The opposite rule of liberalism says that whatever the Left is saying, you should start with the opposite and that is where you will probably find the truth. For example, if they are accusing one of their bogeymen of something, most likely the target is not doing it and is not the bad guy. Odds are, it is the Left engaging in the activity. Whether it is latent guilt or deliberate distraction, the Left tends to accuse others of the things they are doing or plan to do in the future.
It is not always simple like we learned with the Russian collusion hoax. The Left is fond of creating elaborate and plausible concepts that they can use to frame issues so that they are the default moral position. Homosexual marriage is an example where they inverted the morality of the issue. Normal people felt the need to explain why we should maintain normal marriage, as if it was a novel concept. The opposite, of course, was the truth but it was hard for people to see it.
The idea of the social construct is a good example of how it is not easy to tease out the truth from what the Left is saying. It is tempting to use the opposite rule of liberalism and say that there is no such thing as a social construct. Something like sex is obviously not an invented thing and people are not assigned sex at birth. While their concept of gender is nonsense, there are gender roles in society. These are closely tied to biological sex and the natural differences between the sexes.
Where the opposite rule of liberalism applies in regard to something like social constructs is that it is not the normal world that is a construct but rather how the Left engages with the world that is a creation of their mind. Like the simple example of the Russian collusion hoax, the Left is accusing Mother Nature of creating constructs of the mind when it is the Left that is doing it. In fact, everything about the Left relies on an invented moral framework that does not exist in realty.
A good example of this is the “hate researcher”. There are people running around now with that title. Another flavor of this is the extremism expert. Whenever the media wants to label someone a heretic and have them hurled into the void, they call on people with one of these titles. The target is identified, the hate researcher provides the “data” proving that this person meets the definition of a hater or extremist, and therefore they deserve to be hurled into the void.
The fact that there can be no such thing as a hate researcher, or an extremism expert is never questioned. Hate is an entirely subjective term as used by the Left. It does not actually mean an intense or passionate dislike. Instead, they have created a new definition that means something close to unorthodox and taboo. Most of the people accused of being a hater do not, in fact, hate anyone. They simply disagree from the prevailing orthodoxy with regards to the human condition.
Of course, “extreme” is and must be an entirely subjective term. Extremes are relative, so it all depends upon your perspective. People into “extreme sports” are not all that crazy to the people in those sports. Someone holding an extreme opinion is only considered to be an extremist in relation to others. Researching extremism, beyond explaining the subjectivity of the term and how it is used, is like researching UFO encounters or Big Foot sightings.
What the Left has done is create a moral framework. Inside the framework are the acceptable truths and outside are the taboo ideas. Wrong and right are not determined by factual accuracy but by the rules of the moral framework. Accepting the facts of table 43 of the Uniform Crime Report is wrong even though it is factual accurate. When the Left accuses the world of creating social constructs, it is because everything about their understanding of the world is through a social construct.
The hate expert and extremism researcher are similarly inventions that can only exist within the rules of the moral framework. In actuality there is no such thing and can be no such thing without the warped moral code of the Left. What the Left is doing, what they are expert at doing, is creating the required social constructs that allow them to anathematize things that contradict their current beliefs. It is how something can go from taboo to virtuous in the blink of an eye.
Another good example of this is the concept of “racism”. It is another invention that does not exist in the real world. The Left defines this as prejudice plus power and power is only held by white people. The reason for that is society is a social construct made by and for white people. This mean the lowliest white guy has power, while Barak Obama is his powerless victim. Therefore, by definition, the only people who can be racist are white people, because they have power.
It is only in the matrix of the Left’s fantasy world that this idea can seem real. The moral concept of racism would have been baffling to people a century ago. Prejudice was certainly something people have always known. They also considered it perfectly normal as tastes are subjective. Some people hate lima beans while others love them, but that says nothing about the nature of lima beans. The same applies to people’s taste in other people and other tribes.
This is why clarity of language is such a powerful weapon against the Left, even when wielded by crude people. When a leftist uses the term “hate speech” and someone corrects them with “you mean taboo speech” they will get very nervous. At some level, the Left knows the moral world they inhabit is a fiction. Using clear language to turn the lights on and expose the fiction is horrifying to them. Their fantasy world works only when they can commit to it totally.
Maintaining this fictional moral universe may be why the Left is so prone to accusing others of what they are doing. It is a defense mechanism. By shifting the focus to outside their safe zone, they get to avoid see the reality of their world. It is an extension of their natural self-loathing. The fictional world replaces their hated sense of self and the projection onto enemies of their own fears about themselves provides a necessary distraction from the reality of their condition.
The crackdown by the oligarchs on dissidents has had the happy result of a proliferation of new ways to support your favorite creator. If you like my work and wish to kick in a few bucks, you can buy me a beer. You can sign up for a SubscribeStar subscription and get some extra content. You can donate via PayPal. My crypto addresses are here for those who prefer that option. You can send gold bars to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. Thank you for your support!
Promotions: We have a new addition to the list. Havamal Soap Works is the maker of natural, handmade soap and bath products. If you are looking to reduce the volume of man-made chemicals in your life, all-natural personal products are a good start. If you use this link you get 15% off of your purchase.
The good folks at Alaska Chaga are offering a ten percent discount to readers of this site. You just click on the this link and they take care of the rest. About a year ago they sent me some of their stuff. Up until that point, I had never heard of chaga, but I gave a try and it is very good. It is a tea, but it has a mild flavor. It’s autumn here in Lagos, so it is my daily beverage now.
Minter & Richter Designs makes high-quality, hand-made by one guy in Boston, titanium wedding rings for men and women and they are now offering readers a fifteen percent discount on purchases if you use this link. If you are headed to Boston, they are also offering my readers 20% off their 5-star rated Airbnb. Just email them directly to book at sales@minterandrichterdesigns.com.
