RSS
It’s not just brats denouncing their “regressive” parents to popular acclaim on Twatter and Plebbit.
We are now seeing case after case of people getting fired from work on the basis of political quasi-crimes (e.g. racist or more often “racist” statements) committed by their spouses or relatives.
One mob has succeeded in getting a Lebanese father to fire his daughter from his family business, who was poasting overly “powerful” things about Blacks, Jews, and Hitler on her social media at the age of 14 (i.e., not even the age of legal responsibility).
This wasn’t enough to satiate them (don’t forget – never cuck), they have continued boycotting and harassing the business, on the logic that only a culture of hate within the family could produce teenage shitposters.
Stepmother of Garrett Rolfe, the cop who shot that Black criminal Rayshard Brooks, a career criminal (previously convicted of False Imprisonment, Simple Battery/Family, Battery Simple and Felony Cruelty/Cruelty to Children) who had resisted arrest and threatened the police with a stolen taser, was fired from her job as HR director for “creating a hostile working environment.”
I am sure that her son’s travails had absolutely nothing to do with it and it was a pure coincidence.
LA Galaxy let go off a player for some shitposting done by his wife who is also a Serb.
Unfortunately, he seems to have retreated and apologized instead of suing for breach of contract – which, at least theoretically, should still be respected by the US legal system.
And where would we be without the United Memedom joining the imperial center in this clown carnival.
The girlfriend of a man who flew a White Lives Matter – who, incidentally, was investigated by the bobbies, though thankfully it seems that even the Brits can’t yet find grounds to convict someone over that – was fired from her job for refusing to participate in a “intensive racial sensitivity training” struggle session.
***
At the rate things are going, it is not just the thoughtcriminals, shitposters, and occasional actual racists who will be out of a job, deprived of their bank account, and blacklisted by all the tech monopolists from AirBnb to Zoom, it will also come to encompass their associates and family members. Thus providing further incentives to energetically disassociate, disavow, denounce ahead of the mob, even in those cases where they would not otherwise partake in the mob’s cultish hysteria.
�
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Persian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.
If you are new to my work, start here.
Rereading Norman Podhoretz’s infamous essay recently, I was struck by how girls were denouncing their fathers for being insufficiently woke 80 years ago.
There is no bottom.
Workplace-mandated “intensive racial sensitivity training” is wonderful in the way it manages to sound harmless and creepy at the same time.
Orwell wasn’t describing a totalitarian future or a bureaucratized modernity, he was just running a thought experiment where the whole world becomes England.
As someone who has never been to America, I find clips like this baffling (there are more):
Perhaps Rep. Paul Gosar isn’t some moral exemplar, but to have 2/3 of your siblings denounce you in public suggests, to me, a collapse in family values.
The politics in my family is as diverse as it gets — ranging from hard-left to (semi) hard-right — but there is no way my siblings or I would ever speak out against one another in public. That, to me, is a grave crime against everything civilization stands for — no matter your politics — and as a Russophile, my thoughts of course go to Pavlik Morozov:
The mob has its delusions, but you can’t help but be impressed by its piety.
We have been willing to tear apart our own culture to assuage the feelings of our enemies.
White guilt is white supremacy.
—
The hidden part of this storyline is the necessity of conducting Dissident activity through passive, rather than active, methods.
Flying a plane banner does nothing but make you a target, a mass boycott of the sportsball club is rather hard to defeat.
Obviously the above is an exaggeration and there will simply need to be an evolutionary arms race to outpace the censors, but the barriers to organizing boycotts in the present environment are formidable. This is particularly the case because the potential targets are endless and include the commanding heights of the economy. The primary benefit to boycotting will really be to shelter yourself and your family from the toxic, soul-destroying propaganda of the news-entertainment complex.
Narrator voice: No one did anything at all.
https://twitter.com/rechelon/status/1274949340910489616Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Anatoly Karlin, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Philip Owen
The faux outrage and persecution mean massive publicity plus may ultimately white pill many. Meanwhile appeasement isn't working. Last night 'darkies' injured bobbies during a 'peaceful' street party in Londonistan. Normies are fuming on social media over law and order.
As for the blowback in terms of loss of income etc, organized solidarity is key. This is what dispossessed whites of South Africa are doing through groups like AfriForum.
About us - AfriForum
https://www.afriforum.co.za/en/about-us/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1W7lx6IsnY
Perhaps Rep. Paul Gosar isn't some moral exemplar, but to have 2/3 of your siblings denounce you in public suggests, to me, a collapse in family values.
The politics in my family is as diverse as it gets -- ranging from hard-left to (semi) hard-right -- but there is no way my siblings or I would ever speak out against one another in public. That, to me, is a grave crime against everything civilization stands for -- no matter your politics -- and as a Russophile, my thoughts of course go to Pavlik Morozov:Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Ian Smith
This is extremely taboo in Russia as well.
Crushing speech in the public square ends the discussion, not the disagreement.
The fact that the ultra-woke are turning on their own points to the level of extremism becoming unsupportable. I still hope this can burn itself out peacefully at the polls. There are large numbers of registered Independents and Democrats who reject the lunacy of CHAZ and Defund the Police, but are unwilling to speak publicly for fear of retaliation. These silent objectors are by definition impossible to poll.
My biggest fear is that massive vote fraud will break the willingness of the Citizenry to abide by the results. Tammany Hall almost broke local elections in the 30’s. I am not sure what can save broken federal elections.
PEACE 😇
Shouldn’t there be lawyers fighting for the chance to represent people who lost their jobs due to the actions of relatives? Whether that be principled free-speech lawyers or sleazy make-a-quick-buck lawyers, these should be easy cases to win, right?
At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning,[1] as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's race, religion or sexuality).
In past bygone time, there used to be such things as "labor unions" that protected the workers.
Of course, defending rights of the workers is un-American.
Defending rights of the workers is COMMUNISM.
Brave conservatives fought communism and won.
Unions are gone. Communism lost. Capitalism won.
The capitalists can now treat the workers as they please, and this is what you have fighting for.
Enjoy your victory.Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Some Guy
Their are some causes too just, some iniquities so appaling, that it would be unthinkable for any lawyer to assist in making them right, even if it got him rich.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish “just cause” for termination), and without warning,[1] as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee’s race, religion or sexuality).
In past bygone time, there used to be such things as “labor unions” that protected the workers.
Of course, defending rights of the workers is un-American.
Defending rights of the workers is COMMUNISM.
Brave conservatives fought communism and won.
Unions are gone. Communism lost. Capitalism won.
The capitalists can now treat the workers as they please, and this is what you have fighting for.
Enjoy your victory.
They get really confused when the employee turns the tables.Replies: @another anon
Lawyers, even sleazy ones, prefer not to be debarred.
Ohoho this will end well
Parallel institutions. Parallel businesses. Parallel states.
Instant balkanization!
But, you know, something something get what deserve
Parallel institutions. Parallel businesses. Parallel states.
Instant balkanization!
But, you know, something something get what deserveReplies: @216
Or Ottoman milletization
"the prosecutes you, the kadi judges you"
We have been willing to tear apart our own culture to assuage the feelings of our enemies.
White guilt is white supremacy.
---
The hidden part of this storyline is the necessity of conducting Dissident activity through passive, rather than active, methods.
Flying a plane banner does nothing but make you a target, a mass boycott of the sportsball club is rather hard to defeat.Replies: @The Obscurantist, @another anon, @Amerimutt Golems
How are you supposed to coordinate a mass boycott under the current circumstances? We have already established that you will be unable to organize a boycott using your own name. Collective punishment means that even if you have little to lose, you will be fearful to expose your family to social and economic ruin. So, you will have to mobilize anonymously as will everyone else who wants to participate. Then you will need to find a way to communicate using venues which systematically deplatform you. Whether by human moderator or artful algorithm, your public campaign will be shadow banned out of existence.
Obviously the above is an exaggeration and there will simply need to be an evolutionary arms race to outpace the censors, but the barriers to organizing boycotts in the present environment are formidable. This is particularly the case because the potential targets are endless and include the commanding heights of the economy. The primary benefit to boycotting will really be to shelter yourself and your family from the toxic, soul-destroying propaganda of the news-entertainment complex.
We have been willing to tear apart our own culture to assuage the feelings of our enemies.
White guilt is white supremacy.
