Amerika

Posts Tagged ‘the narrative’

Watching the Establishment Unite Against Us, Western People Are Turning to the Alt Right

Saturday, August 26th, 2017

The media had one gamble after Charlottseville: portray the Alt Right as horrible Nazis, drive the herd into a frenzy, and hope that this would settle the issue.

It did not.

Instead, the memory hole closed. The media wanted us to believe that a crazed Nazi had deliberately run down innocent Leftist protesters, but as it turned out, the Antifa “et al” were initiating the violence, and the car terrorist was a scared mentally unstable young man trying to escape as people beat his car with flagpoles, bricks and bottles.

And so the narrative collapsed.

Betting on this narrative, however, the Left embarked on a program of removing the Alt Right from the internet, and this backfired spectacularly as ordinary people realized that they prefer free speech to a neo-Communist dictatorship where all thought except the egalitarian Leftist ideology is excluded.

Recent polls suggest that Americans prefer free speech to “safe speech”, which shows their reaction to the crusade against the Alt Right as negative:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that an overwhelming 85% of American Adults think giving people the right to free speech is more important than making sure no one is offended by what others say.

…Seventy-three percent (73%) agree with the famous line by the 18th century French author Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Just 28% of Americans believe they have true freedom of speech today, and most think the country is too politically correct.

These numbers remain consistent with those in the past, but the bigger point is this: the biggest media blitz in recent history tried to change this perception and failed utterly in doing so. In other words, the Establishment of the media, academia, Leftists in government and the vast horde of SJWs and SWPLs out there are on the wrong side of history. People want fairness over political correctness.

This manifested in a number of ripple effects, including the fall of those who helped in the purge, showing that because the consumer base is against the Leftist pogrom, companies are following what their customers desire:

GoDaddy CEO Blake Irving, who reshaped the domain-name company over five years and helped it double revenue and quadrupled its market value to $9 billion, is retiring.

…“It’s been a long time — a lot of boots on the ground battling that takes its toll,” said Irving, 58, who last week dropped a neo-Nazi site, The Daily Stormer, from GoDaddy’s service.

“I had an unbalanced work life,” says Irving. “It’s time to focus on (the non-work) part of my life, which I haven’t done well.”

This sort of snapback does not occur unless the action taken by the CEO has failed, and Irving’s choice to join the group of companies like Google, Facebook, Paypal, Reddit and Twitter in using Charlottesville as a pretext for cracking down on the Alt Right has seemingly hurt him. In doing so, he joins Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who stepped down after making SJW/SWPL a cornerstone of his tenure, which came back to bite him in the plump regions after Donald Trump won the election. The shareholders and management committee knew what Schultz did not: that a seismic shift or sea change had occurred in public attitudes.

A similar shift has occurred with the Alt Right. People may not like them, but they see them as the extreme which will preserve the ability not to join the Leftist cult. The media bet on America being horrified by the display of neo-Nazi symbols and the car crash, which they referred to as “terrorism,” but not enough people outside of “the base” were convinced, and so the narrative turned back on the Establishment comprised of media, entertainment, academia and lower government (MEAL) because ordinary people want free speech and they want the right to quietly dissent from the Leftist narrative and not to be forced to participate in what they see as Soviet-style insanity.

It takes some backtracking to figure out how we got to this point. As always, the voters get played by extremes, and the media hyped up a full-on tirade against George W. Bush and, thanks to connections in entertainment, became very powerful. The voters, believing CNN as if it were law, ran to the opposite extreme and elected Barack Obama. Eight years later, they found themselves regretting it: society had become re-ordered to take from the white middle class and give it to the brown underclass, all while elevating Leftists to positions of power and summoning an army of SJWs, Antifa, SWPLs, Anarchists, BLM, etc. who waged public vandalism riots on our cities with the hope of scaring the middle class into giving over whatever the Left sought at that moment.

This approach worked with Obergfell, Ferguson and transgender bathrooms. But at this point, even the slow people were getting the point: none of these issues were about the actual issue, but instead, they were about destroying the power to avoid having Leftism invade your life. This is about total control, because the Left knows that when they get permanent power by ensuring that they will win every election, they can do as Clinton and Obama did and sell favors based on the expectation of their future power.

Voters found this fatiguing. Salaries were flat, unemployment was not terrible but no one was getting promoted and many were working jobs below their capacity, the economy was fake and flattening, and yet the media kept telling us that things were better than ever before. Then the shocks came: a debt raised by $10 trillion, falling American prestige and influence, corruption popping up at every level, and government always pushing another ideological agenda.

People elected Barack Obama for the same reason that they voted for William Jefferson Clinton: they wanted an end to the racial tension that has been a problem in America since the Civil War. They figured that by electing people who were sympathetic to blacks, they could avoid future violence. As it turned out, Obama had more race riots on his watch than Bush, because once you promise to be pro-black, any deviation is cause for alarm, while someone like Bush was seen as just acting for his constituency, no matter how many nice things he tried to do for black people. Despite more welfare, affirmative action and diversity propaganda than ever before, diversity still wasn’t working!