That was truly excellent.
Z-Man, this is a great post! “You mean taboo speech.”
This post is on the edge of getting the vocabulary to destroy the enemy.
Homo marriage: Population collapse?
Green New Deal: Culling humanity?
Women voting: Hysterical matriarchy? 🙂
Leftism: Hopelessness? Personal failure?
Have you difficulties to vomit ?
This could help !
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/dont-cry-for-kenosha-killer-kyle-rittenhouse
the greasy guy, from national review, OF COURSE, is also covidhysteric OF COURSE
Let’s go Quintin !
Thinking in primitive, superstitious terms is a really good way to analyze options for response. But which I mean that it doesn’t pay to be rational, you have to use their superstitious magical way of being against them.
Thus, ‘hate speech is taboo speech’ is a good way to introduce conceptual turbulence into the smooth functioning of the Judeo-Left’s propaganda system.
“Most of the people accused of being a hater do not, in fact, hate anyone. ”
This Saxon has learned to hate.
Vizzini: Hope you are doing well. Hope your daughter has found another job.
The left’s matrix of their fantasy world needs to be blown to smithereens and any survivors dealt with accordingly. It’s the only way to be sure.
A lot of these crazy Leftist concepts derive from the “postmodernist” worldview:
The primary claim of postmodernists is that “there’s no such thing as objective truth”: meaning that when humans experience something as being objectively true, they’re deluding themselves. Contrary to what they’re imagining it to be, their experience of the world doesn’t involve an accurate apprehension of a demonstrable reality: it doesn’t involve the person “seeing what’s really there.”
Rather, in the postmodernist view, all “truth” is constructed truth: every person creates a “truth” about “the way things are” which furthers their interests and gets them what they want.
All truth is relative, depending on who’s constructing it, so there can be no such thing as “facts” or “objective truth” or “being objective”.
Truth-claims are seen by postmodernists as power-grabs: it’s the people in power who get to decide what’s considered to be true. Truth-claims are not assertions concerning an objective reality which can be empirically tested; but rather, “social constructs”— agreements about how things are, formulated (“constructed”) by the group in power, for the furtherance of their own ends. Thus the prog definition of “racism” as prejudice plus power.
Being thoroughly-indoctrinated believers, far past the point where they’re subjecting their beliefs to logical analysis, they fail to see the fundamental contradiction in what they’re saying: “It’s true that there’s no such thing as truth.”
So from that general assertion that “all
truths are socially-constructed”, follows the specific assertions: that “there’s no such thing as gender” and “there’s no such thing as race”: that particular beliefs about gender and race are concepts which the people in power have defined in such a way as to maintain their power; not an objective acknowledgement of a biological reality.
Of course any sane person can see that this is crazy: that on the most fundamental level, race and gender are purely-biological concepts, describing a person’s physical body, and determined by that person’s DNA.
Evolutionary theory makes it clear that significant group racial differences are to be expected; and that there’s no reason not to assume that differences in “inner” characteristics like temperament and intelligence, are every bit as striking as the “outer” differences in appearance which allow us to immediately distinguish a Swede from a Siberian from a Somali.
However, there is a grain of truth in the notion of social constructs.
There is a sense in which our the reality we experience is “constructed”: before it reaches our consciousness, our brains have ordered the incoming “raw” sensory data: what we see and hear comes to us already having been “processed” through the levels of our brain which assign it a meaning and context based on past experience.
And there’s also a sense in which gender roles and beliefs about race are social constructs. The shared beliefs about what it means to be a man or a woman are different among the various people-groups: the manhood ideal of the Manhattan stockbroker differs from that of the Lapland reindeer herder. Likewise beliefs about race.
And there’s certainly a sense in which the people in power construct the prevailing truth: we saw them do that with “gay marriage”, transforming it from “that’s disgusting” to “that’s perfectly normal”.
But it’s a huge and stupid leap, to go from acknowledging that different cultures often understand race and gender roles somewhat differently, to insisting that race and gender roles are infinitely malleable, completely unconnected from the biological reality underlying them.
Hi Bill,
Absolutely great post. I’ve been working on this from the standpoint of making it smaller so as to have a quick punch to the gut of Leftie. I wrote this tonight as my latest attempt.
The Making of a Leftie
What is Leftism, how they are made, and how to fight it.
Depravity and power-seeking are anesthesias for hopelessness.
Leftism is about personal hopelessness. The utopian urge is to create a unicorn world where they don’t have to suffer a meaningless life any more. The focus is not only external, but to the exclusion of the internal world. The rule is: Do NOT See the internal world. Responsibility, purpose, meaning, love, commitment, goals and dreams, beauty itself.
Without purpose, Nihilism is unavoidable. I don’t think that word is used too much. What I think is that the underlying cause is not explained enough. Ironically, the meaning of Nihilism!
To create a Leftie out of a child:
1. You first need to pervert them sexually. That is the biggest cyanide pill. Several ugly things are created from this. They become unable to love.
2. Then call diligent work into question, call it “being white”, so they can have no pride.
3. Destroy the precious Feminine and the heroic Masculine. 100 bad things happen from that.
4. You know the rest.
Now you have a Nihilist, even if they can’t spell the word.
A Nihilist is desperate for meaning, whether they can articulate it or not. And so:
5. Provide any external barely-plausible moral framework and call it righteous.
6. The victims will embrace the framework with fervor.
7. You now have a Leftie. They will always accept any new framework without question from that point on, (gay marriage, global warming, abortion, CRT – whatever pops up next). Their emotional life depends on it. Dopamine addiction is involved.
