Outside of the progressive hive, there has been a long running debate, going back to the 1980’s, about the awareness of the people in the hive. Left-wing people say things that are clearly not true, but they seem to believe what they are saying. They have some of the facts and seem to grasp certain concepts, but they come to conclusions that are obviously false. The question is whether the people in the hive really believe what they say or do they know the truth?
The default assumption, popular with mainstream conservatives, is that progressives are well-intentioned, but wrong on the facts. These are reasonable people who can come to the right answer if you slowly explain it to them. Conservatives have built their entire movement around the assumption that there is some way to explain things to the Left that will trigger a revelation. They will see their error, throw down their weapons and embrace the conservatives as brothers.
Along with conservatism, this view is fading from the scene. It is a generational thing as conservatism and most conservatives were formed in the post-war period. Most people have now concluded that the Left knows they are lying, but they are consumed with partisanship, so they are fine with lying. Far-left cranks will claim men can get pregnant because it advances their interests. The blank slate is central to their program, so they defend nutty ideas like the trans business.
In a way, this is a coping strategy for conservatives. They cannot accept that there are people not driven by facts and reason. To do so would mean the whole facts and reason approach is a waste of time. If the hive is immune to reason, then there is no point in reasoning with them and therefore no need for conservatives. Instead, they fall back on the mendacity claim. That way, if they can expose the lie, the liars will have not choice but to admit the lie and receive the truth.
There is no doubt that self-interest drives mendacity in politics, but this only works at the personal or small group level. Politicians lie for personal advantage. Their staff and allies will join them in the lie if it benefits them. It was clear that Jen Psaki knew she was lying and she knew everyone knew she was lying. It was her job and the path to a television job where she would make big money. This is how things work in entertainment and politics and everyone knows it.
The behavior of the hive, in contrast, is not for petty advantage. It looks more like a religious duty. People in the hive now declare their pronouns and claim people are assigned sex at birth as an act of faith. The motivation to put pronouns in an e-mail signature is no different than the motivation to wear a crucifix. It is way to signal your membership in a religion. In fact, religions have often required these displays as a way to separate the faithful from the rest.
Here is an example of how this works. This article in the Atlantic is about how dog breeds are a social construct. It is based in a shoddy bit of social science that was concocted to address the dog breed line used by people who question the blank slate arguments of the hive. Dog breeds are used by critics of the hive as a proxy for the human family and human diversity. Just as there are different breeds of dogs, there are different breeds of humans with different characteristics.
The first thing to note is that this was an organized effort. On the same day, the Washington Post had the same story about the dog breed study. This was then picked up by small sites that republished it. That is how it works in the hive. The second thing to note is the Atlantic writer is someone with impressive academic credentials. Mx. Wu has a PhD in microbiology from Harvard. She did her undergraduate and masters at Stanford. Box ticking aside, those are impressive credentials.
Despite those credentials she has never worked in the human sciences. Instead, she has been a small time contributor to on-line sites. Her role here is to give the fake study legitimacy by having someone with credentials endorse the study. This is what the lawyers would call mens rea. The rollout of this fake study says they know they are promoting a fraud. They selected the sites and authors in order to best promote what they know is not true.
On the other hand, where is the personal advantage? The problem with the conscious mendacity angle is there is no personal advantage for the people involved. It is not as if Mx. Wu gains something from this. It will not boost her career in science, assuming she wants a career in the human sciences. The Post used a random dingbat on the staff for their version of the story. Instead, Mx. Wu is selflessly sacrificing her credibility to show her commitment to the progressive faith.
The camp that argues that self-interest is what motivates these will point out that Mx. Wu could be working from self-interest. People with her credentials who promote crackpot ideas like the blank slate are quickly elevated in the hive. Credentials count for a lot with the Left. If a credentialed person says the moon is made of cheese, the faithful will believe it. Therefore, Mx. Wu is simply gaming the system in the hope of being quickly elevated to high status in the hive.
That brings as back to where we started. It is clear from examples like Mx. Wu that there can be no reasoning with these people. A woman with her training should see right through that study. She chooses to promote it, ether because she is a sociopath or she is a true believer. In either case, facts and reason will have no purchase on her mind or the minds of the people like her. What motivates members of the hive is either sociopathy or faith, neither of which yields to reason.
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.
Mx. Wu is a true believer. How you tell this is because she never actually worked in microbiology since getting her degrees. She has always worked as a writer instead. If she were a sociopath, she would most likely be an actual molecular biologist writing articles to score brownie points from the collective for personal and career benefit.
“They cannot accept that there are people not driven by facts and reason. To do so would mean the whole facts and reason approach is a waste of time.”
Those people all have vaginas. The sooner we recognize this and start taking measure to control women we might yet survive as a nation.
The whole environmental movement is a walking talking exhibition that they don’t believe their psychotic demands earnestly.
Do these woke-imperialist Green politicians in Europe act like people who know that the world will end in 20 years. Ha ha ha
NO
one thing that is emblematic of hive behavior is when one of its members (who is jabbed) and has some horrific side effect (from the jab) says “it was worth it; I’d get jabbed again”. they are probably happy they were afflicted so they can be martyrs to the cause…
Vaclav Havel, 1978, ‘The Power of the Powerless’.
Been there, done that.
One obvious cultural divide is the loss of “the truth”. “My truth” is a fairly new invention.
Take the Heard Depp trial, for example. Time after time in this case (as with Blasey Ford case), the left is completely unfazed with both strong circumstantial evidence and even direct evidence of lying. Nothing could peirce their FAITH bubble.
When one of the Supremes can’t define what a woman is (or, most likely refuses to, but that’s neither here nor there in effect), coherent legal arguments will become a thing of the past. Not to mention lowering standards for the LSAT or doing away with it altogether. Harvard is no longer top drawer and Yale is perhaps worse, including the professional schools. MeToo style witch trials may become the alternative mechanism for sorting disputes in such a polarized and dual duality.
Right.
“Mx. Wu has a PhD in microbiology from Harvard. She did her undergraduate and masters at Stanford. Box ticking aside, those are impressive credentials.”
The “credentials” are impressive only in that they leave an impression: that of a firmly planted red flag.
Ephesians 6:11-12(KJV)
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
it’s mostly gone as an issue now but should some jurisdictions actually try to ban masks in schools so as to actually prevent the fire from getting any more oxygen. It seems kind of harsh but I think Mark McDonald might be right to put the foot down:
https://markmcdonaldmd.substack.com/p/i-have-banned-child-masking-in-my?s=r
https://markmcdonaldmd.substack.com/p/pity-the-children?s=r
Looks like Katherine Wu is struggling with the dog breed issue at a profound level:
https://www.storycollider.org/stories/2020/1/13/identity-crisis-stories-about-what-makes-us-who-we-are
Tony Lawless: Bingo. Poor baby, she says that “it sometimes felt like by simple virtue of not being white, I just wasn’t always allowed to occupy the full space of human potential.” And she was dreadfully bothered when they tried to set up a computer algorithm for facial recognition and the researcher noted she was of Han ethnicity. Ah, but “I was actually born here in the United States.”
Visible racial minority resentment of Whites, belief in magic dirt, standard anti-White animus. She most definitely knew what she was doing signing off on that supposed ‘study.’ Her entire life has been trying to disprove racial reality.
Having to deal indirectly or directly with psychopaths and fanatics – what a great Hobbesian choice. One would think after roughly 2000 odd years of civilization, the human condition would be far more logical and reality based. Fat chance – humans aren’t much different than they were two millennia ago (if not worse) other than being far less raciss, homophobic, transphobic and misogynistic among others, of course. A cleansing fire to cull the dead wood and trash and allow new growth to propagate is what is desperately needed.
Humans aren’t much different than 2,000 or 200,000 years ago. Our hominid ancestors were using primitive tools millions of years ago. Civilization is a relatively recent innovation, probably at most ten thousand years, usually tied to the appearance of agriculture.
Upvote 10,000! This fanciful belief is the faulty basis of all progressivism. Even many Conservatives entertain this belief that human nature can “evolve”. The least intelligent Progressive senses that biology must be denied at ALL cost, even though they couldn’t begin to explain why.
Damn right !
Human nature doesn’t change.
I’m plenty racist, homotransphobic and patriarchal. That’s my nature as a knuckle dragging white male that my betters hate especially when they need me.
The people criticizing Christianity do have a point. Universalism is baked into it, and it tends to generate over and over again, various destructive heresies. We no longer have “throne and altar” able to stamp out the Albigensian Heresy, the Cathars.
These were the people, mostly in the South of France, the Languedoc province, who believed there were two gods, the evil one of the Old Testament and the good one of the New Testament, that this world was evil, that reproduction was sinful, and everyone should commit what amounted to revolutionary suicide. They often castrated themselves and their animals and were hostile to reproduction.
This impulse shows up over and over again in Europeans. The 1990s Heaven’s Gate people castrated themselves and committed suicide wearing Nikes “Just Do It!” so the aliens behind the Hale-Bopp comet could beam them up. Not kidding, that really happened. Jonestown. Etc.
The argument the neo-Pagans make is that the connection to prior generations and heroism offers an alternative to modernism and its dithering Hamlet like indecisiveness. Gregory Hood over at Unz offers a fairly good critique of the movie “the Norseman” which does a fairly good job of showing pre-Christian Pagan Vikings in ways of acting and believing that are pretty alien to us now. I do take the neo-Pagan’s criticism of modernist indecisiveness mostly, but would argue that no one is going to believe and act for Odin anymore, he’s just an actor in a movie pushed by one mega corp now.
And that whatever belief system that will allow “our guys” to act to oppose the Woke True Believers, neither Christianity nor neo-Paganism nor politics is going to be it. And that logic, reason, facts, and clever graphs will not in the end motivate men to fight and die in the mud and terror of modern warfare.
The pseudo-Christianity is rife with heresies in the Anglo-Zionist asylum. Anti-Christ political Zionism has been an epidemic heresy for about 200 years in the English speaking world (see Stephen Sizer on Christian Zionism 2003) and there is no evading the heretical insanity of same sex marriage prevailing in probably half the congregations claiming “Christianity” in the United States.
Christianity has become unrecognizable in the U.S. anti-Christ culture and everything from dual covenant theology to mandates to takes oaths to “Israel” have overwhelmed any rational meaning of the New Testament that has been drowning drowning in megaChristianity Inc. for 40 years at least.
As Christ is forsaken and the spirit of the Word is ignored we arrive back into sewer world where the RNC/DNC at best are his and her toilets on the White House front lawn seeking to express a claim to culture and morality.
By way of omission, indifference and a refusal to act we have degenerated into a new cultural filth of staggering proportions.
The evidence is overwhelming and damning to a self destruction in front of God and everybody.
Historical, theoretical, and potential Christianities doen’t matter. Actual existing Christians in all places, races, and denominations, are absolute sellouts to the faggiest available “earthly” power.
Since I’m rather a Cathar myself, stupendous comment, Whiskey.
Satan, ruler of this kingdom, offered the Christ its bread, its treasures during 40 days of temptation.
Christ said, “I don’t work for you.”
It’s a political allegory.
Anyone alive at the time would have caught the underlying political statement. The Romans were promoting an Aryan moral alternative to a supreme Jewish god.
