a phone you can use while riding the bike one handed so you can do some texting. Just sling the M4 while riding to your Orbital Telemetry Consortium. Nigga please…
Laws are necessary, and doubly so in a nation of stupids. I’m not arguing how pathetic it is that we’ve arrived at this point, I’m simply acknowledging the truth of what I see around me. Everyone here would love to live in a libertarian paradise but the social capital needed for that vanished a long long time ago. Come visit the rest of us in objective reality some time, it’s great!
Carlsdad is saying that a white country can have lots of grey space in the laws.
We don’t need the ’em, and the stupids ignore ’em.
I upvoted Zeroth for her rousing snarl and bite. Gives me a, umm, a thrill, it do.
So hot when she’s angry, oh yeah!
Ahh – so Zero Tollrants is a woman?
And suddenly it all made sense……………
@Apex
Laws are necessary, and doubly so in a nation of stupids.
Just a question do the stupids usually follow the law or is it just the smart ones being oppressed once again…Do gun laws work to stop crime? Just something to ponder I know you know the answer…I know what might work let’s ban stupidity…
Like I already said: beatings a time proven solution
I dont think the feds should be checking up on ppl’s driving and talking. Other than that I think it may illustrate why we re always losing cultural battles that ppl here are blasting each other over cell phones while white babies are now somewhere in the high to mid 40s % being born in a country founded by disgruntled colonial Englishmen.
Agreed.
Maybe we could just establish cash payouts for the Darwin awards.
Make being stupid “The Heavenly Lottery”.
OT but I’m a lot more interested in Sam Francis, a guy Im just discovering now, than in cell phones in public right now. If you dont know who he was (maybe Im the only ignoramus here?) pls have a listen here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xgdcouz2ChI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2eG0l52Au0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adTezRKdwes
I have it on good authority that Sam Francis was never a child.
You might be.
I havent seen you write anything interesting about him.
On countercurrents website they’ve been reprising his great articles.
I ll have a look. My exact views on race are one of the future pills, color of which one I ll down I still dont know. Since there are so many races and colors in the US, Mr Francis’ views lead to the question ‘what kind of society is the US going to be in the future, or should be?’
If he is right, how is the US going to be kept united. In fact, is it? What are the odds that all that is currently the 50 states, ie ignoring Guam or Puerto Rico and other semi affiliated areas, are still going to be part of the same nation in 2118? I honestly dont know.
Thanks, I’ve never read any Sam Francis, but I will now.
(I made the mistake of sampling Sam Harris, that cucking tool. Sheesh.)
*update* Just saw the first paragraphs of the linked Unz reprint. The first time I heard of the seat belt law was from a poor mom committing the awful crime of buying her kid milk at 9 pm.
I was a cashier at a ghetto mini-mart, and my customer had been ticketed $45 on her short drive to the store where bums and bangers were our regular scene.
I mean, her youngster wasn’t even strapped in and tied down in the back! The tyke was actually sitting with her mom in the front seat!
That’s, like, child abuse, right?
($45 was one third of my weekly pay at min wage in 1990)
*update to the updated update*
Wow, Z. Wow, Troll King.
I read it. Francis sounds dangerously paleo-libertarian. No wonder Conservative Inc. sounded so outrageousely schizophrenic in the 90s.
Hang ’em all- hang ’em high!
“For example, the Feds could tell mobile phone makers that their devices must shut off when they detect movement. ”
That would also disable the phones of passengers, and not just passengers of cars. Buses, trains, planes, taxis, etc. Why should a passenger have his phone disabled? There’s no good reason for such a heavy-handed governmental edict. No thanks.
Imagine it, riding a bus without having to hear a moron yammering to another moron of of the mobile. Imagine not having to hear some dope talk about what he had for lunch on the plane.
You make a great point. I never thought about it. Maybe just ban the damn things entirely
Let ’em chatter away on the phone. They ain’t talking to *me* that way.
That makes you part of the problem.