Our job is to destroy their morality, as Z-Man says. We will never win until we do that. The old ways of attacking them have never worked because it doesn’t hit them in their soul. It’s legalistic “you shouldn’t do that because the Bible says so!” That may be true, but Satan (any nihilist) has never been affected by “You shouldn’t” arguments. I don’t care if you believe in religion or not, the idea works either way.
What does work against Satan? “I command you in the Name of the Lord”. (Interpretation: Meaning trumps nihilism all day long. The Logos creates the world, Genesis and all of that) Now, apply that to this situation, see what works and what doesn’t.
Satan (again, a nihilist) cannot stand to be seen. Ridicule is a particular “water on the witch” that Satan can not tolerate. There are others. We fail continuously with “THAT is immoral”. We win easily if we say “YOU are immoral” with ridicule, for one. It’s a different argument. Then go on to display how their depravity hurts others AND HURTS THEM.
This deprives them of their morality.
The accusation is not intended to be kind. In fact, it is intended to obliterate the worldview of the enemy. Take away their morality, and leave them with nothing.
Cruel to be kind, to coin a phrase.
Offer redemption, “You know, meaning is something you create by bearing the cross, personal responsibility. There is no other path.”
Depravity and power-seeking are anesthesias for hopelessness. We need to take that moral framework away from them.
“So, what is your favorite thing about Satan?”
>the Left tends to accuse others of the things they are doing or plan to do in the future.
I’ve been saying this for decades. I call it ‘Drummond’s Law’.
“They simply disagree from the prevailing orthodoxy…”, but then the Left calls them a hater, and guess what? They rightly hate the Left.
The Left cannot be defeated by words for words are lies and the lie is their weapon of choice.
Words, reason, good faith, elections will NOT work. EVER.
I agree. But ridicule works, and it’s fun if you are mean. I like being mean to evil bastards.
btw, I like your handle 🙂
The primary marker of virtually every form of leftism (cultural, political, economic, all of them of course interwoven at some level) is the project of decoupling language from reality. Theoretically. It sounds so cool, so edgy.
But it is a risky commitment, like juggling glass balls filled with Sarin.
“Their fantasy world works only when they can commit to it totally.” There’s the rub. They are juggling, and can’t drop the ball. And they keep adding balls, because you can never have too much nerve gas.
This is why Leftism, like every cult, is necessarily totalizing. It is an all-or-nothing proposition, like jumping out of an airplane with a parachute on. And knowing you can at most have one reserve chute. I saw this for years in big high-end research universities where I taught. Grad students would be berated for writing with clarity if they even dared use it. Everything had to be ‘problematized’ because Leftism is a kind of weird forward-looking Revanchism. You could never just *assert* something—everything has to be delimited, tentative, passive-voice, subjunctive-mood pablum. Just try reading any published work in the humanities after 1965. No one says anything. Derrida famously said in the heady early days of deconstruction ‘Il n’y a pas dehors-texte’ — ‘there is nothing outside text.’ Yeah great, but now there’s nothing inside of it, either. And there is no ‘it’ in the ‘it.’ Yet…Language is believed to be absolutely constitutive of reality by these deeply bewildered folk, and it leaves them unable to actually say anything—which is why they want desperately want to command to the ignorant proles, always in the imperative.
Totalitarians gonna totalize.
Corrected from end of last paragraph:
‘which is why they want desperately to command the ignorant proles, always in the imperative.’
I just so happen to be reading Georges Bataille right now. He exerted a significant influence upon Derrida, Foucault and Lacan, among other poststructuralist mandarins. And, I dare say, 65 to 70 percent of Bataille’s prose is incoherent gibberish. It literally means nothing. And Bataille admits it. He acknowledges that he is largely mad, and that he is lucid only part of the time. Obviously, much of the time he spent writing coincided with his bouts with insanity coupled with drunkenness. And yet this man is one of the wellsprings of the intellectual stance that has swept Western academe and spearheaded the destruction of the West. Now I certainly have my own problems with the Enlightenment, but this is what happens when you reject instrumental reason entirely.
65%-70% is quite generous! Battaille makes the typical Decon essay appear lucid. They are often amusing, like a Jackson Pollock painting, which can entertain the viewer momentarily with its energy and play of color and space. But after you walked away could you describe it at all? Battaille, and the others, produce little more than what Rieff called a ‘Deathwork.’ Like Althusser (strangled his wife Helene, not that we should hold that against him; that would be terribly bigoted) … he was more than a wee bit off-kilter. And the stories about Foucault and the gay bathhouses in SF are legendary. And well-documented. These folks are not well. Yet they are on every grad school syllabus from Sociology to Education. I’d be in a graduate Shakespeare seminar and there was more French Theory on the reading list than the playwright himself. Yay, Paul DeMan, language is always deferral and differ/e/a/nce yay, how fun—can I also read Hamlet? Please?
I did tons of work in high theory in grad school and studied with some of the top dogs and found it all very intellectually interesting. Read a lot of them in the original French, which is even weirder. Clever puns, odd metonymies—and no real argument. Which, apparently, WAS the argument. Great fun as artifacts of decadent late 20th c intellectual history. But….since after college I had arrived solid, grounded, ‘based’ at 29, when I put my straw in that barrel of KoolAid, I didn’t suck it up. And boy do I have some wild stories from the 90s…
And yes, it is a Mandarinate.
Perfect phrase, Ostei! I imagine we’d get along nicely.
Well, there’s a bit of a coincidence. I was also 29 and reasonably based when I hit grad school. This was back in ’96. My first semester I was required to take a historiography course that focused heavily on various strands of Leftist thought, not the least of which was poststructuralism. In preparation for that class I took it upon myself to read The Order of Things. I stole a march, as it were.