At the same time, people lost faith in the Establishment. When the press tells you things that you can see with your own two eyes are false, then you stop believing that the press is anything other than what it is, which is a for-profit industry which sells whatever sleaze and bad news it can, all while protecting its allies and business partners by printing bucketloads of propaganda. The press seemed to be our savior in the 1960s, but that image fell in the 2010s, and now, most people see it as a predatory business. Americans no longer trust the press, government, non-profits or academia, which leaves us few institutions to respect, indeed.

All of these institutions have failed. Academia got greedy, and used government money and easy degrees to sell college to a massive number of people who should never have been there in the first place; non-profits and the press became cheerleaders for a Leftist agenda that appeared to be shared by most people who worked for the government, and government was taken over by those who desired power for its own sake or at least to profit from it, and since Leftism justifies intrusion into every area of life to make sure that we are all “equal,” government swung Left and expanded massively both in its own size, and in the degree to which it created requirements for businesses and citizens, such that government compliance became an industry in itself.

The same thing was happening in Europe, where politicians imported third world people so that those could be worked and taxed to pay for the retirement benefits owed to the Baby Boomer generation. It seemed that our economies had become dominated by government, where it did things to force people to react to them, then taxed everyone and paid that out in benefits in order to keep the Keynesian pump primed, resulting in a tax-spend cycle which produced constant growth along with a steady lessening in actual wages and currency value. This circular Ponzi scheme originated during the JFK and Clinton years, and seemed to work until it collapsed on a ten-year cycle, leaving a Republican to inherit the mess and get blamed for it.

To those who survived the last few decades, the combination of taxing, spending, social benefits and strong ideological governments reminded us of something we do not like, which is the failed idea of Leftist Socialism, a mental cancer which takes prosperous, happy places and turns them into desolate, impoverished and architecturally bleak wastelands:

After reunification, East Germany’s GDP per capita was just one third of the West German level. The poorest West German region, Schleswig-Holstein, was still two and a half times as rich as the richest East German region, Saxony. Every other available indicator of economic performance (productivity, capital intensity…) shows a similar gap. There was a three-year gap in life expectancy as well.

The cost of cleaning up the mess left behind by socialism has been colossal. Net fiscal transfers from West to East Germany since 1990 add up to €1.9 trillion (in today’s prices), which is roughly equivalent to the GDP of Britain.

Add to that the human cost associated with over four decades of totalitarian rule – the imprisonment of dissidents, the shooting of people attempting to commit Republikflucht (=’desertion from the republic’, i.e. emigration), censorship, surveillance etc. – and you can make a fairly strong case against socialism.

Americans realized with great shock that they had fallen prey to soft totalitarianism, a newer version of what the Left imposed on people in the last generation through Communism. Now, censorship is done through angry mobs of citizens in the streets or private companies like Google, and the press is compliant because it gets leaks that way but is not strictly “government controlled,” and people are not thrown into gulags so much as they are denied opportunities which are regulated by government and popular opinion. The media became the conductor of this orchestra, and frequently destroyed lives of those who said something that was not “politically correct,” or in other words conforming to the narrative of equality, diversity, pluralism, entitlements and wealth redistribution.

Into this void came the Alt Right, who opposed both the Leftism of the post-Soviet era and the ineffectual “Right-wing” parties that had done nothing to stop it over the past six decades. By raising a principled objection and using aggressive humor to point out the utter stupidity and failure of our current way of life, not just the government but the values we have adopted, the Alt Right shot to the front of the line by addressing the actual concerns of people while government chased increasingly eclectic ideological concerns. People might not like the Alt Right, but they like how it has thwarted the path of decay that the Left under Hillary Clinton saw as a “sure bet.”

In the days after Charlottesville, the Left made a massive miscalculation, and by embarking on a regimen of censorship and oppression, made themselves look exactly like the Communists and Jacobites that the people of America and Europe feared that they were. While the Left was talking about bad optics for the Alt Right, the real bad optics were for the Left, who acted like blindly rigid and doctrinaire Leftist ideologues like we remembered from East Germany and other Socialist success stories. This just underscores our fear that our entire system is actually, contrary to what it tells us, extremely fragile and tottering over the abyss.

People now want to go back to the point before we went down this path. They are excited about the America of the 1980s and 1950s because those are the two most recent cases of respite from the steady Leftizing of everything. Even more, some are starting to realize that the assumptions upon which modern Western government are based — individualism and equality from The Renaissance™ and The Enlightenment™ — are wrong and lead to an endless cycle of shuttling between Right and Left versions of the same style of government. This means that we never get what we need, and spend all of our energy on the big football game of polarized politics.

Now that the Left is making further missteps by censoring non-Rightists for saying true things that the Right might use, resistance is growing. More than ever, people in the West realize that we are living under the nu-Soviet regime, and that our only escape is to remove the idea of equality that gives it perceived legitimacy, and seems to cordycept people and make them chase it to their doom, simply because like “world peace” it is an idea that seems to solve all problems, even when by removing conflict it creates regression toward the mean.