I accept Jesus the archetype as superior to, and superseding, the storm god YHWH. Superseding, as do the Christians, and that the White god speaks for the cosmic Maker, and for Heaven as a physical reality.
I see the YHWH as an imposter, an evil stepdad who only claims to be everything, who promises anything.
A way to accept the depth and much profound thought in the OT is to realize it was a prolonged cultural battle, fought in the editorial pages, between those accused of original sin- that is, of mating with and adopting the dominant Aryan culture- and a radical faction of race zealots who claimed supremacy. The various authors depends on which party was leading at that time.
Those zealots won the war.
The war within their own society, against their own people, as we see today. Therein lays a comparison of battle strategy, effectiveness, and victory. Who will win?
The Bible resonates deeply on a personal, social, family level, because it deals with community issues. I note that those issues don’t rise above township or gang (small kingdom) level; there is no Aristotle, Thucydices, or Zman talking about imperial-level civilization, its means, its maneuvers, its effects, its politics.
Such style a manual will be quite effective in, say, the ethnic patchwork of the Balkans, or for an African social worldview, or in a severely balkanized US where there are certain neighborhoods that one dare not enter. (True for white or black at one time, here, true for methhead favelas in Buenos Aires, Muslim enclaves in Birmingham, or EFF districts in South Africa.)
As for me, I want real answers, not frustrated nihilism, or LARPing another civilization’s glorious past, or appealing to a Supreme Magician’s powers, or mystic spells.
My race is my religion. I would draw upon the unique Maker-given White heritage and talents to do two things: understand the science, and make weapons. And to use them to carve out enclaves where White children can have a future.
Amazing comment Whiskey. A simple “like” wasn’t enough.
You are right on in holding multiple thoughts on motivations in your head at once. It is nice to find that some can still do that. I speak in reference to the individual sociopath, “Exhibit Psaki”, and the true believer exhibit the hives of fact checkers who are in fact mindless credential checkers. Another one for the Orwellian translator. ‘Fact checker: n. a person who looks at the credentials to cite authority rather than using their faculty for reason to discern facts and find a semblance of truth.’
I think there is another factor for libertarians and conservatives that you missed – integrity. I know because I suffered from it being a minarchist libertarian. The issue is the proper reasoning that if you engage these bad faith authoritarians the way logic dictates, then you have departed from first principles and will create a civilization that has departed from them. “If I depart from persuasion and reason and logic and kick them out of the public square then I am just the new tyrant. I have transformed The Republic into a tyranny”
However, the good old Founders discussed this. The Republic is a non-starter once a significant mass of people, not citizens but people, do not believe in it and do not act in good faith to perpetuate it. So the landscape has changed. We can’t have a Constitutional Republic – not at this point. First, it is long dead. It died with the Bull Moose and then the Progressive party in 1907 (exact date?) Maybe it died with Lincoln. Not important for this discussion.
Here and now, it is either their faceless Leviathan or The Individualist’s Regime. I’ve capitulated and come to my senses. The Individualist’s Regime with not a minute to waste on persuading those bent on coercing me. The public square must be cleared first. Perhaps we could create a new Constitutional Republic learning the lessons of the destruction of the previous one. We can’t create it if the degenerates are enfranchised and given a seat at the table.
In the end, the masses of the hive want to submit to big daddy. I don’t think they will mind being told they can’t have their rattle and given a pacifier called hard work in the real world. The hard part are the tricksters looking to operate within the system – the sociopaths angling for their personal gain with no sacrifice – parasites. First order of business is to clear them out. For a generation or two you know them by name because they are the current regime and on its conveyor belt in school. Future generations will have to have the resolve to keep the newly spawned at bay. I think that is a lesson of The First Republic. It was not systemic failure and procedure, but it was a failure of men and their resolve to keep the children and the snakes away.
This is why I am a constitutional minarchist. Do not let the government get big enough to start paying the parasites to be parasites and legalize and institutionalize paracitism, and don’t give them an in via militarism/empire. But, we aren’t there yet. We may never be. The gloves must come off and the bad faith operators cast aside. The masses will scuttle for safety. The institutionalized will fight to the end. The overtly criminal must have their faces stuffed into a mighty banquet of consequences. The Great Engorgement if you will. It is hopeless if the warrior class sees their pensions and economic well being as best served by defending the institutions and protecting if not outright becoming the tax collector. Most of them I encounter can’t stand this regime. But, will they defend it and enforce its perpetuation? Most of them and their progeny are the targets of The Great Replacement. Talk about an unstable idea put forth by an unstable regime.
In summary, integrity is an understandable stumbling block for a significant number of conservatives/libertarians. At this point the integrity to conserve a dead system that long ago became a fantasy every bit as grandiose as the fantasy spun by the leftists is stupidity. How long before enough come to their senses and come to accept and most importantly shape reality is anyone’s guess.
“Fact Checker: Someone who checks to make sure you are not getting the facts” Mark Twain, probably.
Great comment, especially regarding the importance of the warrior class. They are likely to be amenable to persuasion towards a new healthier model, especially where it offers themselves and their families something materially better. We can offer plata. But the alien Regime ultimately only offers them plomo, however well polished.
Taking it out there a bit, if I could add my 2 cents… I maintain lefty is very in touch with the truth, righty is the coper. One must have a strong grasp of the truth to so exquisitely and satanically invert it. But with the lack of cope comes great fear.
Hence the religious aspect. My axiom is that you worship what you fear, you become like what you worship— or, to add a corollary, you rebel against it. Satanists believe in God, for instance, but they are in rebellion against Him.
Righty’s cope is, in part, as Z mentioned. Add to it the prosperity angle— ‘I made my home fancy but the neighborhood is going to shit. I can sell now at a profit and go somewhere nice where I’ll fit in. I’m smart because I know how to time the market, I’m good because I make things fancy, Jesus loves me because I’m prosperous and my megapreacher says Jesus wants me to be rich. Those dirty libs are the bad guys!’ LOL
So one side makes money by selling the seed corn, the other devours it and makes shit. As it has been my entire life.
This is what EMJ gets and why I’m a fan— the revolutionary spirit. Yes, the JQ guys have a point, but that isn’t who’s selling my beloved LanCo out or who shows up at BLM protests or is teaching kids about deviant sexual practices. At least not for the most part, and the general wickedness and depravity is far past the point where I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
America is still a Christian nation, in rebellion against the truth. That’s the horror and the hope, simultaneously.
They may not be doing those things directly (although certainly some are), and it may not be all of them. But there are enough of them assisting and enabling it, giving it cover *cough* Aay Dee eL *cough* that they are not an insignificant part of the problem.
I look at this way, maybe true, maybe not, maybe just me being sentimental: America in the last century was an adolescent nation, rebellious, unsure of itself, looking to prove itself. Easy to fall under bad influences. That’s ending, adulthood is beginning. Do we grow up, or do we become a loser?
Idk if that’s a good analogy, but to your point, it’s our ‘life’ and we can just as easily decide to go a different way.
you forgot athestic bordering on satanic
What’s it been now, 246 years?
As likely the US is an elderly convalescent, reliving its defining moments in a semiconscious terror as death chases out its final breaths.
The nation not the polity.
The question is, how to relate to people that live in another faith, another religion, another reality. And that, frankly, insist that we bow to their gods.
You don’t. They make war on you and if they win, they force you to submit. If you win you don’t have to submit.
We can’t live with them, so we live where we can ignore them…But they will eventually show up to force obedience, and at that point it will be do or die…I think the upcoming resource crisis will sharpen tempers drastically, and could be the end for these perfumed, worthless hive members…
You make a serious point. I have been mulling over relocating from where I live behind enemy lines in NY. I wish I didn’t have to because my family has been here since the 1690’s, but things are becoming untenable here, especially if our cultist karen “governor” manages to get elected in Nov.
Having said that, I’m not sure where to go now. I’d like to relocate to MT, but I’m hearing that too many people from CA are winding up there. I’m not a big fan of humidity, so most of the south is out of the question and I have no desire to live next to a-holes who have fled here because of their voting habits, only to pollute where they land next. Parts of West-By-God have a nice appeal though, but the big problem remains; setting up shop somewhere else and
enjoying my new life and then five years from now, the biological garbage moves in and where I’ve moved to, goes to shit in an express bus. What to do?
There’s no perfect outcome, only a better outcome.
Anyone with enough sense to pour piss out of a boot knows the fanatics demanding you bend the knee to their religion are
No different than any other totalitarians in history, they will never stop if You even ask any simple question about their insane utopian fever dream then you become their enemy, they will kill you. As Z said There is no reasoning, no compromise.
No cure for their mental hydrophobia.
All action that follows is self defense.
In the matter of moral relativism, sociopaths and dogs…
Lee Marvin in The Dirty Dozen had this observation as Major John Reisman…
“So you want to stink? Well, that’s okay with me because I don’t have to smell you.”
OT: well the LEOs covered themselves in glory…again, in the recent texas shooting. they refused to enter the school for 40 minutes while the shooting was going on, but they did muster the courage to prevent parents from going in. there is a deeply black comedy about the true nature of the police, waiting to be made. maybe Ricky Gervais will do it…
Ricky Gervais is being so brave bandwagoning with his tranny jokes. Just so brave. No, Gervais will stick to the usual formula of “dumb Christian whitey hates abortion but loves guns.” Just like Elon Musk, the Maga-tards are falling for a false savior just because he throws them a rhetorical crumb. The definition of cucked. They really are stupid.
Why do we need cops again? Crickets chirping……. Oh ya, that’s right, they’re the security guards of the regime. Cowardice ones. But support that “thin blue line” you dumb Hannity watching fools.
In Russia for example the rubes know better than call the cops for anything. They aren’t there to protect you, they have known that for a long time.
The better question is:
“Why do we need public schools?”
It’s getting very old. The cops will tell you – if you attend safety meetings for a church or something – that the old, tired way was to huddle up outside the location and await backup. That was the Columbine procedure, see? and they’ve learned a lot since then.
The new process is to rush right in, like friction’ heroes, man. So, if you’re packin’ heat yourself, thinking you’ll do some defending, you better be prepared to get shot by one of the police who come crashing in and will assume you’re the bad guy. Just sayin’.
The reality is cops with body armor and armed with their own tricked out rifles setting up a cordon around the school and waiting for backup.
I want an actual experiment done with a city, where they do indeed get rid of cops. It’ll never happen. The vigilantes would be too effective.
You know so little about police tactics Karl. If you did you’d know the cops were waiting for a key (true). If that doesn’t work, call a locksmith.
Utterly predictable. Since the 1980s cops have been selected for certain qualities. Now post Saint George Floyd, he of the blessed Fentanyl up his bum, no cop wants to be a “knee cop.” Barack Obama noted in a tweet that the real tragedy was George Floyd.
Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett’s right hand man and the operational dude behind Berkshire Hathaway’s growth, observed that incentives matter, and even he a person who understands this is still astonished at how much it matters.
We have spent half a century or more demanding cops not arrest or hassle sacred racial redeemers of the original sin of Whiteness and we got exactly what we incentivized. We wanted “Heather Has Two Mommies” instead of Dirty Harry. And we got it. Want Dirty Harry to come in there and save the day? Society needs to constantly reward these guys. But we didn’t and we have not, and so this is what we get. That video is going viral, and making every parent’s blood boil. They will be wanting to home school now, as cops and government look like what they are.