Now, some 16 years after getting the doctorate, I’ve come full circle and am writing a book on the poststructuralist attack on the West. Hence, Bataille.
Poststructuralism is like a hideous, glossy, garish, and extremely venomous spider perched in a highly irregular and asymmetrical web. It is repulsive and disturbing, but one can’t help looking at it. In my case, I’m using a microscope. And I hope to play some small part in destroying that demoniac arachnid.
If you look closely at the French Arachnid you will see a red hourglass on her belly. She mates and she kills.
To Ostei and Gman,
Thanks for this thread.
Is that where the “Hate Studies Journal” publishes? Top quality, both.
Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to Valley Lurker.
He who controls the language…..
Separately, thanks for keeping Joe Sobran’s metaphor of the Hive alive.
“Idiocracy” is such a Rorschach blot test because of scenes like the Time Masheen Ride (“First to the year 1939 when Charlie Chaplin and his evil Nazi regime enslaved Europe…”), which cons take for a lampoon of simplistic moralism emanating from Nice White Lady schoolmarms, while libs interpret as scoffing at right-wing ignorance of True History, reality, progressive sophistication, etc. “Extremism” is such a denatured word at this point of great incommensurable conceptual conflict between Right and Left, which I suppose is the telos of liberal democracy at the national level. Incidentally it reminded me of James Bowman once observing of “controversial”— in the 60s calling someone or thing that was a compliment or advertising hype, nowadays it’s a notorious slur.
the riff (or backing track) of the song “gimme shelter” is going on in my mind. America in late 2021 I feel is the soundtrack to such a thing. Wasn’t the song in a call of duty commercial once?
I always enjoyed the, “Mad World,” teaser trailer for Gears of War which was a pretty good post-apocalyptic property that eventually got pozzed as well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBjS9EpKY4w
Back at the start of my academic career I was invited to contribute to something like “The Journal of Interdisciplinary Hate Studies” or something like that. I thought it was retarded and said so, then promptly forgot about it (this was back at the turn of the century, lest you’re tempted to think this is something new). The whole deal stank of desperation — the “journal” was little better than the mimeographed stuff Lyndon LaRouche types used to pass out in front of grocery stores in the 1980s.
What an opportunity I missed! I should’ve written an “article” that “proved” Dems R Tha Real Rayciss. I could be on easy street right now, hanging out with Jonah Goldberg in his $10 million condo in Washington. Or I could be an internationally recognized “hate expert,” cited by goodthinkers everywhere. Hello, Harvard!!!
Alas. The point is, I guess, never take investment advice from me.
Its never too late to pretend you’re Indian (feathers, not dot) if you want to get into Harvard Law School after coming from those other elite institutions of U of Houston & Rutgers. Just trying to be helpful!
Is that where the “Hate Studies Journal” publishes? Top quality, both.
When I was starting out, we had the “Journal of Irreproducible Results”. Of course it was a spoof, but articles were often well written with (IIRC) intentional errors and out right nonsense wrt statistics and logic. As grad students, our major professor, tasked us with analyzing some of these for discussion at the nearest college bar. Good times.
One of my very white daughter in laws is now claiming her Indian heritage. She is tribe shopping looking for the best benefits
She is letting her bleached blond hair return to its light brown natural color. And wearing it in braids.
I asked her if she was no longer wanting to be white. She got angry called me racist. I laughed and said I’ve been around fake Indians all my life & one more didn’t mater.
Probably won’t be seeing her this Thanksgiving. Lol.
Surely she wouldn’t celebrate the rape of her ancestral lands on Thanksgiving?
She has previously, this girl lives on faceberg, Instagram Tic toc and whatever social media tripe of the moment. These things are crack for weak minded individuals. Mostly women it seems.
The hand that rocks the cradle….
Sounds like you’ll have something to be thankful for on Thanksgiving.
Never mind, just caught the reference. I figured Elizabeth Warren wasn’t exactly an Ivy Leaguer from way back, but… wow. That’s not what you’d call an impressive academic resume.
It’s been at least 50 yrs since an academic resume impressed anybody outside the Hive.
Interesting that George Orwell understood and wrote about the essence of today’s missive 75 years ago. We can’t say we were not forewarned. “Newspeak” is real. “1984” has arrived. Our very thought processes are encased/expressed in language. Change the language—remove the words or their meaning—and you disarm/suppress the opposition. Hard to organize opposition to an idea you can’t even express.
Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Concepts of The Hive
Equality is a social construct.
Ultimately, the Left is engaging in a dystopian project of discursive and cultural totalitarianism. For over 50 years they’ve been undermining the taboos–and norms–of white civilization and replacing them with an entirely new set of taboos designed to prevent that civilization from recrudescing. Marriage, heterosexuality and formal beauty in art, for instance, have been vanquished and replaced by homosexual “marriage,” sexual perversion and deviance, and hideousness/mental illness in art as typified by the use of feces and dead animals as media of expression.
The end game here is obvious–civilization will be demolished and replaced by a hellish horror-scape. The 64-dollar question is why? We know the Left hates the white race, and we have a pretty good reason for why it does. What is baffling, however, is the Left’s complete uninterest in replacing it with something putatively superior. The Left seeks to immanentize the damnatio, which is an act either of madness or evil. In the case of the former, we would conclude that Leftists are fundamentally irrational. In that latter, that they are under the sway of unclean forces. I’m not sure which is closer to the truth.
Because some people just want to watch the world burn:
https://youtu.be/efHCdKb5UWc
I’m not religious but do believe there is evil. So, yes, the Left is under the sway of unclean forces. Sociopathology explains much of their behavior, and it is why the almost universally White Left, except for the Dancing Bears of Color in the Academy and Media, is simpatico with urban Black culture and its attendant violence and mindless destruction.