---
The hidden part of this storyline is the necessity of conducting Dissident activity through passive, rather than active, methods.
Flying a plane banner does nothing but make you a target, a mass boycott of the sportsball club is rather hard to defeat.Replies: @The Obscurantist, @another anon, @Amerimutt Golems
We Have Had Enough! Someone Shall Do Something!
Narrator voice: No one did anything at all.
https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/1276128695661535234Replies: @Inselaffen, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @another anon
“Inanity of inanities; all is inanity.” RCclesiastes.
Narrator voice: No one did anything at all.
https://twitter.com/rechelon/status/1274949340910489616Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Anatoly Karlin, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Philip Owen
The right is quite a bit better at organizing online, I’d say. Unfortunately, the world doesn’t end there and that is a challenge.
Unfortunately, they are not clear what the concept means.
https://www.businessinsider.com/keurig-boycott-coffee-machine-smashing-videos-2017-11
The ‘white lives matter’ banner guy did a pretty good job of showing up the establishment hypocrisy on this one.
Comments from fellow Daily Mail and Yahoo news proles are universally in his favour.
The tighter the punishment gets (he’s been fired from his job) and the more talking heads condemn his act (the same ones who supported BLM smashing statues etc, or football clubs wearing ‘black lives matter’ on their shirts and taking the knee – in a sport which has tried to claim not to allow politics on the pitch in the recent past!) the better he looks (martyr effect) and the angrier the proles get at the treatment of ‘our side’. Some seeds being sown there.
Best of all, he refused to apologise (increasing his power level substantially).
Shows what a simple act of ‘standing up’ can do.
Of course it’s up to someone ‘greater’ to start coordinating that latent anger into something politically firmer, which is where we’ll probably fail again, but as the tensions increase something will have to give eventually…
Yeah, and in practice the undesirables are still oppressed at any chance possible
“the prosecutes you, the kadi judges you”
I can’t imagine any Americans flying a “White Lives Matter” banner, just shows that native British are still less cucked than white Americans.
Well, the Right sometimes tries to boycott something.
Unfortunately, they are not clear what the concept means.
https://www.businessinsider.com/keurig-boycott-coffee-machine-smashing-videos-2017-11
Comments from fellow Daily Mail and Yahoo news proles are universally in his favour.
The tighter the punishment gets (he's been fired from his job) and the more talking heads condemn his act (the same ones who supported BLM smashing statues etc, or football clubs wearing 'black lives matter' on their shirts and taking the knee - in a sport which has tried to claim not to allow politics on the pitch in the recent past!) the better he looks (martyr effect) and the angrier the proles get at the treatment of 'our side'. Some seeds being sown there.
Best of all, he refused to apologise (increasing his power level substantially).
Shows what a simple act of 'standing up' can do.
Of course it's up to someone 'greater' to start coordinating that latent anger into something politically firmer, which is where we'll probably fail again, but as the tensions increase something will have to give eventually...Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive, @Amerimutt Golems
Especially since it came just after three white people being murdered in Reading
Comments from fellow Daily Mail and Yahoo news proles are universally in his favour.
The tighter the punishment gets (he's been fired from his job) and the more talking heads condemn his act (the same ones who supported BLM smashing statues etc, or football clubs wearing 'black lives matter' on their shirts and taking the knee - in a sport which has tried to claim not to allow politics on the pitch in the recent past!) the better he looks (martyr effect) and the angrier the proles get at the treatment of 'our side'. Some seeds being sown there.
Best of all, he refused to apologise (increasing his power level substantially).
Shows what a simple act of 'standing up' can do.
Of course it's up to someone 'greater' to start coordinating that latent anger into something politically firmer, which is where we'll probably fail again, but as the tensions increase something will have to give eventually...Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive, @Amerimutt Golems
It was a waste of money and loss of a good job that could have been used to support anti-leftist causes more discretely and effectively. No amount of boomers pointing out the hypocrisy will save this event from being memory holed.
We have been willing to tear apart our own culture to assuage the feelings of our enemies.
White guilt is white supremacy.
---
The hidden part of this storyline is the necessity of conducting Dissident activity through passive, rather than active, methods.
Flying a plane banner does nothing but make you a target, a mass boycott of the sportsball club is rather hard to defeat.Replies: @The Obscurantist, @another anon, @Amerimutt Golems
On the contrary, the stunt is really clever trolling.
The faux outrage and persecution mean massive publicity plus may ultimately white pill many. Meanwhile appeasement isn’t working. Last night ‘darkies’ injured bobbies during a ‘peaceful’ street party in Londonistan. Normies are fuming on social media over law and order.
As for the blowback in terms of loss of income etc, organized solidarity is key. This is what dispossessed whites of South Africa are doing through groups like AfriForum.
About us – AfriForum
https://www.afriforum.co.za/en/about-us/
Comments from fellow Daily Mail and Yahoo news proles are universally in his favour.
The tighter the punishment gets (he's been fired from his job) and the more talking heads condemn his act (the same ones who supported BLM smashing statues etc, or football clubs wearing 'black lives matter' on their shirts and taking the knee - in a sport which has tried to claim not to allow politics on the pitch in the recent past!) the better he looks (martyr effect) and the angrier the proles get at the treatment of 'our side'. Some seeds being sown there.
Best of all, he refused to apologise (increasing his power level substantially).
Shows what a simple act of 'standing up' can do.
Of course it's up to someone 'greater' to start coordinating that latent anger into something politically firmer, which is where we'll probably fail again, but as the tensions increase something will have to give eventually...Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive, @Amerimutt Golems
You need someone who can outsmart the evil ruling class.
Narrator voice: No one did anything at all.
https://twitter.com/rechelon/status/1274949340910489616Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Anatoly Karlin, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Philip Owen
I agree with him (thread).
Antifa is successful only in those efforts that are favored by the ruling class, specifically because those activities are paid for, organized, and supported by the ruling class. Wherever their goals diverge from international capital and the US government, they always make zero progress (unsurprisingly this gang of mentally ill perverts, drug addicts and social retards can never realise this no matter how often it happens). Let's see how much better than "dogshit" this slime can organize when he's not supported by teams of professional getting paid with Soros bucks or through the state department. Or maybe even with all those things but in an area where the police are hostile rather than supportive of their protesting.Replies: @Thulean Friend
Cope that Antifa are all paid by Soros (coz right wing cannot imagine someone not being mercenary)
Cope that Antifa have "bad genes" (what difference it makes? if they had "better genes" they would be even more succesful than they are?)
Daydreaming about torture, rape and killing of Antifa Pinochet style (you well know that you are not in 1970's Chile. You know well that the armed forces and friendly three letter agencies are not on your side. If any military coup happens, it will be against you, it will be the alt-right who will be thrown off the helicopters)
All too typical right wing fantasies from the position of absolute powerlessness. Absolute zero interest in learning what Antifa is and what it does.Replies: @Denis, @Pericles
At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning,[1] as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's race, religion or sexuality).
In past bygone time, there used to be such things as "labor unions" that protected the workers.
Of course, defending rights of the workers is un-American.
Defending rights of the workers is COMMUNISM.
Brave conservatives fought communism and won.
Unions are gone. Communism lost. Capitalism won.
The capitalists can now treat the workers as they please, and this is what you have fighting for.
Enjoy your victory.Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Some Guy
I was in a position to exercise my at-will rights a few months ago to leave a position that was not a good fit and a supervisor I did not care for.
They get really confused when the employee turns the tables.
And if conservatives see any problem, it is the idea of "protected classes" and fight to abolish it and give the employers absolute freedom.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_groupHopefully the conservatives will soon win on this cause too, so they can be all fired only for being straight white male christian boomers.
Narrator voice: No one did anything at all.
https://twitter.com/rechelon/status/1274949340910489616Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Anatoly Karlin, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Philip Owen
The stereotype of the conservative who just wants to grill, have a few beers, and watch sportsball exists for a reason.
https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/1276128695661535234Replies: @Inselaffen, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @another anon
‘titted ethnocentric’, now there’s a mob I’d stand behind…
“I WILL DO ANYTHING FOR MONEY” is a principle too high for lawyers to live up to.
Their are some causes too just, some iniquities so appaling, that it would be unthinkable for any lawyer to assist in making them right, even if it got him rich.