Another word for that regression is “randomness,” as it means when applied to groups:

But none of these had any major impact on our study’s results. Regression to the mean can be thought of as an application of a statistical concept called the Central Limit Theorem, which mathematically describes the average tendency for any measurable process controlled by random forces to orbit a central (mean) value. In other words, if one tries to measure some attribute on multiple occasions, and that attribute is governed by random forces, then the measurements will tend to hover around an average value. When one tosses a pair of dice, for example, the sum of the two dice tends to be seven. Regression to the mean simply means that a roll of two or twelve (extreme departures from the mean) will tend to be followed by a roll that falls closer to seven, or the mean value.

When governed by random forces, human results tend toward an average instead of a number above it. This means that the more random our behavior is, the more mediocre we become. It would be hard to find a better summary of America, which is being battered by forces of randomness: consumer trends, political issues of a symbolic nature, social changes based on rebellion, and other factors of entropy have worked together to make sure that the path of events in America is wholly arbitrary and without deliberate, consistent purpose.

Leftism is a force of randomness because it is based in the individual and therefore, in rejection of any order above that individual, with token exceptions made for one all-powerful General Secretary and commonsense prohibitions on murder, assault and theft of personal items. Since there is no greater order, the individual does whatever it wants, and society absorbs the consequences. This contrasts Rightism, where the there is a purpose to society and the individual maintains it as a term of their membership in that society.

The “fash wave” that is sweeping the West consists of a desire for order. We did not thrive under Leftism, but it took several centuries to break down what was left of our social order. Now we realize that we must not only defeat Leftism, but rebuild society in an entirely new direction, one based on order and the type of principles and realism that are required to desire order and maintain it. This is not something we are doing as a political choice, but a social and cultural one. We want a thriving, top-notch society again and we cannot have that while civilization is held hostage to the acts of individuals, which cause randomness and break it down.

Overreaction as seen on the Left only occurs when we have challenged an existing order deeply, and by demanding order, we have attacked the fundamental premise of the Left. This is why we do not have to dress up in Nazi uniforms or bring Confederate flags — although I have no problem with this — in order to provoke the Left. They know what we are, which is their undoing. We will always trigger them.

Because of that, power is on the side of the Alt Right now. Whenever we show up in town, Antifa and riots/vandalism will follow. Cities have the choice to either crack down on Antifa by removing masks, which seems to do the trick, or to refuse to help the Right and therefore to end with damage to their towns. Now is the time for the Alt Right to do more rallies, more public appearances, and issue more political and cultural ideas. Every thing we do will cause the Left to contort in a paroxysm of rage, and this will make life worse for ordinary Americans, but instead of this forcing people to obey the Left, it is making them hate the Left.

Neo-Nazis are reacting badly to the Alt Right because we have replaced them. There is no longer a need for swastikas and 14/88 when there is a group saying a plain-language, commonsense and un-fetishized but more mature version of what White Nationalists and neo-Nazis have desired for years. We took out all the antisocial and historical elements, and replaced them with what one might call a fearless conservatism that is not limited to, but includes, racial and ethnic awareness, as well as in defiance of the Left, caste and class awareness. This is why the neo-Nazi wing is critical of the Alt Right:

Stormfront posters complained that the ragtag collection of groups brandishing homemade shields and screaming openly about Jews gave other neo-Nazis a bad name. They viewed the death of 32-year-old Heather Heyer almost exclusively as bad PR.

The rifts between Stormfront’s white supremacists and the younger, more internet-savvy generation that cut its teeth on 4chan have shown before.

…Stormfront’s present-day concerns coalesce around recruiting best-practices. The alt-right’s flamboyance, they say, could alienate potential enlistees to their movement of hate.

The point is that they missed the boat: the Alt Right has recruited people by being defiant and open, instead of cult-like and clandestine. The Alt Right shows up and speaks common sense and everyone loses their minds; the neo-Nazis show up and blart out angry hateful propaganda and no one is challenged because they have seen this behavior in movies and television, and it is what they expect. The Alt Right is the opposite of what they expect.

In the future, the Alt Right might consider just showing up in suits with tiki torches just to see cities burn. When our normalcy causes the Left to behave like insane criminal vandals, then people recognize the Left for what it is; when we behave like we might be unhinged, then the Left looks more moderate. Our goal is to make them look extremist and to make ourselves look like the sane, normal and wise alternative.

We want the message that we are the sensible adults here to be battered into the heads of everyone watching these conflagrations from afar, in this case voiced by miscegenating violence aficionado Kyle “Based Stickman” Chapman:

Chapman then went on to blame “commies” and “international domestic terrorists” for recent violence at right-wing rallies in California and other parts of the country.

Regarding Berkeley, he said the police failed to keep right-wing and leftist protesters separated during the first two rallies and that this resulted in violent clashes. For what he called “Berkeley 3.0,” the third political rally in April, Chapman said the police “finally did their job,” and this resulted in “not one incidence of violence.”

Let the police know: if they keep us safe, and unmask Antifa, there will be no violence or vandalism. We do not initiate the violence, because our goal is not violence or power but change. We have no interest in violence until it is necessary and we hope to avoid that point from the standpoint of simple efficiency and reduced risk to all parties. But we are here to replace Antifa and the Left because they are following insane ideas that are mostly responsible for the destruction of our civilization. Cities can either accept this changing order and accommodate us, or continue supporting Antifa and suffer the concomittant violence/vandalism.