Look at the monsters Rittenhouse laudably killed. To put it mildly, these are not people who seek utopia. Even nihilism is insufficient for them. They want blood and fire. Corporate America and the Inner Party will not be able to harness what they have unleashed without massive violence at this point. In that sense, stepping back and aside and letting Frankenstein battle his monster is not cowardice but an intelligent and rational response. We need to keep as separate as possible and work within our own communities because it really is the only option at this point. We do need to be prepared to act once the destruction allows, and there is no way to tell when that will happen, to be clear.
Look at Rosenbaum’s MO.
Demonic is not a strong enough term.
Jack Dobson: Thank you for correctly labeling Rittenhouse’s ‘victims’ monsters who deserved death. There remain many more such, unfortunately. Most people of purported ‘principles’ refuse to acknowledge the very existence of evil, let alone accept that it needs to be destroyed. I offer no niceness, no understanding, no empathy, no compromise to such – only death.
Your summary description of the cultural landscape (wasteland) is logical and one that while we see as insane, the Left would cheer.
As the $64 dollar baffling question of why – posed as either madness OR evil. My belief is that it BOTH – although not sure whether madness engenders evil or vice versa. I tend to think it’s the later case (the ‘unclean forces’ you denoted). That unclean force (evil), causes disdain to retain God in their knowledge, whence God then gives them over to reprobate minds, to do those things which are not convenient (of which you provided at least a partial list)
I think in spite of or rather, owing to their strong belief in The Science, the organized Left does not feel a clear good/bad preference between order/chaos continuing for X amount of time, in the Samsara sense of fire & rebirth. Of course they have a handy ally there in Left-adjacent Wall Street, which loves constricting the economy and crushing suckers under the auspices of Critical Creative-Destruction Theology. I’m not sure why it draws in so many street-level useful liberals though, who don’t win any material benefits from this vaporization of social capital and can’t, in my opinion, be deriving *THAT* much psychic benefit from it either. At the risk of Thomas Franking the issue, what’s the matter with suburban liberals? If the Democrats really take a bath in whatever mailed-in election happens next, a dubious forecast in my opinion, I doubt it would merely dispirit useful liberals & normies, to retreat & nurse their wounds. Instead they are mentally primed to just egg on Antifa now. That is a puzzling turn in my lifetime memory of U.S. politics. The polarization wrought during the George W. years, polarization which both teams avidly fed, brings us to so many “What’s the Matter With [x]” questions. It was fun to laugh at soccer moms and NASCAR dads, while it lasted
ClevonMaximus: Perhaps I misunderstand your words, but you seem to be apportioning equal blame for the “polarization” of America. If you are speaking of red team/blue team politicians and press, fair enough. If you are speaking of the generally naive followers of team red and the generally evil followers of team blue, I strongly disagree. Such polarization between utterly alien peoples is natural and normal. The attempt to paper over such innate differences is evil itself, a deliberate attempt to subvert nature. One does not compromise or seek accord with evil.
What they get from it is drama.
To relieve the unbearable lightness (meaninglessness) of existing; in a wealthy, peaceful, boring society.
A long time ago some few of them wrote some teaching tales:
We have been chosen to rule the world.
Everybody is always out to get us, so we get them first.
Seek out harlots, and get them to betray their people for salvation, gain, or other weakness.
Generation by generation, they’ve implemented their schemes. The technocratic totalitarian death we face was made possible by traitorous collaborationist whores.
One mistake often made by the right is not fully understanding that the left uses proprietary definitions of words in their arguments, and trying to counter them by proving that they do not fit the standard definition of that word. Arguing that you don’t “hate” or that you aren’t a “racist” by submitting evidence that the standard definitions of those terms clearly don’t apply to you is like responding to being called an “asshole” by submitting evidence that you are not, in fact, a ring of muscle at the end of a digestive system. You’re missing the point and wasting your time.
Larry Elder can be a “white supremacist” to a leftist, despite the patent ridiculousness of this charge when using standard definitions of terms, because he fits the left’s proprietary definition of them, which, much like “asshole”, simply means someone who they don’t like.
Yep. This has been a hobby horse of my from time to time.
Correct. You are not being accused – you are being found guilty and the only thing to settle now is your punishment.
One can spend too much time on these people trying to figure them out. I personally have spent a lifetime, trying to suss out their reasoning, motivations, and intents. Guys… it’s all BS.
Leftists come in three stripes: the gullible true believer. They are morons. Or, they are shrewd grifters and opportunists – leftist virtue signallers that have vested financial and personal interests in nigolatry, intersectionality, misogyny, or the other leftist grift mines. The final category is comprised of people who are both – they are bat chit crazy AND have monetized their mental disorders. You will not argue with any of them, and none of them will stop bullying you until YOU stop them.
Yes. The challenge with breaking the lefts hold on anti-reality is that we have all been subjected to mass-conditioning of some sorts.
Much of what the loonies pull off is enabled by normal people habitually accepting their framing. ‘In defense of reality’ seems locked in an abusive relationship with their anti-reality. How do we go from this enabler-abuser dance as the world burns into a divorce and TRO and full custody of the kids?
For a long time they used subtlety of our various differences to Trojan horse the inversion into “normal” polite conversations. Our own reasonableness to hear them out and our conditioned Civnat blank slate moral decency invited the perpetual grey areas, aka relativism, to not just move everything leftward but to condition those clinging to Reality into accepting the burden to prove itself as the left cranked the ratchet.
Once the gates of relativism were opened the horse of Progress spilled out black magic of linguistic perversion and logical fallacies. Backed by the long march of converged experts in academia and other institutions, words took on new meaning, the emotional appeal supplanted hateful reason and evidence, and the false legacy of Progress assumed its moral supremacy.
