Few understand this idea; Leftists obviously refuse to, and Rightists just do not seem to be able to grasp the subtlety. If one is anti-diversity, it is a recognition that any diversity is toxic. This is not a veiled stab at African-Americans, gypsies or Jews; it is pure logic applied: if more than one group exists in the same place, no group will be able to define the values of that place, and therefore, a constant internal dissent — a type of background hum — will pervade all activities. Eventually that civilization will tear itself apart. Robert Putnam’s research on diversity is just the tip of the iceberg; diversity lowers social trust. It also destroys the ability to have culture, standards or values other than the lowest common denominator, which makes no one happy, and makes all minority groups feel subjugated and the majority feel parasitized. No one with a functional brain thinks that diversity can work, which makes you wonder why the Left insists that it does. The answer is that they want to destroy culture, heritage and standards so that the individual alone is the focus, and diversity is a means to that end. They will then need Big Government to constrain the resulting anarchy and be amazed when that ends in totalitarian Communism, as if they could not have predicted that. Then again, when your political platform begins with denying reality in order to destroy social order, you have cast aside any hope of understanding the consequences of any actions and the effects of any cause.
For your amusement, an early proto-Outliers. The null reaction to these convinced me to never do linkposts again. Should this continue? Answer in the comments, if you have a moment.
It is time we recognize the true goal of egalitarianism: legitimizing mediocrity. To hide this fact, they always argue from the extremes, so that we are presented with a blind retarded gay minority orphan with irritable bowel syndrome and told that if he cannot experience freedom, none of us have freedom, so everyone must change to the standard that allows blind retarded gay minority orphans with colon disease to serve as the form factor for which society is designed. What they really mean is that they want morally neutral, indecisive, and not particularly insightful people of no particular ability to be able to beat down the ones with particular abilities and high levels of intelligence, beauty and moral character. Liberals are the people in the middle, who are not suffering but also have nothing distinctive to put next to their names, therefore are always ranging and hungry like a wolf with AIDS. They want to destroy anything which has risen above a C level activity, and then declare that really well-executed C-level thinking is A-level work. They will replace all heroes with fakes, all artists with entertainers, and otherwise turn everything they touch into mediocrity. Only when hidden in a vast sea of mediocrity can they feel their personal mediocrity will not be noticed, and it is this fear and resentment that propels them.
It can be explained at its simplest and most central as being the triumph of nature over human intentions. Natural methods work because they are reality-based, finely granular and use resonant or balanced internal structures. Human intentions work on the level of appearance, not so much symbols as social gestures to one another. This creates a death spiral where people “must” and “should” do what gives a group of people warm fuzzies, even though they know it is insane, and in the process it drives them insane. For centuries or longer this has been eating the West because of Western success at civilization enabling the population that would otherwise die off to thrive. We now have some good people and many useless ones, and if Western Civilization is to survive, the useless must be disenfranchised and dispossessed and the good must triumph. This is how it is in nature: the wolf who leads the pack is the strongest, and the trees that rise the highest are the healthiest. Leftism is a movement to sabotage this natural process and its implicit hierarchy and standards by demanding tolerance for that which is unrealistic through the process of “equality,” which makes wrong equal to right so long as a person “believes” that wrong. After WWII, this movement took over the West, and the alt right is the first credible pushback because it is honest, atavistic and naturalistic.
My appreciation to all who have purchased the book, written about it or mentioned it to others, online or off. For those who are interested in interviewing me, please write to brett -at- amerika.org and send along your questions. To those who have it coming in the mail, I fervently hope you enjoy it!
My first published book, Nihilism: A Philosophy Based In Nothingness and Eternity, has been released by Manticore Press and is available for purchase through Amazon. This allows you to receive a copy printed in your home country and avoid expensive international shipping, which otherwise would exceed the price of the book.
The publisher and I worked together to keep the price reasonable at $16.95 for the paperback version, which is the lowest we can go without cutting out publisher rewards entirely. It was exceptionally good of Manticore Press and its staff to invest so much time, caring and good will in this book. I hope you all enjoy it.
For those who write, there are at least two types of success: popularity and accuracy. There is an inverse relationship between the two but a sweet spot — a relatively narrow spot, and never ensuring Kardashian-level popularity — exists.
This fragile balance however easily disturbs itself because the writer will experience massive pressure to “succeed,” generally at the expense of only a little bit of accuracy at first, much as when writing a sentence a writer can opt to make the sentence simpler, punchier and more flavorful at the price of introducing inexactitude.
At first, the writer may sacrifice perhaps ten percent accuracy and relevance and substitute it with what makes writing popular, which is (literally) more of the same stuff that people always like to read: sex, violence, scapegoating, victimhood, one-dimensional morality plays, hype. But over time the percentage increases because the audience is mostly driven by the filler instead of the content, and stop rewarding it, at the same time any audience concerned with content drops out.
This blog has avoided the sweet spot for this reason and opts instead to be an internal dialogue for all critics of the human tendency toward illusion. Its goal is not to popularize these ideas, but to float them to those who will popularize them, which has been successful over the years (writings on this site include versions of texts developed in the late 1980s).
The payoff of this approach is that the filter of communication is reduced, and the ability to be exact is increased, which fits with the mission to diagnose human illusion and explain why it is wrong and produces bad consequences.
This means that our writers do not hand people the appearance they seek, visually or in the arguments advanced. People expect certain clusters of ideas to clump together and form a football team style “side,” and then to bang the tin drum about them and cheer and use those ideas to imply that other people are morons.
Here a different approach is taken, which is to recognize that all of us humans are morons by nature — or rather, monkeys, sometimes with car keys — who can improve ourselves by understanding ourselves, and through that our world, and finally, the options available for our purpose.
Some of our coming articles are a bit rough, especially for those on the right. Conventions will be violated, convenient explanations debunked, and holy cows spit-roasted with jalapeno sauce. Then again, if you are reading here, you expect nothing less.