On the subject of witch hunts, looks like Sobchak became the witch and lost her advertising gig.
https://yandex.ru/turbo/s/tass.ru/obschestvo/8808055?promo=navbar&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com
Audi canceled Sobchaks’ job because Ksenia was critical of Black Lives Matter protests. Russian liberals and Ukrainian nationalists beware – you matter less to Western elites than you think.
https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/1276128695661535234Replies: @Inselaffen, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @another anon
Trying to imagine the shortfalls of Nationalists and “successes” (how’s that collectivisation of the means of production leading to a stateless society coming?) of the hard left both hinge purely on the traits of their available human capital is absurd. And Antifa is very much the defender of the political status quo, not that they have the mental hardware to ever reach awareness of that fact.
Antifa is successful only in those efforts that are favored by the ruling class, specifically because those activities are paid for, organized, and supported by the ruling class. Wherever their goals diverge from international capital and the US government, they always make zero progress (unsurprisingly this gang of mentally ill perverts, drug addicts and social retards can never realise this no matter how often it happens). Let’s see how much better than “dogshit” this slime can organize when he’s not supported by teams of professional getting paid with Soros bucks or through the state department. Or maybe even with all those things but in an area where the police are hostile rather than supportive of their protesting.
Antifa is successful only in those efforts that are favored by the ruling class, specifically because those activities are paid for, organized, and supported by the ruling class. Wherever their goals diverge from international capital and the US government, they always make zero progress (unsurprisingly this gang of mentally ill perverts, drug addicts and social retards can never realise this no matter how often it happens). Let's see how much better than "dogshit" this slime can organize when he's not supported by teams of professional getting paid with Soros bucks or through the state department. Or maybe even with all those things but in an area where the police are hostile rather than supportive of their protesting.Replies: @Thulean Friend
You’re mistaken in only focusing on Antifa.
Rightoids are by nature authoritarians. And authoritarians like to follow rules, not break them.
How does power shift in society? There is only one way: a massive and sustained breaking of public taboos. For this to be successful, you first need a small set of ideological warriors willing to endure the condemnation of society by frankly not giving a damn and often relishing the outrage. As that group grows, it becomes easier for more people to break said taboos as the social price paid becomes less over time.
This puts a huge premium on an attitude that is contemptful of established norms.
You can even see these differences in how people dress. Rightoids are obsessed with optics, “looking good” and other petit bourgeois diversions. Left-wingers, by contrast, are much more likely to be dressed in whatever way we feel like it, and have a healthy skepticism of “good behaviour” that we view as stifling and even negative status. Such attitudes are inherently better suited at disrupting society and shaping it to our tastes.
Rightoids are just terrible revolutionaires and always have been. I think it is deeply embedded in your psyche and won’t ever change.
At any rate, the leftist immantization of religious insanity won't really get anywhere - certainly not the madness witnessed now - as it pretty much as concreted itself into masochism as a form of morality. Its not really very fun, and something you might not realize is that a lot of the younger Rightists came into the movement because a lot of what the Right offers(if often inconsistently) is rebellious and fun. Thus the "edgy" accusations.
In the end, any movement of anti-fun will self-destruct.Replies: @Thulean Friend, @AaronB, @another anon, @dfordoom
Rightists are people who think that casting a vote for a right-wing leader is as much of a revolutionary act as they'll ever need to commit.
Actually, it isn’t a mistake to focus on Antifa, and its amusing that you can’t even keep your mental state consistent enough in a single post. As you noted, it is the extremists that form the beachhead so that normie NPCs like yourself and then chitter along while pretending to feel like you’re breaking rules. The typical leftist is more of a self-preening bully fighting imaginary shadow giants with performative acts of deviance than any true rebel; this, in fact, can make some Antifa and even their handlers noble in their actual defiance, but certainly not hanger-ons like yourself.
At any rate, the leftist immantization of religious insanity won’t really get anywhere – certainly not the madness witnessed now – as it pretty much as concreted itself into masochism as a form of morality. Its not really very fun, and something you might not realize is that a lot of the younger Rightists came into the movement because a lot of what the Right offers(if often inconsistently) is rebellious and fun. Thus the “edgy” accusations.
In the end, any movement of anti-fun will self-destruct.
But isn't this why Western Civ is self-destructing now?
It stopped being fun sometime around the late 19th century, according to the artists, poets, and philosophers.
A single reading of Madame Bovary by Flaubert - one of the most celebrated books of its time - and a prescient man could have foreseen the statue toppling of 2012.
Or a single poem by Baudelair. Or a few pages out of any if Schopenhauer's or Kierkegaard's books. Or Sartre or Camus.
The list is endless.
But the idea that things die when they stop being fun can be used to examine any historical social change, quite fruitfully.
It's well known that Britain and Europe lost their colonies because they suddenly lost their will to keep them - Ghandi would have been helpless against a Britain that still had the heart to hold on.
If you look at how the colonies evolved, it started as this grand slapdash adventure by individuals not the government having the time of their lives. It wasn't even intentional. Then it got taken over by the government, heavily organized and regulated, English women began to be imported for marriage, (before that European men were having a ball with the local girls. William Dalrymple has a fun book on this), and it started to be about the "white man's burden" and the "mission civilatrice" - horrid, dull stuff!
And the people changed too. The early colonists were larger than life fascinating types - by Orwells time they were the squares, dullest petit-bourgeois types.
Or look at the ancient Greco-Roman world. Towards the end, culture had become extremely reasonable and rational, and writers were observing a general malaise over the entire ancient world. You had philosophies like Stoicism and Epicurianism offering nothing more than a tepid, lukewarm avoidance of pain (not that these philosophies don't contain some things that are very good and can be integrated into larger philosophies). Nietzsche thought that there would have been mass suicides if Christianity had not come to add some irrational zest to life.
Reams have been written on the fall of the Roman Empire - but in truth it died of boredom.
And what the heck was World War One if not just people being absolutely fed up with the stuffy boredom of the Victorian and Edwardian eras? Look at the so called "causes" historians have identified. Mere fig leafs. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand?!
All this being said, I am not so sure this bodes well for your point to Thulean.Replies: @Agathoklis, @dfordoom
Protesting, rioting and busting shit up on the streets is great fun - much better than sitting in your basement, shitposting, and shivering in fear you will be doxxed and your mom learns you are the infamous MightyKekmasterHero1488.
But you may be under-estimating Puritanism. It has its own appeal to many people. That delicious sense of self-righteousness and moral superiority - it's better than sex.
Puritans get their fun by depriving other people of fun.
At any rate, the leftist immantization of religious insanity won't really get anywhere - certainly not the madness witnessed now - as it pretty much as concreted itself into masochism as a form of morality. Its not really very fun, and something you might not realize is that a lot of the younger Rightists came into the movement because a lot of what the Right offers(if often inconsistently) is rebellious and fun. Thus the "edgy" accusations.
In the end, any movement of anti-fun will self-destruct.Replies: @Thulean Friend, @AaronB, @another anon, @dfordoom
I actually agree with him on Antifa – they’re essentially the sons and daughters of the upper-middle class – which is why I told him it’s a mistake to focus on them. They are just the NGO musclemen of the establishment, not the spearhead of a new ideological vanguard. Violence isn’t a successful political strategy, as I’ve underlined many times over. The fact that you confuse violence with “doing something” shows your own rightoid “might makes right” instincts.
We’re witnessing a glorious moral revolution right now. May it continue unhindered and unencumbered. Even reactionary and nerdy fantasy companies are being forced to adjust. Warhammer has taken steps in this direction and I am now pleased to see that D&D has followed suit in their discarding of ‘evil races‘.
I’m sure slavery was fun for the slavers, as well as treating women as chattel was for misogynists. The world didn’t self-destruct; it just got better. Ancient relics like yourself lost – and will keep losing.
As for slavery, it may not be officially called that, but there are more blacks in prison today than there were slaves in 1800's. They make panties for corporations and license plates for the government rather than working the field for cotton. Is it progress? Maybe. But I'm not sure the world got all that much better for them.
Women are at their most unhappiest ever, with sky-high antidepressant usage, especially for women in 40-50 age range. A quarter of them needs drugs to cope with their miserable reality.
Anyway, the world did get better, but not so much for the groups you mention.
Having responsibility for the lives of hundreds of blacks doesn’t sound very fun to me. But à chacun son goût.