Cops exist to arrest and hassle normie. That’s all they are. Regime enforcers, and people now know this without question or doubt.
Cops exist to do 20-and-out and collect their pensions. They don’t protect anybody and they are not legally required to. They are armed parasites extorting your tax dollars for themselves. Policing is a total sham:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales
The problem, of course, is when the people who have no legal duty to protect you arrest you and charge you with a felony for having the means to protect yourself. I can’t imagine anything more insane but that is the policy in just about every major left-wing state in the country.
Exactly this. Let’s say the original resource officer had shot the perp when he first realized the teen was a threat. We’d be hearing about the trigger-happy cop who murdered a young immigrant who was “just getting his life together.”
Don’t disagree, although I can see some rationale for not letting the parents just rush in (in particular if unarmed) as that might only cause more trouble.
But I can see no reason for armed LEOs to sit on the sideline for 40 minutes. Reminds me of the time when I was a kid and someone broke into the house and we called the police. They called back about an hour later to see if we were still alive.
That reminds me of a joke I heard years ago;
Lady calls the police and says, “there’s a guy breaking into my garage”.
Dispatch says,”sorry, we don’t have anyone to send”.
Lady calls back a few minutes later and says,”cancel my request, I shot him. Just send the coroner when you get a chance.”
Three squad cars and a SWAT team show up within minutes and, what do you know, they catch the guy in the act.
Sgt on scene says,”I thought you said you shot him?”
Lady says,”I thought you didn’t have anyone to send.”
matt you idiot , there is nothing that is “more trouble ” than you kid being shot.
Wait for the whole report—I know, they lie, but there are parental witnesses.
Generally accepted procedure now is to immediately neutralize an *active* shooter. We know after Columbine that active shooters want to run up a body count. They will only stop when they are killed. If they are not shooting, they are looking for targets/victims. The situation is now one of combat.
My University practiced such drills in the building next to mine. The whole thing was taped and student volunteers played victims. I got to watch the tapes. It still was a s**tshow and I commented on it, but they had the right philosophy. However, they failed to watch and control the fleeing victims as they dashed through them. Of course, the “fake” shooter dropped his weapon and fled among them. 😉 But that’s how you learn.
If shots were early and then stopped, one might infer a hostage situation and try to negotiate. If however, shooting was heard and police did nothing…. I’m not supporting the cops in a knee jerk fashion, I simply don’t have the facts, but I have been in training exercises with law enforcement.
People screw up under stress and confusion. Don’t believe the movies. People shoot at you—even with simulations—your hind brain takes over. You do strange s**t. I’ll leave it at that.
Woops. The above word should be “simunitions”—plastic paint containing bullits which are fired out of real duty weapons. In short, high tech “paint ball”, but these babies sting and the weapons react as the would with normal live ammo.
it,s worse than that, they waited over an hour , some of them went in and got their kids out , and they tackled parents who tried to go in for their kids.
this was supposed to be in above post https://www.zerohedge.com/political/go-there-distraught-parents-begged-texas-cops-enter-school-gunman-inside-hour
Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Sociopath or True Believer?
The underlying motivation of the Leftist is control. They tend to be weaker people (in various ways, not always physical) who seek safety by controlling their surroundings instead of themselves. They seek guaranteed outcomes. Guaranteed friendships. And they are terrified of being successfully attacked by somebody or something more powerful.
This desire for control replaces the desire for truth. The truth is frightening and uncomfortable, thus it is naturally shunned and subordinated to results.
Which explains much of Leftist priorities. Herd/hive behavior… always a welfare state… witch hunts… acceptance of micromanagement… using words as tool of control instead of tools of communication… phobia of death… and worst of all, worshiping tyrants because they have achieved the dream of being powerful enough to dictate terms to reality itself. They’re all about efforts to either control or escape a dangerous, uncertain world full of dangerous jocks and dissidents.
Meanwhile, we who accepted the world as it is and worked to understand it, are the people who eventually mastered it.
Spot on. I worked for 36 years for a microcosm of the Leftist mentality, the USPS. I eventually realized that I had a good job, and that I could separate the job from the organization. Instead of management and leadership, we had surveillance, data mining, social engineering, and, of course, the usual toadying and bureaucratic behavior. Actually, I coped fairly well under the circumstances, I liked and respected some of my diverse co-workers; seniority and age group, rather than ethnicity sorted us out. I even got along with some of our diversity-hire supervisors, though they reminded me of Marlon Brando’s reference to “errand boys sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill” in Apocalypse Now. I even managed to develop a sense of humor while firmly dwelling in the D-I-E maelstrom. Sardonic Humor often flourishes in repressive environments. Yet after I punched the clock I could head to the pub (an all too frequent destination) and I would be–relatively–free. The 2009 Project (briefly interrupted) seems to have adopted the Post Office as a basic framework for the new Soviet States of America, only we have more arrayed against us than the feline finger wagging that my mates and I faced.
“This article in the Atlantic is about how dog breeds are a social construct.”
It shows how early evil corrupted the Church when you are taught that ALL human beings descended from Adam, and then later on, from Noah. the Bible never said such things, but it is implicitly understood by 99.99% of believers. Cain himself went into the Land of Nod where he took a wife. You mean there already were people in the Land of Nod? Yes. And the Flood was not worldwide. This is shown by the fact that if the entire world was covered, the Egyptian empire, which already existed, would have ceased to exist and it would have been centuries before it was repopulated. And yet, Egyptian history shows an unbroken line in their Pharaohs. It is important to realize how much the “brotherhood of mankind” is a necessary deception for evil. If everyone descended from the same people, then there is no difference, aside from “social construct” differences, which need to be put aside so that a coherent narrative may be established. That coherent narrative is a lie, to deceive the descendants of Adam concerning their uniqueness.
Brotherhood of mankind is freemasonic, not Catholic.
No, it is Satanic.
so are the freemasons
Exactly, although many practicing Masons only view it as a club. I was implying that it doesn’t matter if Freemasons include the phrase “brotherhood of mankind” in their literature and rituals, they didn’t originate it. It has been with us at least since the Tower of Babel.
Not to be spergy, but the floods mentioned in the Bible and in the cultural records of other civilizations likely occurred in the Younger Dryas event of roughly 12,000 BC, long before the Egyptian dynasties.
Every thing about that shitty little country is a lie.Anything that’s true was stolen from somewhere else. Their bullshit and their bodies have no place in the West.
And yet the Great Pyramids stand, at least 4500 years old, built by a relatively primitive civilization that did not even have the wheel, if I recall correctly. I’m no expert of course, but I don’t think there is a reasonable engineering explanation for how the biggest were built, although it apparently did not require space aliens or supernatural powers, as some of the more lurid conjectures would have it.
As impressive as Cheops is, there are supposed to be other ancient structures such as those in South America that are even more enigmatic.
Your conclusion does not necessarily follow from your premise. You can even see differences among your own first-generation siblings, unless they are all identical twins.
Credentials are purchasable commodities these days. They say very little about the person’s competence or actual expertise.
I’ve known too many doctors, MBAs, lawyers and engineers to be deluded into thinking otherwise.
“An expert is someone who gets paid to say what his client wants to hear.” Will Rogers, probably.
I had to pretty much give up on Scott Adams, but one of the few things he got right, in my opinion – was when he said that these guys have a movie playing in their heads. They are the central characters and you – you’re not even a supporting actor. You a prop, at best – starring in a morality play where they are the heroes who can do no wrong.
None of this is about you. They are living in a different world that must be artificially filtered and maintained and at best, all you are is a pathogen. Your reason and logic that gets past their filters cause them real pain.
I read the articles on the dog study a couple weeks ago or so, when they first came out. There was obvious weasel wording even in the articles that gave away the game that the “breed doesn’t determine behavior” narrative was bunk. Another key clue was that they admitted that they had excluded working dogs — precisely the category where breed characteristics come through most strongly and were most likely to invalidate their “hypothesis” (if you can call a preordained outcome an hypothesis).
Based on some of the criticism I’ve read of Big Pharma, it’s apparently common practice to “creatively” draw up and execute an investigation (e.g. of a new medication), either to sandbag it if one wants an undesirable result (e.g. these were done with repurposed (“cheap”) drugs that might have been effective against Covid-19, or to use various deceptive practices to get closer to a positive outcome. Even an outsider’s looking in can see that these studies (e.g. for a new drug) can cost millions of dollars and the success can produce a market worth billions, so there is enormous incentive by all involved to show a positive result, by hook or by crook. Of course, what constitutes “fraud” may be debatable, but it’s probably safe to say that a lot of clinical trials are not impartial and objective investigations. I’m sure the problem extends to other realms as well: even if money is not a factor, often prestige (real or counterfeit) is.
There is *proof* of what you say, so it’s a fact. I offer as evidence the number of “approved—as in safe and effective” drugs removed from use after years on the market and hundreds of deaths. I believe VIOX is one, but I’m too lazy to look it up.
“The blank slate is central to their program”
The left: “Everyone can be whatever they want to be. Race, sex and gender are just social constructs. Anyone can learn to be a brain surgeon or champion athlete if they just get enough early support.”
Also the left: “I was born this way!”
Don’t have arguments with crazy people. It just wastes your time.
Its intended to be self-contradictory as that short circuits most people’s reasoning. Its a trick they use all the time.
If you read the equality legislation it states “protected characteristics”, but as anyone can be anything then there is no such thing as a characteristic.
The contradiction is the point. It provides the lever to bludgeon the confused from both sides at once.
Death is the solution to all problems. No man – no problem. — Josef Stalin
As we’ve seen in the LibsOfTiktok videos, these “teachers” want to fuck kids. Very badly. They are pretty open about grooming kids for sex.
But the thing is, once you start fucking a child (or even just pressuring a child for sex daily), the child eventually starts presenting in a messed up fashion. Like, “Desmond is Amazing” levels of messed up.
If parents understood that their sons were coming home with rainbow hair, piercings, thigh-high stockings and miniskirts because of things the teachers were doing to them, they might take it into their heads to do something drastic.
So the Left needs to run interference for their pedos by saying the kids were just “born this way.”
Oddly enough, the Disney (death be upon it) movie Ratatouie made an interesting point that “anyone” can be a chef, but not “everyone” can be. Not sure how that somewhat common sense observation made it through editing, but that movie was made in a different time.
Zootopia is the new zeitgeist
I think Disney’s been evil since at least the 1930s “Fantasia,” which included everything from cross-species (“trans”) chimeras to satanic/occult imagery.
They’re manufacturing consumable info-products for a certain demo. There’s now millions of them (see Portland, any neighborhood will do). The recent Columbia grad millennial woman in Brooklyn apartment. She currently has 350k in student debt, double major, Pantheist Wiccan Studies/Medieval Feminist Studies. She currently works in a coffee shop and sells crochet macrame’ on Etsy. People complement her retro glasses. She wants this. She NEEDS this! Every day. If she ever found out that her entire life was a lie, and she’s always had a negative value to society, who knows what she would do. Luckily her easily led, feminine mind would never open that door.