The official narrative has collapsed, and because nature abhors a vacuum, there is need for something to take its place. Instead of ideology, we offer calm and commonsense assessments of our position in history and as a civilization. The main difference is that our scope is larger than a focus on the individual alone as the Left demands, and this difference is crushing them as people realize how far America and Europe have unraveled. The Left will fail because they insist on defending the status quo while the Alt Right wants to rebuild and improve it.

Kathy Griffin Gives The Left A Hard Choice

Wednesday, May 31st, 2017

At least Kathy Griffin is honest. In so doing, she just put the challenge to most Amerikan Leftists. Do they lie and act shocked and horrified by the clip below?

Or do they do what Senator Franken just did and ride or die with who they truly are as dispicable, depraved excuses for humanity.

Whether you believe Ms. Griffin is an artist is an aesthetic debate. It takes place along the lines of whether the “Piss Christ” has artistic merit or whether the parody ad in Hustler Magazine about Jerry Falwell was truly “coarse but acceptable parody.” Kathy Griffin is not chess player. I can tell, because she forgot the first rule.

So now the lefties who all laughed their asses off when she was waving around the Trump Head now have two choices. It seems Baron Trump, the President’s son, is an impressionable youngster who initially thought his his father’s decapitation wasn’t a skit. They can Rosie O’Donnell the situation and criticize Baron by calling him stupid.

Or, they can CNN the situation and cauterize the walking wound that is Kathy Griffin.

CNN’s decision comes one day after photos were released of Griffin that showed the comedian holding up a bloody head resembling that of President Donald Trump. “CNN has terminated our agreement with Kathy Griffin to appear on our New Year’s Eve program,” the network said in a statement.

And what of the rest of Leftist-Caping Media? What of MSCCCP? They’ll cover this the way they cover that that whacky new Venezuelan Diet.

Indeed, out of the 50,000 total evening news stories on the three networks, just 25 covered Venezuela, and only seven mentioned “socialism.” In addition, NBC Nightly News only broadcast 13 stories spanning 16 minutes and 54 seconds, ABC’s World News only covered 8 minutes and 34 seconds over seven stories, and CBS Evening News only offered 3 minutes and 11 seconds over five stories.

You see, to the Left, the news is The Narrative. The Narrative is designed to advance the interests of the Cathedral. Beheading Donald Trump as a “just kidding” sort of a thing is a great way to subliminally push assassination as more acceptable. Having a traumatized 11-Year Old freak out and having to explain how hilariously funny the whole thing was to the young man’s mom brings it home on a gut level. Then it doesn’t help The Narrative so much so we can’t have that get any coverage.

This is why the Left excoriates its own for honestly expressing what they sincerely believe would be acceptable and good. What the Left believes to be acceptable and good is sick, immoral and genuinely despicable. It has no place in any civilized society. But then again, no decently civilized society would tolerate what the Left wants to be common accepted practice. The Left just doesn’t want you to figure that out until it’s too late.

Andrew Jackson and the anti-Cathedral

Monday, February 1st, 2016

andrew_jackson_-_battle_of_new_orleans

The American Republic was the greatest one ever. It was so because it developed a Tao. There was a complicated and necessary balance between the Libertarian and the Authoritarian. There was another equally important equipoise between the Classical Liberal and The Progressive. Each school of thought had its plusses and minuses. Through rigorous balance, the best was extracted from each and the crack-pot ideas of all were kicked remorselessly to the curb through an almost Darwinian perfection of the civic population. These four forces were famously described by Walter Russell Mead as Wilsonian, Jacksonian, Hamiltonian, and Jeffersonian.

While the mapping isn’t perfect (Walter Russell Mead was writing foreign policy commentary when he developed the taxonomy), it’s not too abusive a stretch to map Wilsonians to Progressives, Jacksonians to Classical Liberals, Hamiltonians to Authoritarians and Jeffersonians to Civil Libertarians. Banish one of these four vectors to the outer darkness and you get a disturbance in the force…

In recent years The Jacksonian portion of this Tao has been banished to the trailer parks of Appalachian Hollows. This has led to the death of honor* and traditional culture in Elite American Society. This, in turn, has led to an unstable equilibrium. To assuage the problematic situation, a rough alliance has been formed between the Wilsonian, Hamiltonian, and Jeffersonian vectors. Curtis Yarvin described this deep state Amerikan Politboro as The Cathedral.

The Cathedral — The self-organizing consensus of Progressives and Progressive ideology represented by the universities, the media, and the civil service. A term coined by blogger Mencius Moldbug. The Cathedral has no central administrator, but represents a consensus acting as a coherent group that condemns other ideologies as evil. Community writers have enumerated the platform of Progressivism as women’s suffrage, prohibition, abolition, federal income tax, democratic election of senators, labor laws, desegregation, popularization of drugs, destruction of traditional sexual norms, ethnic studies courses in colleges, decolonization, and gay marriage. A defining feature of Progressivism is that “you believe that morality has been essentially solved, and all that’s left is to work out the details.” Reactionaries see Republicans as Progressives, just lagging 10-20 years behind Democrats in their adoption of Progressive norms.