People should fight back against the woke crap. Boycott woke businesses, shame woke bosses
Publicise appalling behaviour, particularly victimisation of people who just happen to be related to someone who said something against woke orthodoxy
There are way more wealthy white and Asian people, a bit of pressure on businesses can do some wonders. Lawfare also helps, crowd fund the victims to enable them to get justice
And a failed boycott is worse than no boycott because a failed boycott displays weakness.
They were there gay blokes on a picnic. One of them was my friend’s daughter’s history teacher, she is inconsolable, this shit is now personal
At any rate, the leftist immantization of religious insanity won't really get anywhere - certainly not the madness witnessed now - as it pretty much as concreted itself into masochism as a form of morality. Its not really very fun, and something you might not realize is that a lot of the younger Rightists came into the movement because a lot of what the Right offers(if often inconsistently) is rebellious and fun. Thus the "edgy" accusations.
In the end, any movement of anti-fun will self-destruct.Replies: @Thulean Friend, @AaronB, @another anon, @dfordoom
Very well said. I believe you have hit upon the motor of historical change.
But isn’t this why Western Civ is self-destructing now?
It stopped being fun sometime around the late 19th century, according to the artists, poets, and philosophers.
A single reading of Madame Bovary by Flaubert – one of the most celebrated books of its time – and a prescient man could have foreseen the statue toppling of 2012.
Or a single poem by Baudelair. Or a few pages out of any if Schopenhauer’s or Kierkegaard’s books. Or Sartre or Camus.
The list is endless.
But the idea that things die when they stop being fun can be used to examine any historical social change, quite fruitfully.
It’s well known that Britain and Europe lost their colonies because they suddenly lost their will to keep them – Ghandi would have been helpless against a Britain that still had the heart to hold on.
If you look at how the colonies evolved, it started as this grand slapdash adventure by individuals not the government having the time of their lives. It wasn’t even intentional. Then it got taken over by the government, heavily organized and regulated, English women began to be imported for marriage, (before that European men were having a ball with the local girls. William Dalrymple has a fun book on this), and it started to be about the “white man’s burden” and the “mission civilatrice” – horrid, dull stuff!
And the people changed too. The early colonists were larger than life fascinating types – by Orwells time they were the squares, dullest petit-bourgeois types.
Or look at the ancient Greco-Roman world. Towards the end, culture had become extremely reasonable and rational, and writers were observing a general malaise over the entire ancient world. You had philosophies like Stoicism and Epicurianism offering nothing more than a tepid, lukewarm avoidance of pain (not that these philosophies don’t contain some things that are very good and can be integrated into larger philosophies). Nietzsche thought that there would have been mass suicides if Christianity had not come to add some irrational zest to life.
Reams have been written on the fall of the Roman Empire – but in truth it died of boredom.
And what the heck was World War One if not just people being absolutely fed up with the stuffy boredom of the Victorian and Edwardian eras? Look at the so called “causes” historians have identified. Mere fig leafs. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand?!
All this being said, I am not so sure this bodes well for your point to Thulean.
As early as 1914 it was obvious that Britain could not afford to defend its empire. In the First World War their ally Japan defended the British Empire in the Far East. In the '20s Britain, under American pressure, cancelled the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. This was the worst foreign policy blunder in British history.Replies: @AaronB
I’m not sure about that. The world did get better, but for unrelated reasons I think. World got better because geeks figured out how to get rich and powerful. Geeks happen to be mostly white, and male, and Jewish with some Asians thrown in.
As for slavery, it may not be officially called that, but there are more blacks in prison today than there were slaves in 1800’s. They make panties for corporations and license plates for the government rather than working the field for cotton. Is it progress? Maybe. But I’m not sure the world got all that much better for them.
Women are at their most unhappiest ever, with sky-high antidepressant usage, especially for women in 40-50 age range. A quarter of them needs drugs to cope with their miserable reality.
Anyway, the world did get better, but not so much for the groups you mention.
Narrator voice: No one did anything at all.
https://twitter.com/rechelon/status/1274949340910489616Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Anatoly Karlin, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Philip Owen
But then, Brexit, the election of Trump, the maintenance of US gun culture.
As for guns, yes, on this issue the right prevailed.
https://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php
Why it happened? Why the gun nuts decisively won, while all other right wing causes decisively lost?
Because there is large mass movement on the ground, and LARGE BUSINESS INTEREST SUPPORTING THE CAUSE, because it directly and immediately profits from sales of guns.
Yes, you need both people on the ground and money to achieve anything at all.
Of course, in the bigger scale of things, the guns are just another consumer items that make no difference at all.
We all heard in our lives ton of gun nut propaganda that guns "defend our freedom".
Well, the numbers of guns in US rises every day.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/01/us/coronavirus-gun-sales-promo-1585789911452/coronavirus-gun-sales-promo-1585789911452-superJumbo.png
https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/S4RCv_HcDeQiQg1C4BvvwbaQlcE=/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost/public/5X2ZKNMFTE2QDNCZDDGRXGZTJA.png
Experts say that these official numbers are way underestimated, that the actual number of firearms in the United States is over 600 million, possibly over one billion.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161031054743/http://weaponsman.com/?p=33875
Where is the freedom the guns are supposed to defend? Is freedom in the United States on the rise?
If you ask the gun nuts more deeply, they will say that the guns make gun confiscation impossible, that the guns protect the freedom to own guns. The guns are not means to some end, but an end in itself.
And this is fine for them, because freedom to own guns is the only freedom they care for.Replies: @A123, @dfordoom
When you lose your balls…all is lost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1W7lx6IsnY
Perhaps Rep. Paul Gosar isn't some moral exemplar, but to have 2/3 of your siblings denounce you in public suggests, to me, a collapse in family values.
The politics in my family is as diverse as it gets -- ranging from hard-left to (semi) hard-right -- but there is no way my siblings or I would ever speak out against one another in public. That, to me, is a grave crime against everything civilization stands for -- no matter your politics -- and as a Russophile, my thoughts of course go to Pavlik Morozov:Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Ian Smith
Affluent white liberals love telling stories of their bigoted relatives at social gatherings. They will even throw their own blood under the bus to virtue signal.
This type of stuff may actually create an insular sub-culture and cause white americans to stop blindly trusting government.
Glad to hear. And here, I think, the taboo is even better grounded in folk wisdom than normal.
In America, perhaps, but none of the Swedish affluent white liberals I know act this way in public. This seems a disturbing American phenomenon.
True, but your assumption is clearly that “the rules” are a country’s body of laws. A more realistic view is that “the rules” are whatever rules the authoritarian finds legitimate — those of his brothers in arms, say.
This is a grossly reductionist idea of how to effect change. In reality, change — even great change — comes in many forms, some of them so subtle it takes a cat to sniff them out.
Absolute baloney. Leftists are every bit as into clothes as rightists — if not more. You would be surprised how many of them walk around in $200 t-shirts.
Half-true at best. Surely military coups count as revolutions? To say nothing of soft coups like industrialization, the managerial revolution, and the rise of private ownership (a great blow to left-wing politics).
Have done what exactly?
https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/1276128695661535234Replies: @Inselaffen, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @another anon
Yea. See the replies in your twitter thread.
Cope that Antifa are all paid by Soros (coz right wing cannot imagine someone not being mercenary)
Cope that Antifa have “bad genes” (what difference it makes? if they had “better genes” they would be even more succesful than they are?)
Daydreaming about torture, rape and killing of Antifa Pinochet style (you well know that you are not in 1970’s Chile. You know well that the armed forces and friendly three letter agencies are not on your side. If any military coup happens, it will be against you, it will be the alt-right who will be thrown off the helicopters)
All too typical right wing fantasies from the position of absolute powerlessness. Absolute zero interest in learning what Antifa is and what it does.
Also, and more to the point, it is quite evident that the same descendants are still extremely butt hurt about Pinochet, lol. All in all, it would probably have been better to destroy them in detail, like the Tamils were destroyed on Sri Lanka.Replies: @RSDB
You know well that Brexit and Trump made no difference at all.
As for guns, yes, on this issue the right prevailed.
https://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php
Why it happened? Why the gun nuts decisively won, while all other right wing causes decisively lost?
Because there is large mass movement on the ground, and LARGE BUSINESS INTEREST SUPPORTING THE CAUSE, because it directly and immediately profits from sales of guns.
Yes, you need both people on the ground and money to achieve anything at all.