On the larger scale it’s just narrative provided for the natural peasants of society. If you ever get stuck listening to idiots talk about current events, the first thing you notice is how everything is understood through simplistic moral platitudes. And this isn’t just shitlibs, Christians get it too with the “Jesus likes fluffy bunnies and helping people and rainbows” version of religion. Some Christians are such nice people they’ve decided hell isn’t real.
The woke religion has the same nonsense so that kindly unthinking dullards can waddle around all day exchanging their woke homilies, congratulating each other for being so “good”.
Yep. They serve the same function as troop identity calls in monkeys. No information can be taken from them.
“she’s always had a negative value to society”
That is the greatest evil our masters have foisted upon the young. Women as economic units.
Had the blue-haired, indebted barrista instead skipped the hive programming and had 3, 4 or 5 kids, she would have provided ALL of the value to society.
Try as I might, I can guard stuff, create machines and destroy things, but I’m a guy. The next generation and society would not exist if Mrs. Noname didn’t dedicate a lot of time and effort into growing & raising small humans.
Having recently escaped Hive Central this is an issue near and dear to my heart. Ninety percent of my acquaintances from there are irredeemable shitlibs (I initially wrote “friends and acquaintances” but can a person with whom one is incapable of having an honest conversation without being on the receiving end of much wailing and gnashing of teeth really be called a friend?). Take away the hive mentality and they are almost all decent people. One in particular has been invaluable to me over the last year in dealing with a serious personal issue. Given his occupation, age and other factors I made the safe assumption that he marinates in “progressive” lunacy so resolved never to go there with him. A couple months ago in a moment of weakness I took the bait. Shortly after explaining my thoughts on group differences based on environmental adaptation I was accused of being a deranged, possibly demonically possessed, racist. I actually found it somewhat amusing in its predictability until I didn’t.
What to do? Older ones I write off because they should know better and are usually insufferable. But I feel for Gen X and younger having been cynically maneuvered into a ‘if you don’t believe this you’re a horrible person’ corner. It’s so unpleasant and frustrating to deal with the irrationality, but If we don’t figure out a way to negotiate this divide and conquer tactic we all fall into the abyss together. It’s a conundrum.
Exactly so, Peabody. Like walking on eggshells.
My technique?
Instead of showing my hand, i’ll just mischievously ask, supported with my most innocent face i can muster, the most reasonable yet poignant/provocative question i can think of.
Peabody – would shooting someone in the face count as falling into the abyss?
Of course this is hyperbole as I’m a…person of the DR persuasion. OTOH, I presume that approach currently exists in the tool kit of Hive Central.
Ultimately, there’s no living with these people. We must separate from white race traitors every big as much as we must separate from Hutus. They deserve one another.
In some ways they are not to blame as they are automata in the grip of the media/academia/govt conditioning. You can tell every utterance they are going to say in advance as its been placed in them directly from without.
In other ways, there is no releasing them from this, even unto death the mind worms control them.
Ostei: That is the conundrum. On the one hand, I accept all Whites have the theoretical potential to be assets to the race, perhaps excepting extreme ends of the bell curve. IQ is not the be-all and end-all, and one should care for and attempt to uplift one’s own.
Yet so many of these people are so far gone that there truly seems no utility in attempting any re-education. Think of one’s own journey to the DR – we’ve all gotten here from different paths and over different timelines, but it still has taken time and work and constant reaffirmation from others to accept that everything we’ve ever been taught was a lie.
Now multiply that by millions – not simply the deprogramming from the various ‘isms,’ but the re-teaching required. Purely from a cost-benefit analysis I don’t see point. Various historical studies have demonstrated that the English, for example, became less violent over time as miscreants great and small were eliminated from the gene pool.
If life becomes as difficult as many of us believe, reality alone may push some people back to sanity, and push others off the already shaky edge of psychosis. But for the great mass of people, and ruling out mass murder, what is to be done?
Compromise:
Just try to save the cute ones.
reality will solve the problem, eventually. just treat the pozzed whiles like a drowning person – don’t go near them lest they drag you down with them. race has been elevated to the be all and end all in grouping, but class, etc are also critical. white trash is still trash.
I know that Z Man will dismiss this as a pipedream, but if we can ever organize a whites only space, or even a space where whites are guaranteed to remain an overwhelming majority, the whites who cannot be saved will identify themselves and can be dealt with.
Ostei, let them have their own “rump state”, just like those folks in eastern Europe are about to do.
It remains to be seen who gets the rump and who gets the clod. The key is that, by hook or crook, we totally disengage from the maniacs and regain control our own destiny. The fact of independence is more important than geographical amplitude.
It’s like that horrible meme on Blab where all the convicts are getting strung up, and the wank goes, “First time, eh?” 😂👍
I’m going into my tenth year of estrangement and cancellation with my militant gay SJW daughter. I don’t do the frooty colours of the rainbow. I got canceled by Mom when I refused to get jabbed, but she’s talking to me again after a year. Unfortunately 😆. The in-laws DID manage to tick me off and I gave THEM the punt. That did so much for my mental health.
It’s the damnedest thing. I stopped drinking and smoking, and started living again once I realized that they were nuts and not worth fighting with. All the stupid stuff in my life went away with them. For them… they started fighting between themselves over stupid stuff and the family fractionates more.
I wish things could be different. But all this BS is aimed at destroying families, and all it takes is one, to destroy a whole family.
We live in truly divisive times.
Yet Zman wants us to think its all naturalistic. We just need to observe and see race and sex and what not. No! Its religious. God revealed himself and his church to us, and we got bored.
Zman is the flip side of the prog coin. Its all naturalism and Liberalism
You said: “I initially wrote “friends and acquaintances” but can a person with whom one is incapable of having an honest conversation without being on the receiving end of much wailing and gnashing of teeth really be called a friend?”
Can someone who promotes your “elimination” ever be considered a friend or acquaintance?
It is impossible to be a shitlib without being anti-White to some degree or other. It’s practically a tautology. Anti-Whiteness is one of the defining characteristics of a shitlib.
When they say we want to “eliminate whiteness,” what I hear/read is we want to eliminate White people. When they say this neighborhood is “insufferably White,” I hear White people are insufferable. When they gloat about how the White population is shrinking and how we’ll be a minority, a HATED minority (mostly because of their anti-White bigotry), I hear they want us exterminated.
Would our special friends tolerate headlines and university classes saying we have to “eliminate Jewishness?” Hell, no! They would rightly see that as a call to extermination.
I wonder what the Jews (the Ashkenazi at least) will do if they find themselves the only Whites available?
Yes, the eliminationist rhetoric is quite clear…to those of us who have ears to hear, and eyes to see. Those so-called “whites” who espouse this stuff should just draw themselves a nice warm bath, settle down in it, and cut their own wrists. I want nothing to do with their twisted, virtue-signaling suicide cult, and consider it meritorious to wish them the ill that they wish on the rest of us. So hurry up then, and get on with it; we will be better off without them.
They think the same thing about us. If we say something they don’t think is evil, they just accuse of lying and hiding our true intentions.
Besides, convincing anyone of anything is falling for the big con of democracy. That is the root cause of political debate amongst the plebs. It is also getting the cause and effect backwards. Mx Wu isn’t convinced by this supposed study, xir thinks the object is to convince the reader to do what it is xir already wanted to do before xir even saw the study. IOW, it is a tool of propaganda.
It is also just a way of putting the “science(TM)” technocratic stamp of approval on xir ideology. It’s no different than Nobel conferring a peace prize on Barrack Obama. The feminists do the same thing. They turned their pet project, their crotch, into a field of academic study which just happens to agree with all the ideas they had before feminism ever existed in the university. They wear credentials and status conferring bodies like a cheap skin-suit. Not only does it confer credibility on them, it often will also allow them to use that credibility to push it into law. This is how a tribal nutter was able to testify against the Charlottesville people and tell the court what they secretly think and wouldn’t say at the trial. Nice work if you can get it.
With the same effect – it doesn’t raise Obama, it lowers the value of the Peace Prize.
OT question
An article on the front page of Market Watch this morning has the language;
“Weaker than expected guidance for the second quarter”
And
“Similarly software stock Snowflake tumbled 12.5% after the companies guidance for operating margin came in narrower than expected”.
I’m guessing the phrases mean the companies did worse than expected.
But the Hive uses words for a reason, and I’m wondering why “guidance” is being substituted for less than expected earnings.
It seems like a nefarious use of language.
Clarification would be appreciated.
In terms of the stock market, guidance is used to describe what the company projects for future quarters. Market analysts guessed what the guidance will be and it was lower than what they excepted. This is a term that has been used for a long time.
First I’ve heard of it.
Thank you for the explanation.
Yes, “guidance” means “estimate.”
i case it wasn’t clear, the company itself gives the guidance (to analysts).
Guidance statements like the one you cited are often picked up by algos that then initiate a significant selloff in the underlying equity post-earnings.
I just finished reading the article in the Atlantic that you referred to. The author isn’t saying that dog breeds are a social construct — she is admitting that the genes of a breed do play a part in determining an individual dog’s traits and proclivities. The quibbling is over the extent to which a breed’s genes determine individual behavior (and not average behavior over a large sample sizes). This is all legitimate explanation and discussion on the writer’s part. Pit bulls are on average more aggressive. Poodles on average are more docile. But we can’t predict the behavior on an individual basis. Pretty obvious stuff.
Like every other serious race realist I am a statistician at heart — the issue is average behavior and traits gleaned from examining large sample sizes. Different ethnic groups will display different traits and proclivities — different average scores on the SAT, for example. But this doesn’t mean I can predict what will happen in an individual case.
“Like every other serious race realist I am a statistician at heart — the issue is average behavior and traits gleaned from examining large sample sizes.”
HBD and race realism aren’t the same thing. Anecdotal experience should trump statistics where survival is concerned. Sailor’s bemused, wry shtick, arch in the face of tragedy, proves how the numbers game is a dead end. He’ll count beans but will not put up his dukes for anything.
“But this doesn’t mean I can predict what will happen in an individual case.”
But genuine conservatism/any reality-based philosophy requires you to act as if you can predict what could happen in each individual case (unless you want to gamble on getting knocked out by a dindu, beheaded by a Muslim, or mauled by a pitbull):
“To be conservative, then, is to prefer the familiar to the unknown, to prefer the tried to the untried, fact to mystery, the actual to the possible, the limited to the unbounded, the near to the distant, the sufficient to the superabundant, the convenient to the perfect, present laughter to utopian bliss.” -Michael Oakeshott
I always fall back on this, and I never heard a better explanation than what Nabokov offered up, paraphrasing:
What determines a person is 70% nature, 20% nurture, and 10% secret ingredient X.
That sounds about right. or as the old saw goes, can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
Precisely. However, absent intimate knowledge of the individual, we are right to use knowledge of race (or breed) as shorthand for dealing with the individual. If there’s a young, male negro walking down one side of a dark street, and a young, male Oriental walking down the other, the white woman who must walk up that street would be justified in walking on the side where the Oriental is.
Bingo. That’s what most of the “Sturm und Drang” is about in police/minority interactions. Police know the odds of the suspected perp being the correct one based on race, and location, and time, and any other number of things. Of course, the poor bastard who is innocent of any wrong doing expects to be treated as “unique” with none of the baggage his peers have left him.