Without people there is no society period and in fact the rugged individualism that the Right preaches is civic suicide,
Vox Day put its a bit more eloquently than I could
The Right’s idolatry of individualism is shortsighted and strategically disastrous. It is the philosophy of the crack addict, the rent boy, the cam whore, and the flytipper. It is the mindset of the parasite and the grasshopper. And it is not compatible with civilization, let alone advanced Western civilization.
Not all collectivisms are equal. Identity politics are not communism. Defending your family and your nation, and working to advance their interests, is not wrong, it is the very sort of normal human behavior that created Western civilization. I could not have created Infogalactic alone. I could not have built Castalia House alone. Arkhaven is a collective effort.
We cannot save civilization by running around like a bunch of headless chickens doing our best to avoid any and every responsibility to others.
You don’t “fix” people’s lack of responsibility to others by making laws against behavior. What you do is give people an excuse to not be responsible.
Social shaming and/or consequences – like a swift punch in the head for bad behavior – with the nodding approval of everybody who saw it happen because they also recognize that the punched person was engaging in bad behavior ….. works a lot better than any “laws”.
We’ve been passing ban this and ban that laws for at least a century now – mostly driven by mad mothers – and things have only gotten worse. Maybe the problem is the solution that keeps getting imposed from above.
I, also, disagree with the Zman, but do have a question of my own.
Public restrooms.
Why do people always get lengthy calls when they’re on the john?
There they are, chatting away like it’s a UN conference call.
Yer in the stall, for cripes’ sake!
Zman shows himself to be more idealistic than the most off-the-grid White Nationalist. We will have a sweet white nationalist homeland before we have a world without white people who loudly announce on social media what they ate for brunch. Status-conscious white people desperately want other people to know about what they ate for brunch. Get realistic and embrace WN and abandon these unrealistic dreams of a world without white people who loudly describe their brunch! Be realistic!
Implying it’s white people chimping and screeching into cell “foams” in public places.
Where do you live, Whiteopia?
White people may want every one to know about their organic, non-GMO, gluten-free, locally sourced lunch, but they do so quietly by posting a picture of it on social media.
As annoying as it is, they aren’t yelling about T’Shaun eating Jon’quaris’ booty hole, because “they be down low niggas,” next to me while I’m trying to eat *my* locally sourced artisinal cheeses.
Ha Ha Ha…Thanks for starting my Monday out with a laugh!!!
I loathe cellphones and rarely use my own, but agree with others that getting the government involved in banning stupid people doing stupid and irritating things is not a good idea. These lapses in common sense and common courtesy used to be dealt with by the population at large – i.e. cultural forces, social opprobrium, stigma, or shaming. When a society has to turn to laws to control daily social interactions, you have a sick society and culture.
Short term personal solution – I carry a pair of foam earplugs in a little case in my purse and use them everywhere – grocery store, carwash waiting room, even during preliminary lecture/patriotard film/government propaganda at jury duty (after 3 -4 wasted hours, they purportedly randomly picked, via computer, all the Mohammedans in the room plus a few other people “of color,” and the rest of us were free to go).
Excellent! – and I completely agree.
The fact that we can’t seem to shame people who do stupid shit any more – is a sign of a sick society.
The ability to shame seems to have been forced out of the society and culture – by yet again: more Federal level laws.
My wife gets upset every time I say “that’s gay” – or – “that’s retarded”, because you know – we can’t make people feel bad any more.
Carlsdad, tell your wife to man up!!! Seriously – what is it with most women who, while being as catty and petty as possible from elementary through high school and in any employment situation, then proceed to dictate the “be nice” death cult to the rest of society? I try to be courteous and civil, except where it is definitely not warranted, but I am not NICE . . . to people who hog the weights at the gym, to pajeets robo-calling, to Oriental drivers, or to people who want me and my family dead.
Aw, shoot. The Zman just trolled us.
“You make a great point. I never thought about it. Maybe just ban the damn things entirely.”
So pwned. I surrender. Ma always said I was a bit slow.
Cell phones- the libertarian revolution!
Not to mention gps. I use my phone for turn by turn directions all the time. But I agree with Z’s sentiment.