Of course, in the bigger scale of things, the guns are just another consumer items that make no difference at all.
We all heard in our lives ton of gun nut propaganda that guns “defend our freedom”.
Well, the numbers of guns in US rises every day.
Experts say that these official numbers are way underestimated, that the actual number of firearms in the United States is over 600 million, possibly over one billion.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161031054743/http://weaponsman.com/?p=33875
Where is the freedom the guns are supposed to defend? Is freedom in the United States on the rise?
If you ask the gun nuts more deeply, they will say that the guns make gun confiscation impossible, that the guns protect the freedom to own guns. The guns are not means to some end, but an end in itself.
And this is fine for them, because freedom to own guns is the only freedom they care for.
______Here is a good example of a win for national security: (1)Borders are becoming meaningful again. Barack Hussein and his Globalist buddies must be crying in their soy lattes over this one.PEACE 😇
_______(1) https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2020/06/25/supreme-court-says-federal-courts-cannot-interfere-in-deportations/
The state has drones, surveillance satellites, stealth aircraft, attack helicopters, tanks. And the state has militarised police forces at its disposal. A redneck with an AR-15 presents zero threat to the state.Replies: @hulijo, @Pericles
They get really confused when the employee turns the tables.Replies: @another anon
Unfortunately, most workers are not like you. Most workers are cogs in the machine that can be easily replaced at will.
And if conservatives see any problem, it is the idea of “protected classes” and fight to abolish it and give the employers absolute freedom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group
Hopefully the conservatives will soon win on this cause too, so they can be all fired only for being straight white male christian boomers.
As for guns, yes, on this issue the right prevailed.
https://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php
Why it happened? Why the gun nuts decisively won, while all other right wing causes decisively lost?
Because there is large mass movement on the ground, and LARGE BUSINESS INTEREST SUPPORTING THE CAUSE, because it directly and immediately profits from sales of guns.
Yes, you need both people on the ground and money to achieve anything at all.
Of course, in the bigger scale of things, the guns are just another consumer items that make no difference at all.
We all heard in our lives ton of gun nut propaganda that guns "defend our freedom".
Well, the numbers of guns in US rises every day.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/01/us/coronavirus-gun-sales-promo-1585789911452/coronavirus-gun-sales-promo-1585789911452-superJumbo.png
https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/S4RCv_HcDeQiQg1C4BvvwbaQlcE=/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost/public/5X2ZKNMFTE2QDNCZDDGRXGZTJA.png
Experts say that these official numbers are way underestimated, that the actual number of firearms in the United States is over 600 million, possibly over one billion.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161031054743/http://weaponsman.com/?p=33875
Where is the freedom the guns are supposed to defend? Is freedom in the United States on the rise?
If you ask the gun nuts more deeply, they will say that the guns make gun confiscation impossible, that the guns protect the freedom to own guns. The guns are not means to some end, but an end in itself.
And this is fine for them, because freedom to own guns is the only freedom they care for.Replies: @A123, @dfordoom
Freedom is slowly coming back.
A great deal of freedom was stolen by anti-Constitution judges. Trump has now appointed 200 judges that believe in the Constitution.
Do not set unreasonably high expectations!!!.
There will never be 100% victory in every case. The true outcome is decided over time. Flipping “4 losses to 1 win” to “4 wins for 1 loss” will ratchet the nation back on course over the long haul.
______
Here is a good example of a win for national security: (1)
Borders are becoming meaningful again. Barack Hussein and his Globalist buddies must be crying in their soy lattes over this one.
PEACE 😇
_______
(1) https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2020/06/25/supreme-court-says-federal-courts-cannot-interfere-in-deportations/
Cope that Antifa are all paid by Soros (coz right wing cannot imagine someone not being mercenary)
Cope that Antifa have "bad genes" (what difference it makes? if they had "better genes" they would be even more succesful than they are?)
Daydreaming about torture, rape and killing of Antifa Pinochet style (you well know that you are not in 1970's Chile. You know well that the armed forces and friendly three letter agencies are not on your side. If any military coup happens, it will be against you, it will be the alt-right who will be thrown off the helicopters)
All too typical right wing fantasies from the position of absolute powerlessness. Absolute zero interest in learning what Antifa is and what it does.Replies: @Denis, @Pericles
What is it and what does it do?
It is no organization. It is a way of life.
If was not invented by Soros, it was there long before him and will be there after him.
It is not something you are, it is something you do.
If you are fighting fascism, you are Antifa.Antifa is fighting fascism by any means necessary.
Antifa monitors fascists, infitrates and disrupts fascist organizations.
Antifa organizes and does not allow fascists to organize.
Antifa does not allow fascists any presence on the streets.
Antifa help their comrades and support their prisoners.
Antifa learns from experience and shares succesful methods, tactics and strategies worldwide.
And Antifa is good at all these things.None of this stuff is any deeply guarded secret, but right wingers, for some rason, insist in staying completely ignorant.If you are not like them, if you want to learn how the radical left works and organize, start with these twitter accounts.@EvanPlatinum
@hradzkaReplies: @Pericles
At any rate, the leftist immantization of religious insanity won't really get anywhere - certainly not the madness witnessed now - as it pretty much as concreted itself into masochism as a form of morality. Its not really very fun, and something you might not realize is that a lot of the younger Rightists came into the movement because a lot of what the Right offers(if often inconsistently) is rebellious and fun. Thus the "edgy" accusations.
In the end, any movement of anti-fun will self-destruct.Replies: @Thulean Friend, @AaronB, @another anon, @dfordoom
If you watch Antifa in action, you will see they are enjoying themselves greatly.
Protesting, rioting and busting shit up on the streets is great fun – much better than sitting in your basement, shitposting, and shivering in fear you will be doxxed and your mom learns you are the infamous MightyKekmasterHero1488.
But isn't this why Western Civ is self-destructing now?
It stopped being fun sometime around the late 19th century, according to the artists, poets, and philosophers.
A single reading of Madame Bovary by Flaubert - one of the most celebrated books of its time - and a prescient man could have foreseen the statue toppling of 2012.
Or a single poem by Baudelair. Or a few pages out of any if Schopenhauer's or Kierkegaard's books. Or Sartre or Camus.
The list is endless.
But the idea that things die when they stop being fun can be used to examine any historical social change, quite fruitfully.
It's well known that Britain and Europe lost their colonies because they suddenly lost their will to keep them - Ghandi would have been helpless against a Britain that still had the heart to hold on.
If you look at how the colonies evolved, it started as this grand slapdash adventure by individuals not the government having the time of their lives. It wasn't even intentional. Then it got taken over by the government, heavily organized and regulated, English women began to be imported for marriage, (before that European men were having a ball with the local girls. William Dalrymple has a fun book on this), and it started to be about the "white man's burden" and the "mission civilatrice" - horrid, dull stuff!
And the people changed too. The early colonists were larger than life fascinating types - by Orwells time they were the squares, dullest petit-bourgeois types.
Or look at the ancient Greco-Roman world. Towards the end, culture had become extremely reasonable and rational, and writers were observing a general malaise over the entire ancient world. You had philosophies like Stoicism and Epicurianism offering nothing more than a tepid, lukewarm avoidance of pain (not that these philosophies don't contain some things that are very good and can be integrated into larger philosophies). Nietzsche thought that there would have been mass suicides if Christianity had not come to add some irrational zest to life.
Reams have been written on the fall of the Roman Empire - but in truth it died of boredom.
And what the heck was World War One if not just people being absolutely fed up with the stuffy boredom of the Victorian and Edwardian eras? Look at the so called "causes" historians have identified. Mere fig leafs. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand?!
All this being said, I am not so sure this bodes well for your point to Thulean.Replies: @Agathoklis, @dfordoom
Rubbish. There was plenty of irrationality in some of the theurgical aspects of Neoplatonism, in figures like Apollonius of Tyana and just everyday worship. I agree, that there needs to be an aspect of irrationality to life but boredom and too much rationality was not the downfall of the Greco-Roman world.
But the mainstream inherited cultural "synthesis" of the late Greco-Roman world prioritized rationality, reasonableness, organization. It had become too arid and dry, like today's "official" Western culture.
And the irrational elements found in Neoplatonism and the Mystery Cults were subsumed into Christianity - apparently on their own they were too weak medicine.
A new "synthesis" had to be formed.