The Cathedral is not a stable equilibrium. It is Metastable at best. Think of a Cathedral as a round, perfect sphere on a perfectly flat surface. Absent external forces beyond gravity and the tension balance resulting from the interposition of the flat surface between the sphere and the source of gravity, the sphere remains at rest. Peace is prevalent. The Jacksonians pull athwart the other three. Vectors in tenuous balance. This makes Jacksonians a pain in the butt at best and a destabilizing catalyst to cataclysm at worst. This leads to the Jackson-Hate resplendent in the so-called Obama Administration. Walter Russell Meade explains below.

Jacksonian populism, the sense of honor-driven egalitarianism and fiery nationalism that drove American politics for many years, has never been hated and reviled as often as it is today, and many American academics and intellectuals (to say nothing of Hollywood icons) are close to demanding that Jacksonian sentiment be redefined as a hate crime.

Traditionalism and fiery nationalism bring up visions of green-toothed boogeymen charging up Cemetery Ridge. Jacksonians are the people who can be convinced that they should charge up Cemetery Ridge if that is what honor demands. This instinct sparks a mortal fear in the heart of the Progressive. Here is a catalog of what the Progressive hive-mind views as the sins of the Jacksonian.

  • Jacksonians are who the then Senator had in mind when, in the campaign of 2008, he spoke of the ‘bitter clingers’ holding on to their guns and their Bibles.
  • It is Jacksonians who…see the Second Amendment as the foundation of and security for American freedom.
  • It is Jacksonians who most resent illegal immigration,
  • don’t want to subsidize the urban poor,
  • support aggressive policing and long prison sentences for violent offenders and
  • who are the slowest to ‘evolve’ on issues like gay marriage and transgender rights.
  • Jacksonian sentiment embraces a concept of the United States as a folk community and, over time, that folk community was generally construed as whites only.
  • Jacksonians don’t have much respect for the educated and the credentialed. Like William F. Buckley, they would rather be governed by the first 100 names in the phonebook than by the Harvard faculty.

I see this guy in the mirror every morning. He’s somewhat edumacayted having read his Spengler, Virgil (in Latin, under vile academic duress), Marx, Gibbons, Rand (for the comedy gold found in the fornication bits), Nietzsche (As an act of utter masochism) and each and every book of the King James Bible** several times over. He doesn’t have green teeth – even the morning after he drinks the green beer on Saint Paddy’s Day. His sin and the reason he is considered outcaste is that he loves the blood, the soil, the traditions and the heritage that he comes from and lives around each and every day.

The folkways of his nation and region flow through his bloodstream like a sacred lifeblood and no Hegelian Dialectic will ever water them down towards some zombie-like synthesis. He never wanted to be that guy. The one Dostoyevsky subjects to condign ridicule in Notes From The Underground. But every day. Every G—–n day he sees more of it slipping away.

This guy (JPW by Pseudonym) is the least qualified and most unlikely Neo-Reactionary you would ever meet. He was built for a certain time and a certain place in America that got yanked out from under his feet by the vile machinations of this Cathedral. It is against all things ending that he reacts. It is against the final heat death of Jacksonianism that he reacts in Amerika; in particular.

You can’t have America without gold, old AJ. You need him there passed out drunk on the White House lawn the morning after his first inauguration. Take away the Jacksonians and you take away everything good, noble and sacred about the South and the Old West. Take away Jacksonianism and you get Amerika instead. We; the Jacksonians, are America’s last, best Anti-Cathedral. Blaspheme against us at your mortal peril.

* Part II of this post will involve a discussion of honor and what America has lost when we lose it.
**-Once reality spiked him off the pavement hard enough to accept this dire necessity.

Blame democracy, not the rapefugees

Friday, January 15th, 2016

kill_whites

The inhabitants welcomed them with gifts, celebrations and good cheer. The narrative went this way: fleeing war-torn countries, they had come to Europe for a better life, and since all people are equal the Europeans obviously got this better life by accident of birth and should share it with the less fortunate.

Some of us sounded warnings. Much as creatures in nature are as they must be to live as they do, people in third world countries have been shaped by their surroundings for many generations. Just like natural selection chooses those who have adapted to their environment to survive, the third world keeps only those for whom third world behavior is normal.

The media, celebrities and politicians brought out the usual magic words — racism, bigotry, intolerance, selfishness — and so they beat back the doubters. A People’s Victory! And yet, over New Year’s Eve, Europe was home to mass rape and sexual assault events perpetrated by the new refugees.

If we accept the narrative, the cause of this orgy of violation was a lack of knowledge. Being equal, the third worlders simply did not know that rape and molestation are wrong, and the more revealing attire and friendly manners of European women provoked them. The politicians tried that at first, too. But the narrative collapsed there as well when other incidents of contempt for the European hosts came out. Lots of young men, surging over the border, to a place whose inhabitants they despise — this sounds more like a crypto-invasion than escape from poverty.

And so, now, European rings with recriminations. How would these immigrants be so ungrateful? Do they not realize that Europe is the land of tolerance, pluralism, openness and compassion? It is almost as if these “rapefugees” want to ruin the socialist white Utopia and replace it with more conditions like those they were in theory escaping. These refugees are bad. And yet that, too, is within the narrative.