Take trends to their logical conclusion and you get slavery of higher iq White men to provide money for managers and bureaucrats and oligarchs and their non White armies. See Europe or South Africa. The Islamic golden age ran on European slaves from Ireland and England in Spain and Eastern Europe in Baghdad. Literate and intelligent these slaves kept Muslim society afloat and when the Vikings finally were Christian ized the trade stopped and Islam collapsed until Turks could raid the Balkans, Italy France and Spain and as far north as Iceland for slaves with intelligence.
It’s become increasingly clear to me that our political class caters to (1) the donors, and (barring donor objections) (2) the voters. If Adelson, Zuck or Bezos actually identified with the citizenry and shared our concerns things would change PDQ. But they don’t. They’re far removed from the consequences of policies they advocate. In their eyes your replacement is desirable (complainers!) There are quite literally millions willing to take your place. Congress is approving their VISAs as we chat.
Yep, democracy does not work. .Serving sheeple only gets your life ruined. This is why democratic countries never have a real leader. Check every nationalist movement in the Europe last 50 years. Did they won or did they got their pathetic 10 % on the every single election ?
Last victories do not count, we are not living in the end of history. We may like Brexit or Salvini but after 10 years liberals roaring back because liberal candidate has better hair color or underwear or something like this.
Poland and Hungary do not count either, nationalists took over so whatever party candidate sheeple likes , it is nationalist party.
Sounds like Poland and Hungary have the winning strategy — all political parties include nationalist agendas! Hope that fever spreads in the U.S.
The person who steals your car costs the state money: Costs money to go after, costs money to prosecute, costs money to incarcerate, costs insurance company claims money. The essentially law abiding schmuck who runs a traffic light or gets a DUI is a profit center for the cops, courts and insurance companies. Whattasurprise it is who they go after…
Driverless vehicles will not only wipe out millions of blue-collar jobs, they will also knock out much of the white-collar insurance industry. AI will also do a number on their ranks. I expect little resistance as AI is one of the few tools we have to reduce healthcare costs.
That’s an interesting idea about AI possibly reducing healthcare costs. Would that be from labor saved? Based on past experience, do we have any reason to believe they wouldn’t just scoop up the additional profits at the expense of jobs lost?
On paper a lot of our healthcare system is “non-profit”. The insurance industry and drug industry are the two engines of “windfall profits” that appear to be driving some cost increases. But even in socialist sytems the growing cost of healthcare outpaces inflation. AI might reduce errors, and provide a more efficient process for collecting data. Lower malpractice costs
If anyone says “infomatics” one more time, the doctors themselves will head the pitchfork parade.
(They’d rather waste time treating patients than typing in data for lawyers to sue them with)
I expect it will also wipe out a fair number of cops. I’m guessing that most people’s interaction with cops happens while they’re behind the wheel. If the car is automatically piloted, the cops aren’t going to be getting much in the way of probable cause to pull them over.
Agree, AI coupled with mass data gathering will kill employment in insurance. Who needs underwriters?
We’ve already algo’d most of what you would experience as a consumer. In the commercial end, lot is still stubbornly resistant to modeling—but that is mostly a data quality problem. Solve that and the correlations will fall into place.
Driverless will be a bit farther away than is described in the popular press. At my current firm, have spent the last year exiting that segment. Ironic thing is that for most of the 2000s technology like airbags, anti-lock, automatic braking, lane sensors etc was dropping bodily injury and accident rates. Add the iPhone and turning cars into F-35 cockpits we see increasing accident rates—too many screens and switches to play with. I prefer driving my 4 door Jeep Wrangler now. Want AC, turn a knob versus hunting and pecking on a control screen for the thermostat.
After the intro, I assumed you’d be talking about things like mandatory minimums, Project Exile, etc. – programs proven to reduce crime that are memory-holed so that progressives can gaslight us on gun control.