Beautifully put. Couldn’t say it better myself. Of course the left say the police are stereotyping. Well of course they’re stereotyping — but they neglect to mention there’s a lot of statistical truth in the stereotypes. In the case of the police that statistical truth has been arrived at on the basis of dozens or hundreds of encounters. The left expects everyone to be treated as an individual with no preconceptions. But that’s unrealistic. A policewoman who stops a young black in the Twin Cities knows she’s going to have more trouble than with a young white or young Asian and this conditions her responses. And this is called “racist.”
“Precisely. However, absent intimate knowledge of the individual, we are right to use knowledge of race (or breed) as shorthand for dealing with the individual. If there’s a young, male negro walking down one side of a dark street, and a young, male Oriental walking down the other, the white woman who must walk up that street would be justified in walking on the side where the Oriental is.”
I absolutely agree. It’s all about the odds. That’s what statistics are all about — that without knowing the particularities we make a decision based on statistical summaries like mean and standard deviation.Give me a choice between five young blacks and five young East Asians in a dark alley and I know what I’ll choose.
In a sense statistics as a discipline is just about our inductive faculty taken to a higher degree. If I get stung by a blue and green fly twice, the third time I’m not going to give a blue and green fly the benefit of the doubt (“Maybe they don’t all sting. Maybe this one is more gentle”).
I always say Feminism is when a woman sees a man following her so she crosses to the other side of the street…and Intersectional Feminism is when a woman will cross the street if she sees a white man, but will NOT cross the street to avoid a black man because it would look racist.
So the paper could have been summed up in 7 letters:. NAPBALT
Glad to know that even pit bulls have a talented tenth.
But Zman is correct in how it was being used to forward a behavioralist, blank slate narrative. Most average people will either not read the full article or not understand the implications. They’ll get the sound bite or the click bait headline, and that’s what will stay with them.
Yep, that’s exactly what such articles are intended to do. Create false references to prove false conclusions.
Could be. But it’s a big jump from saying genetic baggage doesn’t completely determine behavior and traits to saying it doesn’t determine them at all, and all we have is a “tabula rasa.” That big jump would be disingenuous indeed.
What the Biology doesn’t contribute, the culture does.
Some are lacking in both.
Given culture is downstream from biology it sort of makes everything biology?
You pull a single observation from two populations with different means. Turns out, you can’t say for sure what the difference will be. Amazing.
Everybody wants to act like this discovery is a big deal.
Exactly – because you cannot predict what will happen in a particular case, the average proclivities provide the only available guidance, at least until more is known about the individual specimen. Pet the Labrador, avoid the Doberman.
tl;dr: They believe because they want to believe. The exception is the sociopaths, although they are a distinct minority, usually in the thing for personal gain and benefit (the rapey male feminist is an actual thing, billionaires pocketing govenment cash to save the planet via their products are a real thing).
Transgenderism, MSNBC, Elizabeth Warren, all the transparent frauds and phonies, thrive because their fans want to believe them, regardless of the validity, which is irrelevant, and will believe them. Yes, for the True Believer it is a religion, and the majority of the leaders still tend to be sociopathic or more sociopathic Jimmy Swaggarts, who will make 180 degree turns whenever it personally benefits them. The Hive will follow and forget about East Oceania. Conservatives are the same, just late adopters like the Scandis were with Christianity. Once the sociopaths led the nation and dominated the institutions and the Hive simply followed them. The great change is the loons are empowered along with the sociopaths now, and much of the upheaval is a direct result. The sociopaths still are most of the leaders and in charge, but for how long?
There is no dealing with these people, absolutely none, and unfortunately the lunatics may have access to nuclear weapons. All the loose talk recently about survivable nuclear war is a good example. I want to believe, and kind of believe, the grifting sociopaths still have operational control. If that is wrong, and it may be, we all may be vaporized. If Putin believes the loons control the buttons, we will be vaporized.
Let’s hope Putin’s aim is strategic and pinpoint. Think scalpel, Vlad, not sledgehammer.
Eh, he can use a sledgehammer in some places. Nothing worth saving from boston to the Potomac.
Pretty much; there is now a non-negligable chance of Russia first-striking the CONUS because the GAE’s nuclear weapons are controlled by lunatics, and now everyone not under the CNN hypnotoad’s control knows it. Dont be near an obvious target around election season.
Socrates believed in lying. Sometimes, as Plato explains in The Republic.
The noble lie. Propaganda for purposes of serving the public welfare. “Johnny! Stop picking on Sally or Santa won’t bring you any presents!”
Or
All men are created equal, for example. There is the concern that the consequences of admitting genetic inequality explaining performance inequality would be worse or politically less expedient than blaming it on racism or sexism.
Yeah, and we see where that’s got us. One thing to tell a dying person he’s looking better and not to worry. Another thing to tell an entire race that a another race has stolen what is rightfully theirs and that their “plight” is because of evil maceration on the part of that race.
You know who took the noble lie and ran with it?
Straussian neocons, that’s who.
Plato or his mouthpieces did say such things. Much of it great enduring wisdom. Yes, we find fault with many of his creations like his real vs. the “apparent” (what at least I call the real world — you know, physical reality). In fairness to Plato, he presents many alternative views in most of his dialogues. Much discussion centers on Rhetoric and Sophistry, in so many words (pun intended!) the good and bad motives of public speaking. Plato presents, in large measure, how people really behave, for whatever morality noble or base, good or evil.
To use an analogy from a modern author I can’t recall: A book about how to DETECT art forgeries must by necessity be a book telling how to CREATE art forgeries.
There is another possibility–Leftists, in general, have strong tendencies toward psychopathy, which creates a caesura between self and objective reality. In short, these people cannot grasp the real world, which causes them to adopt an ideology and specific stances that are fundamentally irrational. They, therefore, actually believe what they are saying. They are not lying. But it is nevertheless impossible to correct and convert them with facts because the facts do not gibe with the fantasy world in which they dwell.
I believe this hypothesis accounts for the political behavior of perhaps 85% of Leftists. The other 15% are shameless liars, they know it, and they couldn’t care less.
The other 15 percent is lying sociopaths in it for profit and personal gain. Pray they stay in charge.
In a word, they’re koo koo
That Van Der Lain lady in Europe has the exact same crazed true believer eyes as this lady who was trying to get me to join her in some pyramid scheme that would make us both rich when I was a struggling young man.
Or more than koo koo alone, they’re a cult. A religious cult. And it is only a matter of time before they are removed from government on separation of church and state grounds.
I have some personal experience in this which may give me a leg up over my peers in seeing the signs, but my aunt was a religious nut who spoke in tongues. I remember when she had me and my dad come over and she busied me with burgers and a bucket of KFC while taking my dad aside and trying to get him to see the light while she convulsed herself speaking in her gobbledygook.
It’s unsettling how many of the female Cloud People have those same eyes. NY Gov. Hochul is exactly the same. Pelosi, AOC, Jankowicz, etc. They all look like bunny boilers.
There is a reason there are so many godesses of death in pagans religions.
Something I put off reading based on the title:
“How to Judge People By What They Look Like”, by Edward Dutton.
Just finished it. It’s not too bad—a good history and support of physiography as a science. Not sure I remember specifics wrt eyes, but there is repeated reference to genetic mutation affecting behavior and appearance.
I believe the conclusions Dutton draws in that book are generally correct. However, the adduced research is a bit threadbare. I’d like to see somebody tackle that subject and really put some meat on the bones.
I tend to agree—but I give Dutton and other researchers a bit of a pass. Dutton tends to be at the forefront, as in extrapolation of thin findings, more than I’d like. However, who the hell these days can delve into such topics as what Dutton makes his bread and butter?
For one, who prints these findings in the mainstream academic circles. Who will fund such research? For another, how does one hold a position at an institution investigating such? I believe Dutton and his University have separated.
It’s the thousand cock stare. Roissy wrote about that
Alex C on the Duran calls her, “Van der Crazy,” which is spot on.
If you are counting the political grifters and such as opposed to the total body of those we’d call “Leftist”, then you might be on to something. However, most writings I’ve read of psychopathy and sociopathy estimate the total in the population at no more than 5% or so. However, sociopaths do tend to be found in positions of power and authority and are attracted to such—CEO’s, Politicians, etc.
If you look at Dr. Hare’s work , the guy who came up with the Yes they are real and here’s to spot one meme, it’s a continuum rather than a cliff. I can even detect some mild instances of some characteristic in my own glorious self!.
At least for a large portion of White leftists, that fantasy can persist because they do not feel the consequences of their actions.
As Apex Predator said, some will only learn from pain and fear!
Decent essay. As I often will criticize however (get ready to hit that frown button, folks) are some downer observations. We are partisan here, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Obviously, deliberate deceit is a universal problem, especially in politics. But what about unintentional deceit? We love to point out the irrationality of the Left, or equivalently, the irrational belief of Conservatives that facts and logical argument will persuade opponents. Both are valid charges. But what are we overlooking here? Simple:
What makes us think that we are immune to “hive mind” or its related defects? No human is immune to falling for a false belief; to defend against them takes a conscious effort or process. What steps have we taken to insure that we are not committing the same sins we accuse the opposition of? You’d be a very rare individual if you don’t hold at least a few erroneous beliefs. I’m not saying EVERYTHING you know is wrong, only that adhering to false beliefs is a universal failing.
The problem is not restricted to psychology or the soft sciences either. For decades, economists crafted their theories under the assumption that humans acted in a rational manner. By the 1970s, at least two researchers, Tversky and Kahneman, among others, researched decision making and concluded that quite the contrary, that humans deviate from what rational theory would suggest, and they do so in predictable ways. Their findings were novel enough that a Nobel in economics (2002) was award, a rather odd award for a psychology investigation.
In medicine, it often takes many decades for new discoveries, even important ones, to become accepted doctrine. A common example is Semmelweis’s suggestion that doctors simply wash their hands with soap and water between patients. A less known one was the heretical claim that a bacteria was the cause of some ulcers. Now to be fair, not just any claim should be accepted without challenge. The world is full of bad actors, whether malevolent cretins or simply well-meaning but misguided lunatics. Nothing should be accepted without proof. In large measure, that’s precisely what official wisdom advances but slowly.
But equally dire problems may arise when new information is rejected not because it’s untrue, or perhaps even provably true, but for what we might call psychological reasons.
The point of the above is to illustrate that a lot of the irrationality is probably hard-wired into the human brain. If even bastions of wisdom, knowledge and rigorous procedure like the hard sciences are not immune to what should be embarrassing lapses, how much worse then will be groups or individuals with little or no discipline of thought? Hence, a large fraction of the craziness we experience.
Go ahead and down vote me if you like, but it remains a fact that you are just as liable to being a “true believer” in at least some areas of your life. As Plato said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” If you are so sure of your beliefs, why not put them to various tests? If they’re valid, they will withstand any challenge. But you balk, don’t you? Again, a perfectly normal human response: “How DARE anyone question my sincerely held beliefs?” To end with another famous quote (Twain, approximate): “It’s not what people don’t know, it’s what people know that ain’t so…” that is what causes the worst problems.