The narrative says that all people are equal, but in reality, every society is composed of the people who fit in it. Third world people have third world ways. Put them in suits, teach them English and email, and they will still be the same inside. This is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence who has observed world history and current events. However, that contradicts the narrative, and anyone who does that loses their job, so natural selection has chosen as leaders only those who will — regardless of consequences — welcome the refugees and ignore the dangers.

When only those who succeed are those who blindly repeat the orthodoxy, there are no dissenting views by anyone with the public status to get noticed by anyone but dropouts, malcontents and dissidents. This localizes and contains disagreement. The leaders, media and public figures continue parroting the same insane nonsense and everyone is afraid to mention that the Emperor has no new clothes, because to do so is to lose their own social power.

This reveals to us that the rapefugees are just the tip of the iceberg, and below the water there is a vast structure of leaders, obedience and conformity which created that tip. But then, we must ask, what are the conditions that allowed the ice to form? Somehow, public image rewards those who speak the narrative. This means it is popular. This means that at the root of the problem is the popularity of the idea of admitting third worlders to the West, which requires denying the obvious and then being “surprised” by the bad results.

Democracy creates a coercive form of social power. When we declared all people equal, we made it taboo to say otherwise, because with the assumption that equal=good, it becomes clear that anything else is bad. This means that a slow grinding process occurs by which society removes the bad, or that which fails to confirm the narrative of equality, and soon, opinions have intensified as people try to demonstrate how “good” they are. When all people are equal, all opinions are equal, and so people choose what they want to hear. This reality-optional approach ensures that only pleasant illusions are voiced.

The problem with refugees is not that they are rapists. It is that they will end up replacing native European culture and creating in its place a typical third-world civilization. It does not make sense to blame the refugees, since the leaders of the West know that this will be the outcome, and the people of the West — by voting for these leaders — show they approve of it. Similarly, it is not even the destructive effects of democracy that is its problem. It is that democracy conditions us to think in fantasy, and then act without regard to consequences.

Europe grew to its height of greatness not through natural luck but through the simple principle of rewarding only those who achieved. When a knight slays a dragon, he returns home a hero and wealth is heaped upon him. This ensures that the best natural leaders rise to the top, and that those opinions push aside the usual contents of the human mind, which is nattering neurosis, self-flattery and fantasies about what should be. In reversing that through democracy, we have not only brought physical doom upon ourselves, but first have doomed our minds to servitude to an illusion.

Reality is arbitrary

Friday, June 12th, 2015

wegro

The media foams at the mouth over Rachel Dolezal as we speak. She presented them with a classic paradox by taking mainstream liberal ideology to the extremes. To wit: if race is a social construct, a woman born and raised white can be black, if she identifies with black.

In a wave of great ironies, this comes months after Elizabeth Warren asserted she was part Amerind but then backed away with the help of a compliant media, and after the gory highway crash rubbernecking over Bruce->Caitlyn Jenner, in which he negated all that was hateful about privilege — white, male, virile — by becoming a white female.

And yet the world shrugs because, dear liberals, you cannot have it both ways. If race is a social construct, then people who identify as black are in fact black. If race is not a social construct, then we are all what we are born to be and diversity looks less sunny, and uncomfortable questions are raised about whether Caitlyn is really a Kate and not simply Bruce having left therapy early.

This confusion reveals the heart of the leftist narrative on race which is a deliberate double standard. Race serves as a means to an end of destroying those at the top of society who are naturally smarter, healthier and wealthier. As such, race is used when convenient to take down those at the top — again, the white heterosexual male hunting season is well underway — but ignored when inconvenient. Thus a white male shooting up a school is proof of white degeneracy, but crime by ethnic minorities like Hispanics, Vietnamese and African-Americans is… well… there must be some other explanation.

Few enjoy my explanation, which is that a tribe of people is either victorious or conquered. Diversity ensures that one group will be on top, and every other group will feel conquered. This is the white liberal equivalent of poor Southern whites insisting that blacks were beneath them; the liberal, being craftier and more educated but less anchored to reality, creates inferiority by implication. He invites all in to his diverse nation but then puts himself at top.

In that we see how Rachel Dolezal is the archetypal liberal. Liberals derive their power from ignoring the real problem of civilization decay and offering a surrogate instead through “social justice” which can be addressed by “equality,” a concept not found in nature. The liberal sees herself as part of the hated power structure, but because she refutes it and works to sabotage it, free from blame and thus able to partake in the victim narrative assigned to minority ethnic groups, religions and genders.

Like long-suffering Moms who hit the claret in late afternoon, liberals bond on suffering. It is what makes them different from all that they hate, and heroes to those minorities, so that it is safe to vote liberals into power because they are the good guys after all. Their suffering excuses them of culpability for their success in achieving wealth and power, and they enjoy paying extra taxes as a sacrifice to this self-image.

While Rachel Dolezal may have taken the liberal view of race to the extreme, first she took liberalism to the extreme: you can be powerful, as long as you are “of the people” which means a victim in some way or another. In her case, she celebrated her misfortunes that she thinks placed her on the same level as African-Americans because Dolezal, like all liberals, is still stuck in the superiority-inferiority narrative that liberals claim is responsible for slavery.