Privacy wasn’t the strongest example you could have picked IMO. Yeah, it matters, but it’s more of a gong show than you think it is in reality – the EU already has these laws and they don’t really help, they just aid in regulatory capture. If the USG really wanted to rein in the Googles and Facebooks of the world, they would demand that these companies choose between editorial control and common-carrier protections – something for which there is already ample legal precedent but simply isn’t being enforced (again, because anarcho-tyranny).
NGO transparency would be nice, but a better solution is to just ban them like Hungary has. Why should they even be allowed to exist? The overwhelming majority are cookie-cutter left-wing causes, while the few “right-wing” NGOs are basically just playing the controlled-opposition role. Yes, we have CIS and Judicial Watch, but I’d sacrifice those if it meant also getting rid of the ACLU, IRAP, Clinton Foundation, etc. Probably the most effective “activist” organization is WikiLeaks, and they’re the ones that every government wants to shut down!
There are other social reasons behind the fall in crime. Abortion is often suggested as a reason, though hotly disputed. Less controversial reasons include improvements in security technology, increased electronic home entertainment, obesity, population aging, and the higher tendency of blacks to live in car-dependent suburbs than 10,20, 30 years ago. There’s also been a glut of low-paying service industry jobs. More incarceration and “tough on crime” policies haven’t been uniform throughout the country, but almost always cause budget increases for those bureaucracies.
A newly unemployed factory worker in 1977 probably had a degree of physical fitness, and might even have been a Vietnam veteran. They might have lived in a dense urban area, with plenty of targets to mug or stores to stick-up. Concealed carry didn’t exist in most states. Porn was either in a discrete theater or a magazine. Atari was just invented, and was mostly in centralized arcades.
A newly unemployed call center rep in 2007 probably has a 1/3 chance of being obese, and returning Iraq veterans received more social services and sympathy, they were also volunteers rather than conscripted. Unemployment benefits were extended several times during the recession. Used video games are cheap, internet porn is free. Part-time work is common. A large portion of the people are on some form of anti-depressant medication.
Also, our legislators do things like change definitions of Felonies into Misdemeanors, making crime appear to decline.
This is all misdirection. Crime is primarily a function of demographics and secondarily a function of law enforcement (or lack thereof). There may be other confounding factors, but the fact is that violent crime overwhelming happens in (a) large cities with (b) a high percentage of nonwhites.
That doesn’t mean the crime can’t be stopped. It can, and it was in the past. But due to progressive policies and 99% of “criminologists” being communists, crime has actually gone up in these areas, not down. Even when you discount things like the Ferguson Effect, it’s mind-blowing if you compare these places today to 200 years ago, when someone could make headlines for vagrancy or public intoxication.
I don’t think we can just sit around and hope that Congress somehow acquires the common sense and cojones to do the right thing. Privacy is extinct in the modern world of high tech devices and subversive apps, but there are many ways to fight back. The problem is that this requires work and intelligence, and therefore is anathema to the masses, who have now been conditioned to only do easy. This won’t change until people become desperate.
So on one hand, the Z man would have the federal government demand that manufacturers brick phones that detect movement, while at the same time, talking something about the loss of digital privacy. No, these won’t square up.
Lawyers’ Committee For Civil Rights Under Law gets funding from a large number of foundations. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6936
LCCR is supported by grants from numerous large foundations, including the American Express Foundation; the Bauman Family Foundation; the Carnegie Corporation of New York; the Fannie Mae Foundation; the Ford Foundation; the Freddie Mac Foundation; the JEHT Foundation; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; the Joyce Foundation; the Mertz Gilmore Foundation; the Minneapolis Foundation; the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation; the Nathan Cummings Foundation; the Open Society Institute; the Rockefeller Foundation; and the Turner Foundation.
Carnegie Corporation and Ford Foundation have ties to funding from CIA — our tax dollars at your service! They love it when we pay for our own demise. And no surprise to see George Soros’ Open Society listed, probably everyone’s first guess as to who might be funding.
Yeah, Freddie Mac and Fannie may are connected with the federal system as well, aren’t they? It’s essentially the government against us, but we already knew that
The Joyce Foundation is not as well known as some others but it is important. Chicago based, it was an important part of the local group of liberal elites that selected, nurtured, and guided the rise of Obama.