But we are also not immune to our own fallacies which is how we end up as enabling so much even though we are adamant that our take is right and normal.
Our own habits of projection and attribution error, for example. While the looney left is busy othering us, our side is busy projecting our qualities and motivations onto them. They want us dead because what we believe makes us evil.
Yet many of us still cling to the idea that they are not evil, but just deeply mistaken; common ground is a matter of us convincing them of the facts. One of many problems with this is that even our side will avoid or fudge facts if it indicts our own choices.
Similarly the left is quick with ad-hominem attacks while our side’s instinct is the token endorsement defense. We fear their invented words to the point we end up validating them as a defense mechanism.
These are hard habits to break it seems. I know its out there but it is difficult to find good average joe material to help break the conditioning. Z’s power hour on the tricks of witches was excellent in this regard. We need a lot more of that.
Fantastic analysis. Engagement is the first error.
Ridicule and shunning are appropriate at times, but you do not reason with evil and/or emotion.
“Much of what the loonies pull off is enabled by normal people habitually accepting their framing. ‘In defense of reality’ seems locked in an abusive relationship with their anti-reality. How do we go from this enabler-abuser dance as the world burns into a divorce and TRO and full custody of the kids?”
I know how, but it’s not something we can discuss here.
It’s a great opportunity for some lulz though. Since Leftism and autism are so closely correlated — the NIH really ought to do a study on that — you can inflict some very serious psychic pain on them by recognizing the script they have in their heads, then skating just up the fringes of it… but never quite saying the lines that they’ve written for you, such that they can uncork their little pre-scripted tirade.
I remember “arguing” online once with one back during the 2012 election, who obviously needed me to affirm my belief that Mitt Romney is a “classical liberal.” He clearly had this whole script ready to go, something about how Obama is really more “conservative” than Nixon, because of the EPA or something, I don’t recall the details (and they don’t matter). Because this guy was a catastrophic sperg who thought he was extremely clever — both of those by “online Leftist” standards, mind you, so we’re talking a stratospherically high bar — he kept quite literally instructing me to say “I believe Mitt Romney is a classical liberal.”
At first it was just bizarre, but once I cottoned to it, I had a lot of fun. I’d say something like “Yes, I’m certain Mitt Romney is Adam Smith’s dharma heir” or something, but since it wasn’t the exact string of words this sperg needed to uncork his little tirade… watching the poor bastard rage-stroke out was hilarious. Looking back, I hope I hospitalized him. Good times. Try it!
Too much like boyish playing with the ants one at a time with your magnifying glass. Just kick over the anthill and move on. I know mocking these fools feels great, but we must focus on provoking their loathing and hate to bring this insanity to a more decisive resolution.
The thing is Nixon was more liberal-progressive than conservative by today’s standards.
Which shows how the definition / positions of the progressive-conservative dichotomy shift over time.
One of my favorite trolling tactics with older boomer lefties is responding to their passionate hate of Nixon with how liberal he was. They can’t grok it and start sputtering.
Charging them with thought crimes flips the script.
“oh, you’re just antiwhite”
Non-nonchalant dismissiveness can be a good tool.
them: bala bala holo hoax. Or what ever.
“Oh, ya, I used to think that.” then change the subject.
When they make a pronouncement on any subject with absolute certainty, give them a puzzled look and reply, “who told you that?” I guarantee they’ll need a few moments to process and calculate a reply. It implies they can’t think for themselves, but they’ll also want to appeal to authority. Sometimes they won’t be able to figure out which route to take.
I like “You might want to stop saying that in case someone mistakes you for an ignorant asshole”
It takes a little while to get and a while longer for them to realize that there is no good response.
“ How, how, how, how? Chopped logic! What is this?
‘Proud,’ and ‘I thank you,’ and ‘I thank you not,’
And yet ‘not proud’? Mistress minion you,
Thank me no thankings, nor proud me no prouds ”
Thanks for saying this. The Left uses words as weapons. And the Center-right never realizes this (or doesn’t want to) and continues to believe that if provide the Left with a good argument or point out the correct definition they will reconsider.
Giving them a 48 page memo on why you aren’t “racist” or “sexist” will never work. A good recent example of this was Matt Yglesis called some at SCOTUS blog a racist for supporting some Republican Judge. The victim then trotted out the usual defenses:
“I’m not a racist” “Here’s my history of opposing racism” “Nobody hates racism more than me” “I’m married to a POC” etc. And after every defense Yglesis would just continue to say “You’re a racist”.
Finally the guy gave up. You could just imagine Matt laughing behind his key board.
The dissident right doesn’t like it, but the response of no you’re the racist is effective because the word is meaningless.
It becomes significantly difficult when you realize the crazies run your company too. I work for a Fortune 300 company in the energy sector and we just rolled out a mandatory vaccine rule, despite all of us working at home for close to 2 years now. I am already sending resumes out to smaller companies that better fit my values. If anyone wants to hire an experienced supply chain / purchasing guy, hit me up! 😉
Another reason to leave the bigs is the institutionalized anti-white racism.
Just look at who the baizuo execs and HR Karens are promoting these days.
Yeah, count me out.
“Another good example of this is the concept of “racism”. It is another invention that does not exist in the real world.The moral concept of racism would have been baffling to people a century ago.The Left defines this as prejudice plus power and power is only held by white people.”
The concept of racism is a bigger hoax than the non existent pandemic, it’s the greatest kabbalistic spell i’ve ever seen. Freaking trotski invented the concept, he’s the same guy who called the russians white niggers. What a joke!
Entire western institutions have to bow down to this cretinity of an idea, which has resulted in them becoming completely ineffective when dealing with the migrant invasion & with the black on white crime, just cause a j*uuw communist pulled a nonsensical idea out of his ass a century ago, unfreaking believable.