An ugly truth of humanity reveals that history is in fact not history, but a series of press releases summarizing what the sponsors of the victors wanted you to think. Those who wished to take over the colonial trade accused the original colonizers of being evil slave-masters, at which point that group withdrew, and the newly corrupt group surged in. Liberals exploit the superiority-inferiority dialogue, forgetting that through most of history hierarchy existed at both vertical and horizontal levels. To nationalists, any other tribe was simply Other and neither superior nor inferior, merely unwanted here, like the more intelligence ancestor of NIMBY.

As liberalism reaches its 226th year of destroying the West, itself a culmination of a millennium of crowdist thought, the cracks in its ancient and scaly skin are beginning to show. Mainly that it depends on rebellion for its logic, and so its “theory” is always an inversion of the functional theory which came before, much as leftists enforce the superiority-inferiority complex on minorities in order to make leftists into victims with an excuse for being wealthy and powerful. Its theories always start with the idea that reality is optional.

This brings us back to Dolezal and Jenner. Rachel can live as a black person all she wants, but as the curtain falls aside, she stands revealed as yet another opportunist — like Elizabeth Warren, Emma Sulkowicz, Hillary Clinton, Al Sharpton and other professional victims — who used victimhood as a cover story to achieve a comfortable life above the rest of us. Jenner can use science to force his body into female form, but he can never have the experience of being a woman, growing up a girl and developing the mind according to those parameters, then going on to being a young bride with a normal life and family ahead of her.

It is all a theory game on the left. Reality is arbitrary because reality is not arbitrary, but preaching its non-existence makes a crowd of unhappy and purposeless people clap their hands and vote or buy. This allows the fantasy to become reality, but only for a few moments, and then the curtain falls away again and we see it is a boring and sad fantasy, with the camera pulling away to reveal the lonely apartments full of empty wine bottles and copies of Mother Jones, resonant with misery that their new jobs as professional victims cannot quite salve.

Potemkin morality in Brezhnevland

Monday, April 6th, 2015

potemkin_morality_in_brezhnevland

I just finished a semester of the most manipulative propaganda conceivable.

As a medical student, I have encountered the American education machine and its propaganda on both an academic and a personal level. Not only was it vile in its attempts to shape young minds toward a clear agenda, but it was also corrupt in its tendency to omit, downplay or ignore information that did not fit with the narrative. On top of that, the academic staff ferreted out and persecuted dissenters, so that the only option for a student who wanted to continue being a student was to nod, smile and (gulp) wolf it down.

One of our teachers literally kills whitey for a living. He is some ethics guy who is involved in determining who gets transplants. He said that they quantified it and in a nutshell, younger white men tend to have the best survival with organ transplants (they give the most organ transplants, being responsible, healthy and altruistic). That was unfair, he thought, so he decided to move for them to give more womens and browns organs even though over all more humans die with that strategy.

He, an old white man, literally said “given a choice between max survival rates and killing whitey, I prefer to kill whitey.” He said this to his students. Then he watched, to see if anyone objected. And while they tell us that our grades are standardized, we are no fools. Any portion of our testing that is not pure Scantron can be graded “subjectively,” which is a euphemism for “truth optional.” Assignments can be lost. And teachers have optional participation grades they can use to drop us a half-letter if we are politically non-compliant.

One of the questions on this teacher’s exam was the following almost verbatim:

“One individual you know is more or less conservative and thinks very negatively of the ideas of social justice and human equality. He considers his position quite reasonable and well thought out. When he discusses his ideas with others, he accuses them of hidden agendas and bias. Which Freudian defense mechanism is he relying on?”

The correct answer is “projection,” of course. That isn’t even how projection works, but what do they care? They just have to push their agenda, truth is a distant second. The point is to — like their Soviet forebears — categorize anything but liberal thought as a mental health disorder. They want to grind it into our heads like everything else they teach us so that in our overworked future lives, it becomes a knee-jerk reaction. Liberal good, anything else ignorant, insane and cowardly.

Throughout the course I was sickened by the overt Marxism with which we were being indoctrinated. All printed materials referred to the default doctor or patient as she/her, and we were taught that the fundamental principle of insurance is wealth redistribution. That’s funny, my good friend out here worked in insurance and he was under the impression it was to spread risk, not to effect communism. The point is for the teachers to spin everything toward a liberal explanation, so that our only way of understanding the world is liberal theory, so that when we encounter the unknown, we project liberal theory onto it.

By the time I am a practicing doctor, these ideas will be the party line in public. They are no longer the domain of 60s radicals, but mainstream, with government, academia, media and celebrities arm-in-arm singing them out as a kind of People’s Liberation Chorus. My fellow classmates, who lack my introspective tendencies and background in theory other than liberalism, will accept these ideas wholesale. And why should they not? In the nu-America, you get ahead by conforming not to culture, but ideology.

This country is turning into Brezhnevland.

During our next term, we have a class with a very substantial lab component. Prior terms had us assigned to lab groups, but this term we are advised to freely choose our own groups, yay! Sort of. Each group of eight must contain at least three women and be “ethnically diverse.” That is the requirement imposed on us by the teachers; if we do not conform, we fail and end up with a vast amount of student loan debt with nothing to show for it.