Another problem that a belief may not be falsifiable. Some questions can be put to a test, others simply cannot be decided. But at the least, a truth seeker can put some premises to the test, but rare is the man who’s brave enough to do that! Like Nietzsche’s example of Oedipus and the Sphinx, does one really want to best the monster and, perhaps, learn unpleasant truths? One problem with truths is that you cannot unlearn them once discovered, unless maybe, one has the dubious “gift” of being authentically mentally ill, cast adrift from everyday reality or even a reasonable facsimile.
And I won’t even get started on the issue of whether humans actually NEED (some) “false” beliefs to even live. This is one area of philosophy I’ve not delved into, but I believe there is validity to that assertion. So perhaps you don’t have to discard all your wrong cherished beliefs after all. 🙂
“What makes us think that we are immune to “hive mind” or its related defects?”
No one is completely immune, but dissidents are hit daily with the other’s sides arguments and morality. Our views are constantly challenged. We can’t exist in an echo chamber if we leave our house or turn on a computer.
You seem to elevate the hard sciences to the realm of objectivity. In theory: yes. In practice: not even close. Furthermore, science only gathers small piece of quanta, discrete little doses of “facts” isolated from everything else. Typically (not always), utterly useless.
You reference medicine; in all likelihood, our medical system is the largest killer of Americans. And, yes, those statistics can be obtained from “official” statistics. Now, I would agree with your points on some level. For example, how many here still hope for the Biden laptop or the trucker convoy to enact miraculous change?
I will utilize Emerson here: When a true theory is discovered, it is its own proof, for it explains everything. As humans, that is the best we can do because no science is ever going to do better. I rarely find any disharmony between my theories on what is occurring and the activities on display. That is not true of the two main parties. It does involve self-examination, absolutely, but I would argue it mainly involves learning to synthesize data – where hard sciences become corrupt.
I would also point out, as you tend to critique the writings of others, it is “ensure” not “insure.”
Thank you! Yes, you are right that I consider the “hard sciences” as perhaps the closest approach to Reality we generally have. Actually, “pure” mathematics is supposed to wear that crown, based on my learning.
I claim no expertise here. Even my beloved Nietzsche is skeptical of “natural philosophy” (Physics?): it is “NOT a world-explanation” yet is popularly so regarded because it deals with what “can be seen and felt…” (“Beyond Good and Evil” Ch. 14) Based on a study aid, his claims (e.g. Just how accessible is “truth,” even in the physical sciences?) were controversial and highly influential to later thinkers. I’ve not studied these aspects at all. Fascinating as he is, his sweeping assertions and almost total lack of references make decrypting his ideas a puzzle. The only definitive academic commentary on this book I’ve found is, fittingly in German, a tongue I know not.
Thanks for the Emerson quote. That is the mark of a successful theory: it explains “everything,” or circumscribing that just a bit: it should describe and perhaps predict everything within the domain that the theory proposes to address. It may not be its own proof, but optimally it will be a reliable model of reality. Yet it is always subject to falsification and thus the need to be amended or even discarded.
By the way, does anyone know where I can obtain a “thing in itself”? 🙂
Thanks for the spelling correction. I am not prefect 😀
You’re talking to the type of people who ask themselves, constantly, “did I do the right thing?”
We are overly self-examined. What wins the day is sheer, appalling gall.
Well, gall, plus pain and fear.
The ability to hurt them when they can’t hurt you back. Gall is a positional statement.
The dissident right’s beliefs are certainly falsifiable. The closest I can get is that lefty whites actually do seem to prefer having other ethnic groups rule over them. Although I’ve yet to see a mayor Mandingus that didn’t massively ramp up the levels of government corruption.
I suppose they might like to be “ruled” by POCs, but they also tend to live insulated from the consequences of such rule. The classic talk like MLK but live like KKK. I moved here for the good schools.
OK Ben, fro ow on when you say, “Go ahead and down vote me…”, I’m skipping to the bottom of your comment and downvoting without further reading. 🙁
Heh! Did I just say something about “overly self-examined?”
Layabout, the way to deal with such self doubt is to ask, “what am I trying to achieve?”
Beyond waxing philosophic, I suspect that, being of an idle disposition, if I ceased from self reflection I might cease to exist 🙂
And once in a blue moon I get a nibble, like Eloi.
The adherents of the leftist hive-think are a mixed group. I think most of those that we know in everyday life are true believers, just following along to be part of it. A lot of them have a view of “the right” which means being lumped in with people they despise like Sarah Palin, George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh and the Tea Party types. They have no chance of differentiating a neoconservative from a paleoconservative, or any other right-leaning faction.
In the example of breeds or race, most of the more intelligent leftists (and many or most on the normie right) don’t want to go down that road because of where they fear it leads, to Hitler and the six million thing, and demolishes happy slogans like “we’re all one race, the human race.”
For guys like Tim Wise, the “anti-racist,” he probably doesn’t really believe his own BS about races being social constructs, since he seems too intelligent for that. But he makes lots of money on the college speaking circuit, and he’s truly on a mission to see that whites become replaced.
Then there’s Richard Spencer, who flops around back and forth with different views and desperately wants to be seen as a leader, so will grab whatever belief will get him there.
In addition to the normie fear of where it leads, they also don’t see any resolution provided by acknowledging the truth. Admitting that different groups have different abilities is not going to raise the performance of the lesser abled. I disagree, as it doesn’t do Jamaal any good to get into Harvard with a 23 ACT, only to crash and burn, or worse to be pushed through and given a fake job with no accountability for adding value, when he very well could learn a productive trade.
They are not doing it for his benefit. He is a means. They are doing it for your detriment.
This (basically AA at the college level) has been discussed and even studied by the few legitimate Black scholars in the field. Whites won’t touch it. All agree that such AA efforts are—as a whole—detrimental to the race and produces fewer grad’s with lessor abilities.
Although Trumpton makes a good point, there is also a great incentive for Universities and the departments therein to admit and pass these minorities to “keep the numbers up”. Good things come from “Uncle Sugar” if you keep their falsehood live.
Instead of the clumsy “bioleninism”, I prefer “toadies” or “buying armies”.
Roman Senators bought and paid for each Legion.
The soldiers didn’t fight for the senator, however, or his beliefs- they fought for the Legion.
Yes, one of the great “open secrets” that must never be broached in Polite Company is that on the average, a Black [insert highly qualified professional title] will be of inferior ability compared to a White. This is, of course, due to decades of affirmative action and other lax standards to try and get the diversity numbers to look better. A rarely mentioned collateral damage: the statistically very rare, but truly qualified Black. He will be unfairly judged as a counterfeit coin, or at best as a debased one, by the world, because the world is wise to the scam even if they dare not utter it.
Occasionally, cracks in the facade appear, as with the Amy Wax flapadoodle a few years ago.
They’re all “Anti-racist” “Race is a social construct” right up to the point where they need a bone marrow transplant.
“If the hive is immune to reason, then there is no point in reasoning with them and therefore no need for conservatives.”
Accepting that the Left can’t be reasoned with is a huge mental hurdle because it means so many things that are extremely disturbing, especially to the logically inclined.
First, it means that debate is now pointless and that you have to fight back on the ground. You have to DO something, not say something. It means getting dirty politically, or, if politics is no longer an option (which it’s not), it means you have to start trying to build an alternate community.
Second, it means you have to abandon any hope of what was the United States surviving. You have to give up on civic nationalism and the hope that all these various groups will adopt the principles of the Enlightenment and the Founding Fathers.
Not to keep piling on the poor guy, but, unfortunately, Steve Sailer is a perfect example of even a dissident who can’t come to grips with this reality. He can’t bring himself to accept that the Left won’t be won over by his charts and tables, so like Sisyphus, he just keeps rolling the ball up the hill. (Really, he’s more like Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football.)
Accepting that the Left can’t be reasoned with means accepting that we can’t live with these people. And that’s a difficult thing to do for Joe Normie.
It turned out that Sailer is more boomer than dissident. The first clue should have been that asinine “citizenism” hokum that he’s been pitching for years. Such a foolish concept completely contradicts everything that Sailer has been exposing since roughly the 1990s. It is astounding that he continues to subscribe to it.
Your post is spot-on. It’s a long and arduous mental road that Joe Normie must travel to discover that, in the end, separation will be the only answer.
Yeah, after I hit “send” I realized that calling Sailer a dissident was wrong. He’s a CivNat Boomer who happens to acknowledge racial differences but then says that we shouldn’t care because we’re all individuals and individuals can fall anywhere along the bell curve.
White Boomers really seem to hate identifying as a group. I guess from their worldview, we’re all “Americans” or something like that so we shouldn’t identify as anything else.
That’s a nice sentiment, but if other groups don’t share it, you’re a fool to continue acting as though they do. It’s related to not acknowledging that the Left (well, the white Left) can’t be reasoned with.
CivNats simply refuse to accept reality because doing so means accepting that they have to fight back and that their country is lost.
CotS-
I was at a resort bar on vacation last summer and got into a conversation with someone from the Boomer generation and eventually we got to talking about the current IDpol mess.
His comment was that, “In the 60s we used to work together in this country.”
It was such a nice day I didn’t have the heart to start detailing the demographic realities of the Current Year versus the 60s.
“White Boomers really seem to hate identifying as a group.”
Because we Boomers “all know where that leads to…”
We were soaked in it, drenched in it, drowned in it.
And we really do want to be good. To do the right thing. We examine ourselves (and the outer world) constantly.
To us, “it ain’t just about us” is instinctive. To the others, “all about is” is so instinctive, they never need define it.
“all about us”
Correction
Sailer came up with Citizenism in the demographically-different early 2000s, when it sounded like a good idea. At least I thought it was, until he debated Jared Taylor.
It’s surprising that Sailer, even though he keeps up with the current culture, can’t grasp that the changes mean that the country is being handed over to POC.
Citizenism was a way to get whites to embrace immigration restriction without having to say that it was to protect the white majority. It wasn’t a crazy idea, but once it failed, he never moved on.
And he didn’t move on because it would mean embracing identity politics and Steve, like so many CivNats, can’t bring himself to do that, even if it means whites become a persecuted minority.
Looking back, that’s why I liked Citizenism. I didn’t want to go there, to explicitly endorse being pro-White. I was all in on immigration restrictionism though. In that debate I mentioned above, Jared Taylor won me over with his White advocacy and freedom of association arguments.
Here is a perfect example provided today in the David French venue called the Dispatch. The author argues conservatives should protect the free speech rights of corporations. It was a nice thought 20 years ago. But with corporations now joined at the hip with the federal government in restricting unapproved speech, this theoretical purity leads only to the gulag.
Sorry, forgot the link: https://thedispatch.com/p/the-new-rights-dangerous-attitude?s=r
You can’t dissuade someone from a belief made though emotion with facts and reason.
However, facts and reason—as a tool of persuasion—are a “fetish” of the Conservative. It is a stage that all true Dissidents have passed through, albeit most “Conservatives” never get beyond so they continue to preach to the choir and are stalled in their growth and effectiveness.
I’m thinking that it is the Conservative’s equivalent to the Left’s “Virtue Signaling”. Meaningless effort that produces no result except to impress your fellow Conservatives and gain status in their group.