The upside to all of this is that the migrants will bite the tribe in the ass, the invaders are weakening the zionist institutions cause they do not care to comply with their agenda.
‘The concept of racism is a bigger hoax than the non existent pandemic’. Agreed. However in light of the current proceedings in Glascow, where then would you insert that other great kabbalistic spell, to wit: Climate Change?
Racism probably still gets the gold medal, but Climate Change claims the Silver in my mind.
There seems to be a general model:
Charge with a wrongness.
Offer solution that benefits the charger.
You are charged with sin, whiteness, climate, whatever.
God, Gaia, whatever, loves you, but…
God, Gaia, whatever is just and holy, oh so painfully just, and holy, and you must make amems. So hand over your children to Saul, devote your life to Saint Tyronette. buy some carbon credits, eat the bugs.
The psychosis of the True Believer is real and growing worse with each passing day. In part, this malady exists because it was intentionally & maliciously manufactured via media indoctrination, but it also is a manifestation of our age of affluence. IOW, if you lived in the jungle and spent most of your time foraging for food or fighting off lethal threats, you won’t have much time to engage in esoteric mind games with your neighbors. We now have a plague of crazy growing in our society because there is no feedback mechanism for deterring or purging it. The normal institutions of medicine and law have been co-opted into allowing or reinforcing the crazy, rather than providing a remedy.
So what to do? The answer is that the few remaining sane among us will eventually have to step up. It’s either that or die off. And if you choose the former, it helps to be somewhat fit and robust. Anger alone is only useful for pitching a fit & whining.
It really grew serious when medicine and other sciences and the legal system were plunged into the Regime-sponsored madness, and this will adversely impact people who come into contact with either. This also will accelerate the collapse even as it does extreme harm in the meantime.
It is frankly shocking how the majority of doctors in this country have supported the vaccine is the only solution narrative. I did have a pretty bad case of Covid earlier this year. I saw two separate doctors the first week. I asked them for ivermectin and they said no. They offered no other treatment. They told me to pretty much go home and deal with it. It took a month to fully recover. I understand ivermectin has 40 year track record with billions of doses dispensed around the world including to children. The risk of at least trying it as a Covid treatment is minimal. We have doctors intentionally making no attempt to treat this disease until people show up at hospitals requiring a ventilator.
This is because the Fed money printers are handing them something like $30k to vent people to death.
The average cost for medicare to usher a Pneumonia patient from doctors office to casket is $4K-$5k.
Diagnosing a patient with Covid gets $13K and the literal Trifecta, three times that or $39K for getting them on a ventilator.
Once on the Vent the money flow stops so a quick death and onto the next one.
artist: A dear friend and her husband were recently diagnosed with Covid/bacterial pneumonia. My friend had been told by others that this particular strip mall ’emergency clinic’ had doctors who hadn’t drunk the kool aid. She said these middle-aged White physicians didn’t play around with phony nose swabs; merely took chest xrays, made a diagnosis, and prescribed ivermectin and an antibiotic. They also confirmed that what they were seeing a great deal of was bacterial pneumonia – same thing that killed most folks in 1918’s ‘flu epidemic.’
But by today’s official medical pronouncements, a virus and a bacterium are not different and distinct, and the entire germ theory of disease is White privilege.
The number of people who need killing boggles the mind sometimes, but where there’s a will there’s a way.
“The number of people who need killing boggles the mind sometimes, but where there’s a will there’s a way.”
I propose a campaign of posters on lamp-posts declaring
” This Pole reserved for:
Name of local politician”
It’s already almost to the point where you’re safer never seeing the inside of the hospital and just taking your chances.
As for law, better off finding some Sharia court to take dispute your case.
Following on from the via mandates in healthcare is the obvious next step of denying any (and I mean any) healthcare to unvexed individuals.
Vex the doctors for the patient safety, then deny the patients for the doctors safety. Its a never ending cycle of levers that can be reversed at will.
So shortly, you won’t need to worry about seeing the inside of a hospital, as i will be off limits to you.
The Grand Inquisitors of Racism, Hatred, and Extremism really are little more than the hired guns known as “expert witnesses” in the courtroom. Any engagement with them starts with establishing who pays them and who funds their foundations, centers and agencies. Eventually these individuals and organizations descend into corruption and graft–or start that way. For example, the SPLC is basically a money-laundering operation with a Regime imprimatur.
Granted, the Right also could have expert witnesses to proclaim the demons du jour do not exist and to create their own, but they do not have ready access to propaganda forums as do their leftwing counterparts. It is that asymmetrical balance that trumps everything, at least for now, and why alternative media scare the living hell out of the Regime and is either destroyed or co-opted.
These Grand Inquisitors are charlatans, but so are fiber analysts for wealthy defendants. As mentioned in an earlier response, ignore and marginalize them if possible, and destroy them if the opportunity arises on either a micro or macro level. They have glass jaws, for the most part. Even the Karens and Chads could reduce them to shards when CRT was directed at them rather than the Dirt(ier) People.
Watched Divorce Inc. that got into the bowels of how these Experts operate in divorce court. Literally write official sounding long documents that says whatever their paymasters tell them to say under the air or objectivity when they know nothing. One example they had was a gay guy who immediately cashed his 2000 dollar checks to participate in orgies.
One of the worst things in media are cop shows that portray these corrupt jokers as geniuses.
Without getting into the weeds, the courts attempted to rein in these frauds with a USSC decision, Dow Chemical Company vs. United States, and it made matters worse.
We already see “hate experts” giving testimony, and this will escalate to include ludicrous experts on such ludicrous sub-genres such as “White privilege.”