Another element was that at a certain point maintaining the Roman Empire just got boring - conquering may be fun, maintaining an empire takes "responsibility" and seriousness - eventually that gets dull and humanity wants a new exciting adventure, which happened to be Christianity.
I really do think there is a pattern here - the early days of any social movement are an exciting adventure, then it gets about rules and regulations and seriousness, and gets boring and dies.
Look at science - in its early days it was this bold slapdash adventure of the mind, there were no rules - today, science is heavily codified and full of rules and regulations and best practices and methodical procedures - and utterly, utterly dull, which is why good science isn't done anymore.
No original brilliant mind will go into science with all its rules and methodical procedures - only mediocrities go into science these days.
That's natural. Right now we are in the process of destroying ossified social structures - thus preparing the way for the next adventure.
We will find a new adventure of the mind - a new science.
And the same for everything in society.
Of course, the transition period will probably be painful and unfortunately protracted.
Anglo-based cultures are the most advanced on the scale of distant familial relationships, transactional interpersonal relationships and low ethnocentricity which leads to this sort of behaviour. It may have initially aided them at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution but it will eventually be their undoing.
There were the Mystery Cults too.
But the mainstream inherited cultural “synthesis” of the late Greco-Roman world prioritized rationality, reasonableness, organization. It had become too arid and dry, like today’s “official” Western culture.
And the irrational elements found in Neoplatonism and the Mystery Cults were subsumed into Christianity – apparently on their own they were too weak medicine.
A new “synthesis” had to be formed.
Another element was that at a certain point maintaining the Roman Empire just got boring – conquering may be fun, maintaining an empire takes “responsibility” and seriousness – eventually that gets dull and humanity wants a new exciting adventure, which happened to be Christianity.
I really do think there is a pattern here – the early days of any social movement are an exciting adventure, then it gets about rules and regulations and seriousness, and gets boring and dies.
Look at science – in its early days it was this bold slapdash adventure of the mind, there were no rules – today, science is heavily codified and full of rules and regulations and best practices and methodical procedures – and utterly, utterly dull, which is why good science isn’t done anymore.
No original brilliant mind will go into science with all its rules and methodical procedures – only mediocrities go into science these days.
That’s natural. Right now we are in the process of destroying ossified social structures – thus preparing the way for the next adventure.
We will find a new adventure of the mind – a new science.
And the same for everything in society.
Of course, the transition period will probably be painful and unfortunately protracted.
I think there’s some truth in that. You’ve only got to look at the way rightists grovel to the police and the military.
I think there’s truth in that as well. If you look at “right-wing” revolutions they certainly weren’t led by people who would have identified as conservatives. Mussolini was a socialist and always considered himself to be a man of the Left. Successful “right-wing” and anti-communist revolutions have usually been an odd mixture of leftist and rightist tendencies. Or they’ve simply been military coups.
Rightists are people who think that casting a vote for a right-wing leader is as much of a revolutionary act as they’ll ever need to commit.
Antifa is worldwide antifascist movement.
It is no organization. It is a way of life.
If was not invented by Soros, it was there long before him and will be there after him.
It is not something you are, it is something you do.
If you are fighting fascism, you are Antifa.
Antifa is fighting fascism by any means necessary.
Antifa monitors fascists, infitrates and disrupts fascist organizations.
Antifa organizes and does not allow fascists to organize.
Antifa does not allow fascists any presence on the streets.
Antifa help their comrades and support their prisoners.
Antifa learns from experience and shares succesful methods, tactics and strategies worldwide.
And Antifa is good at all these things.
None of this stuff is any deeply guarded secret, but right wingers, for some rason, insist in staying completely ignorant.
If you are not like them, if you want to learn how the radical left works and organize, start with these twitter accounts.
@EvanPlatinum
@hradzka
https://status451.com/2017/11/11/radical-book-club-what-righties-can-do/
However, I get the impression that the lefties ran this game on easy mode, then pulled up the ladder after them. So now your organizations get infiltrated, subverted and/or legally banned with some regularity.Replies: @another anon
At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning,[1] as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's race, religion or sexuality).
In past bygone time, there used to be such things as "labor unions" that protected the workers.
Of course, defending rights of the workers is un-American.
Defending rights of the workers is COMMUNISM.
Brave conservatives fought communism and won.
Unions are gone. Communism lost. Capitalism won.
The capitalists can now treat the workers as they please, and this is what you have fighting for.
Enjoy your victory.Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Some Guy
At least one of these cases was in the UK though.
I’m sorry to hear that. I’m gay and was born in Britain. I heard Douglas Murray talk about this incident and it made me so angry that I feel like flying home right now and joining a nationalist group, just to feel like I’m doing something about all of this. There seems to be nobody that our ‘leaders’ aren’t willing to sacrifice at this altar of diversity. These crimes seem to hit closer to home every time. I just want to know when enough will be enough.
Publicise appalling behaviour, particularly victimisation of people who just happen to be related to someone who said something against woke orthodoxy
There are way more wealthy white and Asian people, a bit of pressure on businesses can do some wonders. Lawfare also helps, crowd fund the victims to enable them to get justiceReplies: @dfordoom
It won’t work. Firstly, because all businesses are now Woke. Secondly, normies won’t join a boycott. You’d need millions of people willing to boycott and what you have is a few hundred keyboard warriors who might actually participate in a boycott.
And a failed boycott is worse than no boycott because a failed boycott displays weakness.
At any rate, the leftist immantization of religious insanity won't really get anywhere - certainly not the madness witnessed now - as it pretty much as concreted itself into masochism as a form of morality. Its not really very fun, and something you might not realize is that a lot of the younger Rightists came into the movement because a lot of what the Right offers(if often inconsistently) is rebellious and fun. Thus the "edgy" accusations.
In the end, any movement of anti-fun will self-destruct.Replies: @Thulean Friend, @AaronB, @another anon, @dfordoom
There’s definitely at lot of Puritanism in the current movement. That’s why it’s centred in the U.S. – Puritanism is the defining characteristic of American society.
But you may be under-estimating Puritanism. It has its own appeal to many people. That delicious sense of self-righteousness and moral superiority – it’s better than sex.
Puritans get their fun by depriving other people of fun.
But isn't this why Western Civ is self-destructing now?
It stopped being fun sometime around the late 19th century, according to the artists, poets, and philosophers.
A single reading of Madame Bovary by Flaubert - one of the most celebrated books of its time - and a prescient man could have foreseen the statue toppling of 2012.
Or a single poem by Baudelair. Or a few pages out of any if Schopenhauer's or Kierkegaard's books. Or Sartre or Camus.
The list is endless.
But the idea that things die when they stop being fun can be used to examine any historical social change, quite fruitfully.
It's well known that Britain and Europe lost their colonies because they suddenly lost their will to keep them - Ghandi would have been helpless against a Britain that still had the heart to hold on.
If you look at how the colonies evolved, it started as this grand slapdash adventure by individuals not the government having the time of their lives. It wasn't even intentional. Then it got taken over by the government, heavily organized and regulated, English women began to be imported for marriage, (before that European men were having a ball with the local girls. William Dalrymple has a fun book on this), and it started to be about the "white man's burden" and the "mission civilatrice" - horrid, dull stuff!
And the people changed too. The early colonists were larger than life fascinating types - by Orwells time they were the squares, dullest petit-bourgeois types.
Or look at the ancient Greco-Roman world. Towards the end, culture had become extremely reasonable and rational, and writers were observing a general malaise over the entire ancient world. You had philosophies like Stoicism and Epicurianism offering nothing more than a tepid, lukewarm avoidance of pain (not that these philosophies don't contain some things that are very good and can be integrated into larger philosophies). Nietzsche thought that there would have been mass suicides if Christianity had not come to add some irrational zest to life.
Reams have been written on the fall of the Roman Empire - but in truth it died of boredom.
And what the heck was World War One if not just people being absolutely fed up with the stuffy boredom of the Victorian and Edwardian eras? Look at the so called "causes" historians have identified. Mere fig leafs. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand?!
All this being said, I am not so sure this bodes well for your point to Thulean.Replies: @Agathoklis, @dfordoom
Britain lost its colonies because Britain was broke and could not afford them, and because the U.S. had made it quite clear that it was not going to tolerate the existence of the British Empire. Britain had a choice – try to hold on to the Empire, or become a faithful vassal of the U.S. and they choose being a vassal because they thought it would be cheaper and they thought they’d be a junior partner in Anglo-American empire. They failed to understand that a lapdog or a slave is not the same as being a junior partner.