The usual Jews then
Karl (the ticker guy) just posted:
There Can Be NO Compromise On Data
You’re absolutely right, of course. But – you’re in a legal grey zone. If I am Google, and I tell you that if you use my services, you agree to my collecting your info and using it in a legal fashion. It doesn’t matter if it is in small print; if it is in print, at the back of a document hundreds of pages long in the finest print – it’s there, and by law, the onus is on you to accept or reject that as part of the terms and conditions of the contract.
Having said that, corporations regularly right in terms and conditions that are unenforceable by the courts. Non-competition clauses for employees that leave the company are a good example. Sure, it’s in your contract, but the second it goes to court, the judge will throw it out in most cases. (In law, there is always an exception for everything and believe it or not – most of them are justified).
They can have all the info they want on me; I am a hardened target. It wasn’t easy getting that way – but if the state wants a fight with me they will damned well get one and the people they send to do it will regret it. If they start picking fights with guys like me – we’re ALL in trouble… but by Godfrey, so are they.
We need to play the game. Where DOES your money come from, Kristen Clark? Where IS your birth certificate, Barkie Obutthole? Who are your other benefactors Jonah Goldberg? We need to take names and remember faces too – and make a point of doing it so those guys see it.
Not sure I fully agree with you on publishing names of people who contribute to not-for-profits. Given the current climate, you can be ruined now if you give to a dissident site like Amren publicly.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. When some on the payroll of a non-profit assault someone at a public event, then the victim can sue the financial backers. It causes the rich to think carefully about who they are financing. A big part of the current climate is professional bomb throwers on the left financed by billionaires who see it as a game.
For example, who is paying the rent of Lacy MacAuley, the professional Antifa organizer? I’d like to know. Her victims would like to know.
Lacy MacAuley works for the Institute for Policy Studies.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/ipshistoryandagenda.html
The list of donors is too long to paste in here, but many are the usual NPR-type foundations. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/ is a great resource of info on the Left from David Horowitz.
Btw, Z, Im finding it hader and harder to comment here, for what seems computer technical reasons, longer loading, non-responsive after I push ‘post comment’ etc. Cant be long until the Alex Jones raiders come looking for you as well if others experience this too??
Have noticed the same—but put up with the response time and codes, since the commentary here is usually a good extension of the topic rather than a food fight and the difficulty in posting keeps the trolls away.
“the difficulty in posting keeps the trolls away.”
Very good point
I’ve noticed some issues, but only ion my one PC. I think I may have to upgrade the server, as traffic is getting too high for what I have in place.
Let me propose that there is another reason, besides unwillingness to maintain order which I do not dispute, for the powers that be to impose anarcho-tyranny: they are hopelessly feminized, to a degree I could never have predicted (army soldiers prancing around in high heals, female army ‘rangers’ etc to pick from the most conspicuous place, the military).
The imposition of order is an intrinsically masculine trait. Women, even ‘strong women’, can at the very best, do it very poorly. But ‘correct’ well-behaved ‘wards’ they can do. Which is exactly what you see with the definition of anarcho-tyranny. In imposing anarcho-tyranny the state is behaving in a conspicuously feminized way.
Moderate size metro area near me has given the cops the speed cameras where they simply hide and snap pictures of speeding motorists. You then get a ticket in the mail two to three weeks later. Of course the letter goes to the registered owner and not who was driving because they have no idea who was driving.
Does proving you weren’t driving get you out of the ticket? No, not unless you want to tell them who was driving. I had decided to contest mine because wife was driving, ticket came to me. Nope, law states you owe because it is a civil fine and not a traffic fine. Doesn’t matter if it was you are not. Funny watching the line of people coming in to contest. One guy had to waste his time when they sent him the ticket He drove a Dodge Dart and the camera showed a while panel van. Another guy was there because his ex-girlfriend signed that he was the one driving. One guy was there saying he was over the limit because he was trying to get around a semi-truck that was behaving erratically. Can’t tell in a 1 second video clip.