And, yes, this madness has been portrayed favorably in cop shows and films such as SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. The “profiler” who was fictionalized in that movie, John Douglass, is a former FBI agent who now will say anything in a courtroom for money. He is typical of the hired guns who spout nonsense under oath.
That right there is the central heart of their power. The Eye of their Sauron.
Lawsuits, and the system that honors and enforces them.
It is their nice, smiley face to put on our genocide, the legality of it all. Fuck them.
The money printer is the heart of their power.
They will keep that going at all costs until they can hoover 99% of everyone’s 401k, IRA, pension, and retirement savings into the market, whereupon they will pull the rug and leave everyone penniless as the controllers make trillions more on their massive short positions which will allow them to buy up every home across the land for what is not pocket change to them.
Refusing to accept the Bolshevik framing of the debate as well as their word and phrase choices is one of the simplest and most effective ways of pushing back.
The prime example are the many commentators on this side that are unquestioningly talking about Beer Flu and the experimental injections in the Bolshevik frame and language.
Howard. They are not debating. You are a prop in their morality play. Nothing you say matters one iota. They are the stars of the show, not you. If you start making too much sense, or disrupting the narrative of their play, you will get cancelled.
Glen-
You are absolutely right.
I should know better at this late hour.
> This is why clarity of language is such a powerful weapon against the Left, even when wielded by crude people. When a leftist uses the term “hate speech” and someone corrects them with “you mean taboo speech” they will get very nervous.
It’s also framing themselves as heroes for fighting against what they actively do.
Remember “Banned Books Week” when they trot out Regime approved literature as banned and attack conservatives for not wanting 4th graders to read about sexual degenerates? It has less steam than it used to, as even the craziest leftist realizes how ridiculous they sound now.
Ya know what, Z?
I don’t care anymore. F them all. I don’t want to reason with them, argue with them, or deal with them. I won’t have them in my life anymore either.
Ignoring them to the fullest extent possible is the only rational response. You don’t reason with a guy who thinks he is Napoleon or who thinks women can have penises. This is the sort of madness ignored until the opportunity arises to destroy it.
There is no ignoring them. They have too much power over us right now. We have to confront them, while at the same time rebuilding our moral framework, with a lot of new pieces added, so we are giving the rest of our people something to use to combat the left.
Your point is good, thus my upvote, but there is a lot of needless engagement with these types. The truck driver who beat the New Jersey party boss showed how this is done. Asked to appear on MSNBC, he refused and ridiculed the propaganda organ.
Now, at the employment and education levels avoidance is impossible, but indifference really cannot be punished if dramatics are avoided.
I agree that there’s too much argument about nonsense. Look at all the breathless articles explaining yet again that kids don’t need Covid vaccines or that global warming is not an existential threat.
We know. At some level, they know.
Bickering about these issues online is time you could spend doing something else.
It is kinda hard to ignore a clown who is denying you your job because he wants you to get a shot to protect him even though he already got the shot and it didn’t. Makes no sense.
And it’s hard for hospitals to watch 1/3 or their staff walk off the job when they refuse to get it too, Hoagie. It’s a good point that we need to pick and choose our fights… but it is definitely time to start choosing and fighting.
It’s also hard to envision myself complying with the clot shot to remain part of a system that clearly hates me and wants me dead.
It might be different for the baizuo director-level and above white bugmen since they have a vested interest in the current system that will treat them well for at least a few more years.
That is exactly what I think
Hide behind a smile.
As you put their names on your list.
Yeah, don’t ask me to participate in someone else’s mental illness. Ignore is a good first step.
A week or so ago I was with a group of friends/acquaintances who were discussing a high school pal who decided in his mid 50s he was a woman. One couple fully accepted the delusion/grift, everyone else was being polite. I started laughing, got another beer and went out on the porch. Fuck em. The least I can do is not pay lip service to fantasy.
Jack
100% spot on. There is no reasoning with mentally ill, deranged sociopaths. These are rotten, evil people. The only way to beat leftism is to destroy those who propagate it. Unfortunately, we will never know if society will ever recover. Even if it did at some point, it would not be for generations. Newer generations are simply indoctrinated now, so there isn’t really any hope.
And to tell them to their face they are rotten, evil people!
This is why I just laugh at normie Grillercons who waste hours arguing with the lunatics on Facebook.
Life’s far too short to waste in that fashion.
I’ve finally stopped trying to “red pill the normies.” I used to habitually compose in my head brief statements to post on Faceberg that might have an effect on my libtarded friends and family. I rarely posted them but now I cut myself off at the idea stage. At this point if someone is still on board the progress train they have made a distinct moral choice. Many such people will eventually disembark but it’s not for me to school them. Perhaps it never was. I can count the people I have “helped” on one finger and even he has given up being in opposition to the world.
I am much happier and tranquil for it. I actually see these people as less of any enemy now. They have no ability or desire to suss out the truth or be righteous. They’re simply cattle that will do and believe what the man on the TV tells them. I’m not that man.
Let us break their bonds asunder, and let us cast away their yoke from us.
Astralturf: Very well said and done. What our people need to remember is that we’re not fighting ideas or ‘isms.’ Our enemy is not an ideology, it is other people. Winning doesn’t entail changing people’s minds or convincing them their ‘faith’ is false – it entails removing them from the equation.
The older ‘conservatives’ at places like Western Rifle Shooters and many of their links are constantly harping on killing ‘communists.’ I don’t give a damn what political philosophy or coloration a man may be utilizing at the moment – I want to know who he belongs to, who claims him as one of their own. If the future he works for is against the interests of White people and their civilization, then he’s an enemy to be dealt with. Simple, succinct. Not my job to analyze his ‘heart and mind.’