As early as 1914 it was obvious that Britain could not afford to defend its empire. In the First World War their ally Japan defended the British Empire in the Far East. In the ’20s Britain, under American pressure, cancelled the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. This was the worst foreign policy blunder in British history.
In the period between the wars, when Orwell was writing, the entire English intellectual class, which was Left wing, turned against Empire - the majority, at least.
So for me that is an interesting psychological question. And if you read Orwell, you will see that the business of empire had lost all its glamour and had become very dull and petit-bourgeouis.
Orwell, and other writers from the period, also document an increasing loss of nerve on the part of British administrators and soldiers - an increasing unwillingness to take the risks needed to do their job.
So I'm trying to analyze why that is, and if there are larger human patterns we can fit this into. Things start out like a glamorous adventure, then become full of rules and very settled and ordinary and petty, and the best people lose interest.
I think this is a recurring pattern.
As for guns, yes, on this issue the right prevailed.
https://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php
Why it happened? Why the gun nuts decisively won, while all other right wing causes decisively lost?
Because there is large mass movement on the ground, and LARGE BUSINESS INTEREST SUPPORTING THE CAUSE, because it directly and immediately profits from sales of guns.
Yes, you need both people on the ground and money to achieve anything at all.
Of course, in the bigger scale of things, the guns are just another consumer items that make no difference at all.
We all heard in our lives ton of gun nut propaganda that guns "defend our freedom".
Well, the numbers of guns in US rises every day.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/01/us/coronavirus-gun-sales-promo-1585789911452/coronavirus-gun-sales-promo-1585789911452-superJumbo.png
https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/S4RCv_HcDeQiQg1C4BvvwbaQlcE=/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost/public/5X2ZKNMFTE2QDNCZDDGRXGZTJA.png
Experts say that these official numbers are way underestimated, that the actual number of firearms in the United States is over 600 million, possibly over one billion.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161031054743/http://weaponsman.com/?p=33875
Where is the freedom the guns are supposed to defend? Is freedom in the United States on the rise?
If you ask the gun nuts more deeply, they will say that the guns make gun confiscation impossible, that the guns protect the freedom to own guns. The guns are not means to some end, but an end in itself.
And this is fine for them, because freedom to own guns is the only freedom they care for.Replies: @A123, @dfordoom
Because it’s not the 18th century any more. The idea that guns in private hands protects freedom or prevents tyranny is so naïve and childish that only right-wingers (who live in a fantasy world) could believe it.
The state has drones, surveillance satellites, stealth aircraft, attack helicopters, tanks. And the state has militarised police forces at its disposal. A redneck with an AR-15 presents zero threat to the state.
As early as 1914 it was obvious that Britain could not afford to defend its empire. In the First World War their ally Japan defended the British Empire in the Far East. In the '20s Britain, under American pressure, cancelled the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. This was the worst foreign policy blunder in British history.Replies: @AaronB
I’m talking about something else.
In the period between the wars, when Orwell was writing, the entire English intellectual class, which was Left wing, turned against Empire – the majority, at least.
So for me that is an interesting psychological question. And if you read Orwell, you will see that the business of empire had lost all its glamour and had become very dull and petit-bourgeouis.
Orwell, and other writers from the period, also document an increasing loss of nerve on the part of British administrators and soldiers – an increasing unwillingness to take the risks needed to do their job.
So I’m trying to analyze why that is, and if there are larger human patterns we can fit this into. Things start out like a glamorous adventure, then become full of rules and very settled and ordinary and petty, and the best people lose interest.
I think this is a recurring pattern.
That’s nonsense. I actually was pretty deep in with anti-fa people. If anyone is telling you that a chaotic bunch of hopeful heroes can change the world, he’s trying to sell you something or have sex with you.
Anti-fa ultimately operates like any other organization: there’s money involved. No – this doesn’t mean that they’re being paid for it, the minions are essentially “marginal people” by kind words and scum by any realistic reckoning. They do draw some hanger-ons by idealizing some sort of romantic thing, but by and large, they get just enough funding for room, board, medical care and legal services.
And they don’t ask questions about it.
Because like any other thugs, they’re ultimately in it for the adventure, the romance and to break and hurt things – and many of them are mentally ill or retarded, too. That they might be actually the catspaw of other individuals doesn’t concern them, and if anything, they feel a lot of warmth toward “organizations” that protect them. They live in a weird fantasyland of struggle, truly believing themselves oppressed, that they are subject to government kidnappings, and highly warped by the flow of drugs that they consume. Again, they don’t ask too many questions about it.
By all means, it is indeed an amazing thing to be able to weaponize such marginal people. The Right can and should learn the ability to organize, the ability to supply funds and so on(and in fact, this is what terrorist organizations do, and so in many ways, anti-fa is really little different from a lot of terrorist organizations). But its silly to truly believe that they are just a bunch of decentralized whackos that just happen to always be there and accomplish things. A Rightist version of them, frankly, would be ISIS.
The blood of armies is money. And the Right is anemic, perhaps due to the venial concerns indicated – I think Soros is the devil but I can also see and admire that he actually does seem to want to change the world. With his money.
But let’s not get confused and think that anything isn’t about the money.
Your comments on antifa are very interesting, please keep them up in as much detail as you can supply without doxxing yourself.
A few weeks ago I heard that antifa/BLM (by the way, do you know to what extent, if any, these overlap?) were using Tinder prostitution to raise money; I checked, and at least in the case of BLM there seems to be some truth to this. Not prostitution outright, but claiming to sell nude pictures, dates, etc.; I have no idea anyway if these were bots or real people. But very bizarre.Replies: @Daniel Chieh
The state has drones, surveillance satellites, stealth aircraft, attack helicopters, tanks. And the state has militarised police forces at its disposal. A redneck with an AR-15 presents zero threat to the state.Replies: @hulijo, @Pericles
Guns might not mean much against the government, but they mean a lot when the government is falling apart or has disintegrated.
If it does happen all those guns will just make the resulting bloodbath worse. Remember, if the government disintegrates all those drones and attack helicopters and heavily armed soldiers are not going to just disappear. They're going to fall into the hands of successor quasi-governments or warlords. The rednecks with pickup trucks and AR-15s are not going to stand a chance.
In the unlikely event the US politically fragments the end result will be much like the Warlord Era in China (roughly 1916 to 1928). There will be rival armies fighting it out. Rival armies with aircraft, drones, helicopters, artillery, mortars, heavy machine guns. And trained disciplined troops. Those rednecks with pickup trucks and AR-15s will be just a greasy stain on the ground. Any civilian carrying a gun will be a dead civilian within seconds of encountering a warlord army.
The far right and the gun nuts need to give up their silly fantasies.Replies: @LB
Were you replying to someone or was this in reply to the original post?
Your comments on antifa are very interesting, please keep them up in as much detail as you can supply without doxxing yourself.
A few weeks ago I heard that antifa/BLM (by the way, do you know to what extent, if any, these overlap?) were using Tinder prostitution to raise money; I checked, and at least in the case of BLM there seems to be some truth to this. Not prostitution outright, but claiming to sell nude pictures, dates, etc.; I have no idea anyway if these were bots or real people. But very bizarre.
Your comments on antifa are very interesting, please keep them up in as much detail as you can supply without doxxing yourself.
A few weeks ago I heard that antifa/BLM (by the way, do you know to what extent, if any, these overlap?) were using Tinder prostitution to raise money; I checked, and at least in the case of BLM there seems to be some truth to this. Not prostitution outright, but claiming to sell nude pictures, dates, etc.; I have no idea anyway if these were bots or real people. But very bizarre.Replies: @Daniel Chieh
Reply was to “another anon” but link broke while poasting. I wouldn’t be surprised by any of that. They are very aware of getting funds for their goals. They use drug money; what’s prostitution to them?
The chances of the government falling apart or disintegrating are very very slim.
If it does happen all those guns will just make the resulting bloodbath worse. Remember, if the government disintegrates all those drones and attack helicopters and heavily armed soldiers are not going to just disappear. They’re going to fall into the hands of successor quasi-governments or warlords. The rednecks with pickup trucks and AR-15s are not going to stand a chance.