Because the cops won’t do their jobs, you have people wasting their time to fix problems that would either never have happened or could have been resolved had the cop actually pulled the person over. Interestingly a small suburb unanimously rejected the idea of using the cameras because the city had so enraged people. One fact that came out in their discussion was that the company providing the cameras covers the salary of the officer while he is using the camera. What a scam.
The common justification is “safety”. Happen to be in the insurance business and the connection between reduced accidents due to red light or speed cameras is, at best, tenuous. Often has the opposite effect as people start stopping short out of fear of getting another $50 ticket they can’t afford—particularly since the red light cameras are often badly calibrated.
There have been documented instance where the city (or company they outsourced to) changed the timing of the lights to catch more people – with the result of increasing traffic accidents.
The beleaguered tax-paying and law-abiding citizens are continuously squeezed for more and more money and, once entangled somehow, have more and more of all the burdens dealing with the web of bureaucracies and corporations strangling them. It’s not a bottomless well.
Absolutely. My state is now coming up with the brilliant idea of taxing medical services, prescriptions, vet services, eye exams, etc. So now, if they are successful, you will not only get an ER bill you cannot afford, you will ALSO get a tax bill of hundreds of dollars on top of it. And not only will you have to pay your copay at the doctor’s office, you will also have to pay taxes on the visit that was billed to your insurance company. Madness. All to pay for a very large community of illegals who contribute little but consume much in terms of public funds.
When does it become so oppressive that you leave…What’s your breaking point?
Don’t know how it works in your state, but in CO they just send those things plain mail so the couple of times I’ve gotten them, directly into the trash they go. If they can’t prove I received it, no case in a court of law, and I’ve never heard from them about the tossed ones. What a scam.
I’ve read that if you do this too often they will serve you in person but given the expense that’s probably only the worst offenders.
A close friend of mine (50+) recently got her first EVER ticket (admits herself she drives like a grandma – antithesis of leadfoot me). Stopped by a non-White cop on a deserted suburban street on a Sunday evening, for purportedly “running a stop sign” (i.e. didn’t stop for a full 1-2 minutes before proceeding). Was rude, disrespectful, and claimed to have it on film. She went and dutifully paid her $240 fine the next morning. How does one get people accustomed to obeying the law to correctly view the badge gang as an enemy – and take the time out of work/life to contest their tyranny? They count on most being too busy or too intimidated. Like most other White Americans, I was raised to trust the cops. Experience long ago changed that to contempt, almost daily reinforced by what I see, hear, and read.
Around here it’s become a big revenue source. Unfortunately many of the cops in the tax strapped suburbs around here have simply become tacti-cooled out road pirates. The various towns and villages have put surcharges on tickets since taxes are maxed out—a simply speeding ticket can run 200-300 bucks. Had to go to court with one of my kids a couple years ago—I had a guy lined up to fix his ticket, but most of the courtroom was people that got pulled over for a moving violation then got written up for expired inspections, window tint, improper display of tag—the gamut. Some were fighting nearly $1k worth of tickets from a single moving violation.
Yes, and where I am, these cameras are only in the white affluent areas, not the ghetto where I imagine the vast majority of motor vehicle incidents occur. Oh wait, maybe they could spin that into some sort of white privilege.
Here’s my peeve: why can’t we have a law against the damn telemarketers who manage to call me about ten times per week? Why can’t I easily and permanently opt out? Oh, you can opt out for a while…but they’ll be right back at you in six months. Bastards.
In my experience “opting out” doesn’t deter them. It must be profitable for them, though, or they wouldn’t do it.
Automated (computer) predictive dialing has been around for decades. It might cost a thousandth of a cent when they dial your home, if that much. Pretty profitable business. It’s just a numbers game, and there are always ignorant people to answer the phone and listen to their pitch. Pretty sad, really. And they don’t care about the opt-out lists. Who’s gonna’ enforce it?