For a lot of the conservatives, I think it also comes down to a matter of faith that facts and reason (i.e., truth) wins out in the end. I believe that myself, but the problem is these conservatives either don’t or refuse to recognize that the end may be a long way off.
Facts and reason are what I present to my fellow Conservatives. I believe in them as you do matt. However, the ideologues on the Left I’ve rarely seen persuaded—and by better men than I—so I recommend spending one’s time in more fruitful pursuits. Or barring that, to change one’s strategy in countering the Leftist mindset.
Rather than “we were wrong,” I say, “we tried, we actually gave it a go, a full and fair hearing.”
Because good faith. We act out of good faith, seeing potential friends, instead of potential enemies.
I am actually optimistic about the state of higher education in our Imperial United States. We just have to wait and watch it unfold, with great pleasure.
After The Empire collapses, there will be no money for The Hive. Money from the Givernment is the milk and honey of essence for so-called higher education.
Once the collapse occurs, something like well over 90% of it will collapse as well, and probably within a semester.
Thus the hive will take care of itself. Just like honey bee drones, they produce nothing and when the food dries up, they will be thrown out of their hives whether they like it or not.
Money printer going *BRRRRRR* directly into Leftist causes and institutions really is the heart of their power.
You’ve just seen $40 billion appropriated for funding the deep state.
Far more of that will end up in Northern Virginia than East of the Danube.
I no longer believe these elites are well intentioned. They are all scoundrels.
Joe Manchin just spoke to the WEF saying Ukraine should see this to the end, in other words, this should not end with diplomacy, but with complete victory alone. All the Republican talking heads kept saying Manchin was a good guy.
They kept on saying Joe Biden was a nice guy. More lies. The guy was always a scumbag, and it’s not because he lost his wife and two sons to tragedy that we should feel bad for him.
There are no nice guys. The Party is 100% reptile.
He didn’t tell the whole truth.
GAE’s real plan is to try and fight Russia to the last European and try to fight China to the last Austro-Indo-Asian.
In a way, this is a coping strategy for conservatives. They cannot accept that there are people not driven by facts and reason.
The hive people believe that they themselves are on the side of fact and reason. Their thinking is based on “scientism”.
For most of human history human perceptions of the world were based on the impressions received by the five senses. An individual’s sex was determined by their appearance, odor, the sounds they made and so on. Only since the scientific revolution and the construction of instruments that are supposedly capable of examining things at an atomic level have sensory inputs been made secondary to instrumental findings and computer models. While in some cases, of course, this is a good thing but it also means that only those experts trained and equipped with this equipment can determine the “facts” involved. Arguments about their validity take place between the trained experts, not the general public.
A endocrinologist can say that a particular person with a pharmaceutically induced testosterone level measured in nano-moles per liter is a female while an ordinary person will see, smell and hear a male. Both observers claim fact and reason is on their side. It’s a battle between science and scientism.
The hive represents an indecipherable mix of true believers, swindlers, and textbook sociopaths. Sometimes all three can exist to varying degrees in the same individual. Keep in mind, however, that the hive rewards conformity and punishes anything that even hints at dissents. It’s difficult to figure out how many people are faking it for purely opportunistic reasons.
One thing about sociopaths (and psychopaths) is that they believe their lies are true. In their minds, they are not lying with impunity–they are doggedly defending the truth! This is how Amber Heard can get on the stand and claim that it was the dogs who pooped the bed and not her. She actually believes it! To understand more about psychopaths and sociopaths, I highly recommend HG Tudor’s YouTube Channel on psychopathy.
If I may riff on this topic. Bongino is the classic conservative that truly believes that if he orates the correct magic words on the air, then light bulbs will go off all over the world, sanity will spread like wildfire, voters will have epiphanies en masse, new competent leaders will be elected to office, and the ship of society will change course for Shangri-La.
That’s a nice pipe dream, but the odds of it actually happening are pretty minimal. And it certainly would be nice if it did, but betting your life on that outcome is more than a bit insane in and of itself. Are things really that dire if Starbucks is still making lattes and you can watch Carlson’s rant on Fox every night? If you can continue to rage comfortably from the couch throne, is there any need to roll up your sleeves? Heaven forbid that you must break a sweat.
Being lazy and worthless is not a good long term success strategy. The lying will stop after 3 days without a meal. Or a dirt nap. As nature intended.
I think Bongino is just going through the motions for a paycheck. I absolutely do not believe anyone who was a guard dog for the political elite from 1999 to 2011 actually thinks that reason and logic, combined with voting Republican, will win the day.
But a pitchman has to sell the product.
Rick
Good point about Bonginos’ being a guard dog for the Cloud Folk.
Rule number 3 for survival (after avoiding crowds and Joggers), is “never trust a Fed”.
I beg to differ. Bongino, for all his faults, has parlayed his popularity into being independently wealthy and really doesn’t need a paycheck anymore. Like Rush before him, he now has more money than he could ever possibly spend. Therefore, either he is all about greed (which I seriously doubt because he grew up lower middle class) or he really is an ideologue. I think he really believes his rhetoric, which is why he’s so dangerous. His shtick persuades normies to stay on the couch, vote harder, and pray for a miracle. “Bail harder and the Titanic won’t sink!”
The alt-left is feminine in nature, it operates on feelings rather than facts. A good example was that Justice Kavanaugh “felt rapey” ergo he was a rapist.
Trying to make a point with the alt-left using reason and facts is like trying to teach a dog to play the violin – it doesn’t work, and it annoys the dog.
If conservatives ever want to sway the left, they need to realize this, and make their points based on feelings, not facts or reason.
From my experience, it’s more a high-status/low-status value mechanism. Media conglomerates do a good job of making views regarding immigration, firearms, and sexuality into implicit IQ signifiers. They’re cosmetic beliefs, and the way to counter them on shallow people is to make their beliefs look low-class.
Snobbishness isn’t something that dissidents like to do, but such attitudes towards their beliefs will get more of a rise than anything.
This is absolutely true. It is why the Left cannot abide ridicule, and why it is even worse than Conservatards when dismissed out of hand and ignored.
That’s also why the NPC memes are so effective.
“If conservatives ever want to sway the left, they need to realize this, and make their points based on feelings, not facts or reason.”
There’s no swaying leftists. Like Z has said, these people must be removed by any means necessary for a normal society to function. I know several people who fit this description. They’re all women and they look exactly how you’d imagine them looking.
I come from the hive and live in its midst
Much of the hive’s immunity to reason and fact comes from insularity, the desire for personal status and, like with most people, the ease of going along to get along and the need to think well of oneself.
And don’t neglect the power of Orwellian doublethink. I’ve contended that my Senator Liz, as a type, is not a phony, hypocrite or even an opportunist. She’s an android, an early model AI concoction for whom the present moment is all in all, lacking any context of or commitment to before and after, a being whose genuine beliefs blow with the wind of chance and circumstance.
It’s custmary now to speak of the culture of narcissism and to say that we’re in for the kind of fall and collapse that overtook Rome and, more recently, post The Great War, the Habsburg Empire. “Multiculturalism” is the Trojan Horse. John Glubb laid the sequence out fairly well. We’re on a larger stage now. Those who tout the virtue of the eclipse of fossil fuel and the beneficent effect of the next pandemic have a confluence of interest.
Still, as regards the progressive hive, a few set the pace and the rest follow. There’s not much principle here, just a vague utopian narrative and the feel good vibes of showing off for one another.
Sorry to hear you live in the Hive. But I live in the opposite type area…shootin’, ranchin’, boot-scootin’, Christian, flag-wavin’. There is certainly a desire to fit in here, as well. If you aren’t Christian nor have any patriotic sense, you won’t make friends here nor be elevated in any way. For example our dingbat governor is trying his best to be the most restrictive abortion state. This is what you call a virtue signal on the right. If you run for public office, you’d better be shown going to church, shooting a gun, and closing abortion clinics. And respecting the men and women in uniform. Cops too.
I’m not sure what’s more eye-rolling…the Hive or the Ranch. But at least the Ranch will let you be.
I’ll roll my eyes at whatever does the worst job of preserving European civilization. If I can take the liberty of trying to state your main point in a different way: all people are herd animals to some extent, including those who rule. There are no exceptions. I most certainly include myself. It’s not that those who resist don’t feel the pressure, but that they recognize it as such and refuse to succumb to it.
If a European is unfortunate enough to live in a multicultural society, then the herd masters deciding which way the European variety of human cattle need to be stampeded had best be one of their own, stampeding them in ways that are conducive to social prosperity, stability, and procreative continuity. Else, it will be inevitably hostile foreigners stampeding them with tolerance of abortion, drugs, sexual deviance, and other dyscivilizational behaviors towards their own destruction.
This past week Slow Joe and the Davos crowd were speaking from the same talking points when they called the current Western World energy crisis a “transition” to a great and glorious but still hazy and vague green future. They have it all planned out for us and no, we will not have any say in what is about to happen.
Hopefully our Great Leap Forward works out better than the last.
I am starting to adopt a tactic with these people for each of these for your own good arguments “Who the fuck are you to decide that for me?”
At the moment it helps diffuse the kafka trap of the contradictions they set up and moves straight to a dominance authority discussion which has not been predefined for them. Makes them very uncomfortable if you pursue that route and ignore the flapping.
A part of me hopes that many libtards are one armed mugging away from seeing sanity. But it’s just a hope.
In the chamber of the hive I know well, academia, I’d guess it’s about 70/30, true believer / sociopath. Most of the true believers really don’t see the contradictions, both because it’s an article of faith, and because they’re dumb — that special kind of highly educated stupidity that enables them to miss the forest for the trees, even as they’re smacking headfirst into every tree in the forest. You can give your average academic historian an article you cut and pasted from MSNBC, tell him it’s from the London Times in 1834, and he’ll start gleefully ripping it apart. Tell him it’s from this morning’s New York Times, however, and suddenly it’s sacred scripture.
I got to the point where I really appreciated the sociopaths, because at least the sociopaths can be “reasoned” with. Figure out what they’re after (it’s usually not hard), and you can sidestep them with ease. I’ve known a million Jen Psakis, and they’re a piece of cake to deal with. She wants to be Department Chair; I have no say in who gets to be Department Chair; therefore she’ll never bother with me… either that, or she’s trying to enlist me in some other scheme, so I just play dumb (really easy, as most eggheads are also super autistic, so it’s easy to do the Sling Blade routine to get them off your back).
Too bad they don’t stay in academia, but instead go to Washington, where they have access to nuclear weapons.
“so it’s easy to do the Sling Blade routine to get them off your back”
I’m seeing Professor Sev in my mind’s eye saying to some Assistant Professor: “I picked up a Kaiser Blade that was sittin’ there by the screen door. Some folks call it a Sling Blade, I call it a Kaiser Blade. It’s kindly a wood handle, kind of like an axe handle. With a long blade on it shaped kinda like a bananer. Mhm. Sharp on one edge, and dull on the other. Mhm.”
Followed up with “I like them French fried potaters. Mhm”.
“You can give your average academic historian an article you cut and pasted from MSNBC, tell him it’s from the London Times in 1834, and he’ll start gleefully ripping it apart. Tell him it’s from this morning’s New York Times, however, and suddenly it’s sacred scripture.”