In the unlikely event the US politically fragments the end result will be much like the Warlord Era in China (roughly 1916 to 1928). There will be rival armies fighting it out. Rival armies with aircraft, drones, helicopters, artillery, mortars, heavy machine guns. And trained disciplined troops. Those rednecks with pickup trucks and AR-15s will be just a greasy stain on the ground. Any civilian carrying a gun will be a dead civilian within seconds of encountering a warlord army.
The far right and the gun nuts need to give up their silly fantasies.
If it does happen all those guns will just make the resulting bloodbath worse. Remember, if the government disintegrates all those drones and attack helicopters and heavily armed soldiers are not going to just disappear. They're going to fall into the hands of successor quasi-governments or warlords. The rednecks with pickup trucks and AR-15s are not going to stand a chance.
In the unlikely event the US politically fragments the end result will be much like the Warlord Era in China (roughly 1916 to 1928). There will be rival armies fighting it out. Rival armies with aircraft, drones, helicopters, artillery, mortars, heavy machine guns. And trained disciplined troops. Those rednecks with pickup trucks and AR-15s will be just a greasy stain on the ground. Any civilian carrying a gun will be a dead civilian within seconds of encountering a warlord army.
The far right and the gun nuts need to give up their silly fantasies.Replies: @LB
I think this assumes that civilians will remain scattered and disorganised. There’s a reason the 2nd amendment references militia. A single armed civilian wouldn’t do any good against a junta, but entire militia armies in the fly-over states would. Not that such a situation is likely to happen.
And even with training, organisation, money and leadership how long would a militia army last without air support, artillery and the kinds of sophisticated command and control systems the military has? My guess is, about half an hour.
Irregular military forces have been successful, but only when they're well led, highly disciplined, very highly motivated, have widespread support from the locals and a willingness to die for the cause.
Which ain't gonna happen.Yes, I agree completely.
Cope that Antifa are all paid by Soros (coz right wing cannot imagine someone not being mercenary)
Cope that Antifa have "bad genes" (what difference it makes? if they had "better genes" they would be even more succesful than they are?)
Daydreaming about torture, rape and killing of Antifa Pinochet style (you well know that you are not in 1970's Chile. You know well that the armed forces and friendly three letter agencies are not on your side. If any military coup happens, it will be against you, it will be the alt-right who will be thrown off the helicopters)
All too typical right wing fantasies from the position of absolute powerlessness. Absolute zero interest in learning what Antifa is and what it does.Replies: @Denis, @Pericles
As it happens, Sweden took in the Chilean red trash when they had to run. At this point in time, their descendants are of course woke and hating on Sweden and Swedes according to the US academic schema, so I guess that was yet another great decision by Olof Palme back in the day.
Also, and more to the point, it is quite evident that the same descendants are still extremely butt hurt about Pinochet, lol. All in all, it would probably have been better to destroy them in detail, like the Tamils were destroyed on Sri Lanka.
It is no organization. It is a way of life.
If was not invented by Soros, it was there long before him and will be there after him.
It is not something you are, it is something you do.
If you are fighting fascism, you are Antifa.Antifa is fighting fascism by any means necessary.
Antifa monitors fascists, infitrates and disrupts fascist organizations.
Antifa organizes and does not allow fascists to organize.
Antifa does not allow fascists any presence on the streets.
Antifa help their comrades and support their prisoners.
Antifa learns from experience and shares succesful methods, tactics and strategies worldwide.
And Antifa is good at all these things.None of this stuff is any deeply guarded secret, but right wingers, for some rason, insist in staying completely ignorant.If you are not like them, if you want to learn how the radical left works and organize, start with these twitter accounts.@EvanPlatinum
@hradzkaReplies: @Pericles
David Hines (aka hradzka) wrote a couple of good articles on classical political organizing. For example:
https://status451.com/2017/11/11/radical-book-club-what-righties-can-do/
However, I get the impression that the lefties ran this game on easy mode, then pulled up the ladder after them. So now your organizations get infiltrated, subverted and/or legally banned with some regularity.
How many right wing protests were shot with artillery and machine guns?
How many blacklisted right wing people starved to death?Why the left won? Because it offered something worth fighting and dying for, because it could attract smart and educated people (we are on HBDIQ blog, we are all aware about the importance of IQ) and because it was able to organize.For typical example of worthless loserdom of modern right "dissidents", see just this.https://twitter.com/groypenberg/status/1276577172094926849Replies: @Pericles
The state has drones, surveillance satellites, stealth aircraft, attack helicopters, tanks. And the state has militarised police forces at its disposal. A redneck with an AR-15 presents zero threat to the state.Replies: @hulijo, @Pericles
On the other hand, the goat herders seem to have the upper hand against the army of the future.
Also, and more to the point, it is quite evident that the same descendants are still extremely butt hurt about Pinochet, lol. All in all, it would probably have been better to destroy them in detail, like the Tamils were destroyed on Sri Lanka.Replies: @RSDB
The Tamils are still there, it’s usually not necessary to entirely exterminate an ethnic group to crush a rebellion.
For the interested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Sri_Lankan_Army_Northern_offensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_Civil_War
(I'm not sure how correctly Wikipedia reports on this but the basic facts at least seem familiar.)Replies: @RSDB
This was a long-running affair of 26 years where negotiations and peace agreements had failed, which ended with crushing the Tamil Tigers rather than letting them surrender. But you’re right in that the tamils are still around. (If nothing else, there are plenty of them in India.) And complaining.
For the interested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Sri_Lankan_Army_Northern_offensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_Civil_War
(I’m not sure how correctly Wikipedia reports on this but the basic facts at least seem familiar.)
Wikipedia is not bad; it reflects generally the official view.There are plenty of them in Sri Lanka; despite emigration and deaths the Tamil population rose (in absolute numbers) all through the war years.
For the interested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Sri_Lankan_Army_Northern_offensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_Civil_War
(I'm not sure how correctly Wikipedia reports on this but the basic facts at least seem familiar.)Replies: @RSDB
26 years is counting from 1983 which is an interesting decision. Not a bad one I guess if you have to draw the line somewhere.
Wikipedia is not bad; it reflects generally the official view.
There are plenty of them in Sri Lanka; despite emigration and deaths the Tamil population rose (in absolute numbers) all through the war years.
Sure, but entire militia armies would require training, organisation, money and leadership. The far right is not capable of any of those things.
And even with training, organisation, money and leadership how long would a militia army last without air support, artillery and the kinds of sophisticated command and control systems the military has? My guess is, about half an hour.
Irregular military forces have been successful, but only when they’re well led, highly disciplined, very highly motivated, have widespread support from the locals and a willingness to die for the cause.
Which ain’t gonna happen.
Yes, I agree completely.
https://status451.com/2017/11/11/radical-book-club-what-righties-can-do/
However, I get the impression that the lefties ran this game on easy mode, then pulled up the ladder after them. So now your organizations get infiltrated, subverted and/or legally banned with some regularity.Replies: @another anon
LOL. As David Hines said many times, any persecution the right wingers face now is child’s play in comparison what the left faced in 19th century, when it definitely was not on the establishmen’s side.
How many right wingers were shot or beated to death by cops or Pinkertons? Only few idiots who were playing Rambo and shooting at the cops first.
How many right wing protests were shot with artillery and machine guns?
How many blacklisted right wing people starved to death?
Why the left won? Because it offered something worth fighting and dying for, because it could attract smart and educated people (we are on HBDIQ blog, we are all aware about the importance of IQ) and because it was able to organize.
For typical example of worthless loserdom of modern right “dissidents”, see just this.
https://twitter.com/groypenberg/status/1276577172094926849
How many right wing protests were shot with artillery and machine guns?
How many blacklisted right wing people starved to death?Why the left won? Because it offered something worth fighting and dying for, because it could attract smart and educated people (we are on HBDIQ blog, we are all aware about the importance of IQ) and because it was able to organize.For typical example of worthless loserdom of modern right "dissidents", see just this.https://twitter.com/groypenberg/status/1276577172094926849Replies: @Pericles
True, the right lacks willingness to fight and die for its principles. A few suicide vests going off among the antifa and maybe they’d go home, for example. But note that it’s not like Hines’ examples show how to set up a Paris Commune or something. They are about setting up and growing street political organizations in a condition of benign neglect by authorities.