Yeah, I learned the other day that if someone asks you not to speak to them and you do, you could be prosecuted for “hatrassment.” Then why the heck aren’t the telemarketers “harassing” me?
I get at least ten a day on my cell phone. I use it for business or I’d not answer any number I don’t recognize.
My proposed solution is making a caller pay the recipient some nominal fee for every call- $.50 or $1.00 – would have much net impact on general users but would shut down telemarketers.
“Pay to play.”
“The result is a cycle of anarchy and tyranny.”
And that cycle has only ever ended in one fashion. So what we have to look forward to is either a long downward spiral, or a convulsion of violence that will make America look like the Balkans. All because people wouldn’t behave reasonably.
Apps and services will just require your consent to giving them ownership of the information or the app would not work. My phone is full of stuff like that and I always give permission – without a gmail account your android phone wont even set up.
I assume that’s why the proposal was for signed, written consent. I would also imagine any such laws would require the actual, physical consent form to exist, rather than simply be digitized and stored in a database. Make it as hard as possible for those companies to behave the way they do.
Of course, there would be plenty of people who would willingly sign away whatever is demanded of them for another phone app. There would also be a lot of companies who would simply fold up the tent, and app development would languish, and THAT might be the spark that sets off a revolution, given the present character of this country.
But this is easily addressed in the law. It already is addressed with regards to your financial affairs. Despite what they preach on television, it’s hard to get your credit information and credit card usage without your consent. I’ll note that the habit of making it seem easy for the cops to get your visa card transactions is part of the program to strip you of your privacy. That aside, when you apply to Visa for a credit card, you do not give them the right o use your credit history as they please. You can’t grant them this right, as a matter of law.
The same principle could easily be applied to the mobile phone makers and social media firms.
By the way, these kinds of contracts were never well received by the courts. Forcing someone to sign a contract in order to use a public service is coercive and no contract is valid if coerced.
“Google is not allowed to build a surveillance point on your front lawn.”
Just wait.
It would have no need of such a thing. You carry it, willingly, around with you everywhere you go. Your location, who you talk to, what you write, your phone calls, even your camera and mic can be activated surreptitiously if they are interested.
Building an ostentatious surveillance apparatus would be ahh, how do we say? Redundant…
Good point.
That was not the point. The point is violating people’s property rights is hard, because the principle of private property is strong. The principle of information property, on the other hand, is weak, so it is easily violated.
I’m not sure. I thought “Kelo” would have generated more outrage (and I was young then!) Maybe that was a trial balloon?
You obviously don’t deal with HIPPA on a daily basis.
Google DOES build surveillance points not only on your front lawn, but in your home. It’s called the “internet of things.” And Google isn’t alone in this.
https://what3words.com
They already have and chances are you paid for the privilege. It’s called Google Home. Amazon has Alexa.
One thing Social Media did was to package surveillance gear as a must have device for the home.
Then factor in WiFi in your car or some OnStar variant. Your Cellphone/Pad and use of ATM/CC. The corporations know everything about you. This means your insurance company knows what you eat, where you drive and who are your friends, what your interests are and even your sexual peccadilloes. .
Facebook will soon have access to people’s bank account information.
Remember information equals control(blackmail) in our society. Ever wonder why pols flip once they are in office? Blackmail. They tried that with Trump when the heads of the FBI, CIA and NSC walked into Trump Tower with the dossier in the hopes of blackmailing him into resigning.
And why do you think Congress doesn’t fix this? Because they’re owned by firms like Facebook and Google who made sure to spread the wealth all over D.C.
There are inexpensive soft cases for cell phones or tablets that block all transmission/activity – essentially portable farraday cages – available from Bezos’ Amazon. Of course, using one also means blocking incoming calls, too, but that could be worked around by establishing set check-in times with close friends and family – i.e. phone will be active at only pre-agreed upon times.
Faceberg can only access your info if you continue to Faceberg. Why are you doing this? I have purchased my last computer phone. When this baby wears out, back to a basic ringer. We are only slaves if we willingly use the chains. Set yourself as free as possible. There are lots of search engines-why use Google? Stop telling truths to every fool who asks: including the powerful and the gunned up public protectors. Unless you view YOURSELF as a free citizen, no one else will. Plan B should already be in your head.