In 2016 I was in the company of some leftist acquaintances and their leftist wives. I decided to conduct an experiment. I went back and gathered some talking points from Obama from 2004. You know, things like being against gay marriage, having a secure border and other common sense things that Obama claimed to support back in those days. I proceeded to go down the list of all of Obama’s sane view points at the time without disclosing they were from Obama. The women started cursing me out telling me how rayciss I was and that all of those views were indicative of Trump voters and hillbilly white supremacists. That’s right when I pulled the video montage of Obama…. I swear to you they turned white as a sheet.
For the left, it doesn’t matter WHAT is stated, but only WHO is stating it. That was a very defining moment for me at that time. There is no helping or reasoning with them. They’re all rotten to the core.
And I bet when they walked away it all disappeared from their head and they are of the same opinion still, perhaps even more convinced of their original view?
Oh, men, you know them, you know them indeed
Reason may not work on Sociopaths or true believers, but if you want to get a response from a Hive Minder, mocking and ridicule goes a long way.
If I find myself in a situation where I realize I’m interacting with, and speaking to a Lefty/Hive Minder/Dingbat, I simply disengage by saying,” you know, it’s a good thing we live in an age where people can believe, whatever they want to believe. You get to believe what you want, and I get to believe what I want”.
I’ve had good success with “Oh, is that what your tv told you?” Not original to me, but very effective.
I know a “Hiver” who loves to mock the conservative concern about the border and illegal immigration. He lives in a swanky apartment building with a high gate out front and the riverfront stretching behind his property. “How’s life at the compound?” I ask. “Anyone sneak over the wall?” Then I ask him about the “moat” behind the house. He never enjoys it. I always do.
Your comment reminds me of an event in my political awakening. I was living in a gated and walled community in coastal California and I watched a bunch of Hispanics climb over the wall. It shook me to my core. I became an anti-illegal immigration activist within a year.
When I was about 12, my mother, father, and I traveled in Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador. We strolled a few times through prosperous neighborhoods. All of the homes presented as gated compounds with high masonry walls. The tops of those walls had wicked, large pieces of razorsharp glass embedded in mortar. That trip was an education in various other ways, too.
Most places in the USA, at least residential areas, it’s forbidden to have a fence that would present a real risk of harm to any would-be intruder. E.g. barbed wire, broken glass in the cement on the top, and so on. You may see in older sections of cities such things as high wrought iron fences with sharp points on the top. These are almost certainly antiques, grandfathered in. Probably they could not be installed new and who could afford wrought iron? Surely exceptions exist, but probably only for government or private property with a “legitimate” need for high security.
Nice
I’m purloining that.
With regards to the Jab, I simply say that I’m not getting it as someone will have to bury all the people who voluntarily took it.
Then I offer mine. If one Jab is good, two should be twice as good!
Science!
I’ve had good results with: You’re too smart to think that.
There are a lot of variants which convey different meanings: you seem too smart, or seemed too smart. Seemed means I thought you were smart, but I guess not.
Or to believe or have believed. Have believed means they did believe that but now they don’t Etc.
I found “Yes, that is the dominant narrative” gets their noggin joggin for a moment.
Although I rarely pull off the following owing to my irascible, acerbic demeanor, I’ve tried it on occasion and it actually works, if you have the time and patience and can keep a straight face.
If someone is talking nonsense to you, just pretend being a supportive listener. Ask probing questions. Not to disprove their tartuffery, but gently insisting they explain it to you, the eager but not-yet-enlightened audience.
The outcome is unpredictable, but ideally the person will experience an epiphany that he is an ass for believing such foolishness. You can smile understandingly and make your exit. 🙂
Gives them too much credit. Dismiss them with a simple “you just don’t matter.” Significance is what they crave.
There’s something I noticed, a little poker tell, whenever progressives are cornered and trapped, forced into telling a boldface lie. It happened when Jumanji Jackson was grilled about knowing what a woman was, and it happened several times in senate inquiries involving dirty feds, dirty medicos, and Silicon Valley sleazebags. I also recall seeing it happen when someone asked Pete Bootygig a question about paternity leave or racist highways. There’s a flicker, a little glint in the eye and a smile stowed before it can grow across the face, before the liar answers the question, as if the truth is a kind of burp that’s burbling upward in the belly and needs to be suppressed. It’s a dopamine hit, the lying gives a high (maybe the poker analogy wasn’t the worst one, as some sick players get off on bluffing when the stakes will either double their pot or knock them out of the game). There are sociopaths and true believers among their numbers, but I think there are also junkies. I think the lying is addictive. I just wish that lying had the same effect on them that fentanyl has on the dirt people. It’d be fun to watch Psaki’s eyes roll into the back of her head and get replaced with a couple of X’s after she told us about Biden’s decisive leadership before keeling over at her news desk at MSNBC.
I know what you mean, and I saw it with Bill Clinton. I guess it helped that I really was “apolitical” in those days — I thought politics was just showbiz for ugly people, like the man said, because I was busy getting rich (so I thought) because the good times would never end now that we’d reached The End of History…
…yeah, I was that young and naive and stupid, but whatever, point is, I had no investment in Bill Clinton either way, so whenever I saw him giving a speech or a press conference or whatever, I viewed him almost completely dispassionately. And he always struck me as a little bit off, and I could never figure out why, until one day I watched my goofy Liberal girlfriend watching Bill Clinton. I knew two things right away: I’d be getting some later that evening, and that Bill Clinton got off by lying.
It suddenly all made sense. I don’t know how he ever came out from behind the podium, because lying aroused Bill Clinton sexually. I am 100% serious. The bigger the lie, the more he got off. It was weird and creepy, but nonetheless true. And they’re all like that now.
I did not have sex with that man’s sex slaves on that man’s sex slave island any of the NINETEEN times I visited it!
“On either of the nineteen times”
Gotta leave some space for doubt..
Let’s also not forget that everyone in DC is a lawyer, trained to win for their client whether he is truthful or not, guilty or innocent.
The sociopaths are the true believers are the junkies. There is no difference amongst them. “Leftist” politics might as well be renamed “Cluster B” politics. It’s mental illness all the way down with these people.
It’s called duper’s delight. The personality types that engage in compulsive lying do indeed get a thrill from the idea that the other person is eating their shit sandwich and then asking for more.
It happens, but to her soul.
The Portrait of Dorian Grey.
And even better title for this article would be “The Life and Habits of the Lemming.”
The dog breed stuff is hilarious. Nobody who has own different breeds of dogs would believe it.
I think that there is a spectrum of people who preach the left’s latest lies. On one end if the idiot true-believer NPC type. As IQ increases, it becomes a mix of stupidity and mendacity (most Dem politicians), at the top (Soros and Schwab types) it is pure malice and evil.
There are no homosexual dogs. There are dogs bred over time to serve human needs. Therefore, we have Rottweiler/Pitbull humans, who fight and guard, we have Retriever humans, who go and get things for their master, we have Submissive rollover and rubmabelly humans who will do whatever master wants as long as they get to sleep at the foot of the bed, and we have Terrier humans who go after things like facts or information, and we have Poodle humans who just like to look good and be fussed over on the end of masters leash. Where are the lgbtqpd dog breeds??
Those are extinct
Growing up, my family had a pet dog from a classic herding breed.
Purchased as a newborn pup, from day one she retained extremely strong herding and protective instincts that she applied to the people and waterfowl on our property since no livestock were available.
Our family dog was half Border Collie. In the house if everyone was scattered in different parts of the house, he was uneasy and couldn’t relax. When we’re all in the same room, all was well and he would plop down and relax.
Shepards gotta herd, no matter how ugly the flock.
Yes, one of our two rescues is a border collie who for the first two years of her life was in the hands of nasty, hillbilly yahoos who scarred her spirit with their cruelties. She herds me, as a Daddy’s Girl, until she gets her share. I almost always surrender to her need for unfeigned affection. But that she draws upon her breed’s genetic legacy is patently obvious.
The other one, who was more passively abused as a puppy through deficient quantities of food, is a border collie/flat coated retriever mix, and the hunting dog genetics dominate in her behaviors.
Those two are as different as day and night, clearly owing this to their genetic legacies, and then secondarily through their early experiences.
Talking to some true believers, one of the consistent features is a blind, fanatical trust in institutions, especially scientific ones. They will treat the University professors like a platonic form of a man whose life is devoted to delving into the truths of nature. The thought that a professor is swayed by grant funding and prestige is akin to blasphemy. This falls into the modern trap of thinking man is inherently good and virtuous. With that level of faith, it’s easy to put your mind into pretzels to accept contradictory/crazy beliefs.
Another common property is marriage. I’ve seen several men’s opinions change from conservative to insane progressive when they marry, and I rarely see the opposite happen. The only time the liberal to conservative conversion occurs is if the man changes the wife’s political compass.
These examples are, of course, people without actual power, but just following signals. It’s clear the progressives with actual power to mold public opinion are psychopaths.
Sociopaths, Psychopaths, Dingbats;
It’s almost like they live in a different reality. Which I guess, in a sense, they do, in their heads.
Has anyone seen the commercials (I’m reticent to cop to watching any network stuff), where “doctors” (actors in lab coats), articulate that the Jabs “work” and are “safe”.
The actual facts in the ground are completely the opposite of what is being said, and yet it is spewed out.
They are basically participating in genocide.
Like hearing the beat of a different drummer, and a radio program far off, in a room down the hall, so far it is more sensed than heard.
“Genocide” is (hopefully!) too strong a word. But yes, the government pays billions for advertising that in the name of “public health” is free advertising for a few Big Pharma producers of the jabs, most of which are obtained via government funding, were at least in part developed with government funding, and so on. A de-facto monopoly product, heavily promoted in some cases at zero expense and best of all, mandated for millions of not-always-willing customers. What’s not to like? It’s all quite a lucrative racket, lots of people getting rich, expanding their fiefdoms in the process. Your description of the actor in a white coat is very apposite: While a lot of the players are in fact credentialed professionals, they are “acting” in the sense that pretense (politics, business, greed, power lust) has been placed ahead of true medical science, ethics, safety, etc. At least in some respects, all the world’s indeed a stage, and we are stuck at the performance with the exits barred. 🙁
“I’ve seen several men’s opinions change from conservative to insane progressive when they marry, and I rarely see the opposite happen.”
It seems to be a uniquely female thing that they cannot deal with someone holding a different opinion from them. Also, many women (my wife is one of them) will pretend to agree with their men on issues, until they get married. This seems to be especially true with liberal women and “conservative” men.
As I have learned the hard way, when the wife throws out some opinion as if it was Holy Truth That Can Not Be Questioned, it’s best just to keep quiet and ignore it. It’s not worth the fight to try to prove a point. This is why many political polls get it wrong–the guy will say publicly what keeps him out of trouble, but in secret will still vote how he feels. Lesser men actually adopt their wife’s politics.
“…men actually adopt their wife’s politics.”
That’s my best friend in a nutshell. He was a natural leader in a crowd, but she had the retirement plan (university, union).
(To be fair, he’d also had a crush on her since she threw walnuts at him when they were eight.)
Once they start playing with your nuts you’re a gonner,
Ah. This. Long ago, commenter Tom K noted, “if they’ve gone left, there’s pussy involved.”