The problem is, we’ve been slowly collapsing the average IQ over several decades along with the absolutely brilliant, some would say master stroke, of genius of SELLING people their own shackles and chains.
This was beyond the comprehension of the best totalitarians and even Orwell himself. In those future imaginings the telescreen was a forced intrusion. By making life convenient, creating addictive social apps, and putting utility into the device, we gladly not only accept the slave collar, we pay for it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgxZr6LLS34
Not all. Increasingly in the West we’re becoming a variant of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. From the ubiquitous consumption, onanistic sex, the obsessed with hedonism, mass marketed pharmaceutical bliss, with an economic globalist overclass the Lords of all they see. It’s grim how prophetic the book was. I think that was Orwell’s failing. His reviewed of Mein Kampf had this to say.
Also he has grasped the falsity of the hedonistic attitude to life. Nearly all western thought since the last war, certainly all ‘progressive’ thought, has assumed tacitly that human beings desire nothing beyond ease, security and avoidance of pain. In such a view of life there is no room, for instance, for patriotism and the military virtues. The Socialist who finds his children playing with soldiers is usually upset, but he is never able to think of a substitute for the tin soldiers; tin pacifists somehow won’t do. Hitler, because in his own joyless mind he feels it with exceptional strength, knows that human beings don’tonly want comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense; they also, at least intermittently, want struggle and self-sacrifice.
How wrong it looks in this day and age could you be.
“Nearly all western thought since the last war,”
And just what war was the “last war”?The US’s murderous ongoing assault on Yemen?, that on Libya?, Iraq? Syria? Lebanon? Afghanistan? Vietnam? Korea?
Shut up nerd
So true. Everyone given a platform on TV or status and awards for a book/article or movie are people that reinforce and maybe further contribute to the narrative put out by the elite. Otherwise the show, book or movie gets very little attention or fails.
“…the absolutely brilliant, some would say master stroke, of genius of SELLING people their own shackles and chains.”
Made me laugh but very true. They made it necessary to be shackled to be ‘high status’ and PUA basically teaches that status is the ultimate social currency. Highjack humans’ instinctive social programming and you can play with them like ants…
Oh so correct. Laws may apply to everyone in theory, but are selectively enforced against only specific classes of people. I was raised to be compliant and law abiding, so me and my class are the ones who end up being punished for noncompliance. Victor Davis Hanson has experienced this phenomenon firsthand in rural California for exactly the reasons laid out by Z-man in the first paragraphs of today’s entry. Read some of Hanson’s columns for details.
We are not anarchists, yet I look forward to the day when the normals and “squares” start to lose their fear and begin to defy unreasonable and unfair rules and regulations. Are we ready to give the middle finger to the petty bureaucrats and say enough is enough? If not now, when?
Don’t discount the power of conformity, even in a low-trust diverse society. Plenty of people won’t speak up if they fear being fired and put on an employment blacklist. Admissions at colleges now checks if you follow Alex Jones. I don’t foresee Congress forbidding discrimination based on political ideology, it would be easily stigmatized as the “Nazi Protection Bill”. Silicon Valley is involved in designing a “social credit” system just like China. Those ubiquitous smartphone “freemium” games are the model. Weimar survived the first economic catastrophe, it would have survived the second if France/UK had reoccupied the Rhineland. Our system is more stable.
I think DBD is right. Adding to his comments, it is impossible to overestimate the cravenness of modern white people. Possibly it was ever thus.
“…it is impossible to overestimate the craveness of modern white people”. Wow. Just wow. Is it easier to make an estimate of the slothfulness of modern black people, or the tribalness of modern muslim people – or the ignorance of modern web posters?
There is no other racial group that displays the levels of self-loathing that we do. At least 1/3rd of whites openly admit to “white guilt” in polling. No other group would have chosen the ANC over the AWB.