The insidious nature of this requirement hides behind the illusion of choice. Normally, teachers would choose the groups themselves and ensure that the right distribution of minorities and women was present in each. But that does not teach us the real lesson they want us to learn, does it? The lesson is: conform to the politically correct, or you will fail in life. That is why they demanded that we choose the group. Education consists of repeated behaviors that become instinct. They are training our instincts to always select diverse groups, without even thinking about it.

It also allows them to claim that the students “chose” to be diverse. They can show their little Potemkin village to visitors, who will notice that each group is appropriately diverse. In their minds, they will make a little check-mark on their list: diversity is working OK here. The students will infer that this was their own choice, and then justify it by claiming it was what they wanted all along, because their only other choice is to admit they were forced to do it. They are too proud fo that, and their ego will lead them to claim the ideas of another as their own.

The awards for the groups actually rate on level of diversity. They are literally offering feelgoods for us to offer proof that their retarded idea actually works, and that diverse lab groups are more effective than homogenous lab groups. Never mind that if we are actually all equal, a diverse group will work just as well as a non-diverse group and vice-versa. They know that diversity is a failure. They want to force us to accept it anyway, to humble ourselves and by giving up on our pride in independent thinking, to become good little ideological robots like they are.

In Brezhnevland, everyone will be judged by degree of ideological conformity. Today it is diversity; tomorrow it is diversity and promiscuity; next it will be killing off dissidents, or anything else they need. They want nerve endings they can touch with an electrode and see them twitch the same way every time. That way, when liberal high command makes an order, all of us obey exactly as intended. Power will be absolute. And, we will be extensively trained in the most important art, which is “not noticing” where the narrative fails.

They taught us extensively about the horrors of “paternalism,” where “doctor knows best” and the doctors simply followed their judgment and ignored silly patient nonsense. They used as a prime example some 1960s case where a 16-year-old girl got on oral birth control without telling her parents and the doctor let her dad know, saying he “feared for her moral health.”

Being a slut is a human right! You should be able to let all the boys you want raw dog you without daddy even getting to know, much less disapprove!

So from there on, we were taught how we shouldn’t presume our way is best, and how we should ask the patient what they think is wrong and what they think the treatment ought to be and go from there. Equality means that every individual is right, which is a backdoor way of insisting that there is no right and wrong because only the ideology and the narrative are true. Everything else is reality-optional.

We had to watch a video where a Hmong family wanted to try a tribal rite to cure a six-year-old girl’s heart defect by tying a white ribbon around her wrist while people bowed and chanted in front of a tree. We were taught to pretend that their silly nonsense is working, and simultaneously apply medical science to actually cure the problem. Then to let them attribute their kid’s survival to the plant worship. Never, ever tell them that their idea is retarded. Always affirm the delusion, unless of course it contradicts the narrative.

This is where the Potemkin village nature of our society reveals itself: there are always two layers, a public image surface and an underlying agenda of control. On the surface, we accept and even praise the magic ritual and diversity. Underneath, the real goal is to make everyone into robots so that our overlords can rule with an iron hand. They do not want thought and they do not care about competence. They want obedience. That is all their ideology amounts to, because all the “altruistic” stuff is just the surface layer. The real goal is total control.

Later in the class, they taught us a story about the origins of the Hippocratic oath. Hippocrates oversaw a group which intermixed healing arts with religious ideas. They took an oath of secrecy to never reveal anything about how the body actually works to their patients, ever. It sounds odd, but seeing how medicine has become corrupted in the hands of academia, I’m beginning to think it was a great idea.

“I can breathe again! How’d you do it, doc?”
“Magic! And if you don’t comply perfectly, the gods will put a curse on you!”

Looking at the behavior of my teachers and fellow students, Hippocrates makes more sense to me. Knowledge should go only to those who have the wisdom to use it. My teachers, as leftist zombies who are clearly in denial of history and common sense, are bending “the truth” to fit their own narrative. They are moral degenerates who do not deserve positions of authority. Hippocrates would have told them that healing was magic and sent them back to the only job appropriate for people that callow, manipulative and foolish, which is picking crops in the fields. They are white but they should be slaves.

I think Hippocrates was a swell guy and we should bring back more of his ideas. Maybe start by removing Google and Wikipedia from general public access. Maybe start teaching good info only in Latin and never allow commoners to learn it. The ancients were right again, and when we arrogantly assume we can do better, we end up with forced diversity and magic rituals being validated in the name of medicine, all so that nu-Brezhnevland can keep its citizens under control.

Signals to send to young women

Monday, December 15th, 2014

rusting_tank

With the collapse of the narrative in the UVA rape case, the prime sin of modern time — noticing — has become unavoidable and has momentarily broken through the media embargo on uncomfortable truths about personal responsibility. For at least a few moments, we have an opportunity to observe a truism about life itself.

The usual hand-wringing neurotics wish us to not continue noticing and instead to proceed with enforcing the narrative, continuing the power of those who use that narrative to justify their intrusion into every aspect of our lives. We should believe those who say they are victims even when they are lying, says neo-Communist propaganda rag The Washington Post:

We should believe, as a matter of default, what an accuser says. Ultimately, the costs of wrongly disbelieving a survivor far outweigh the costs of calling someone a rapist…The cost of disbelieving women, on the other hand, is far steeper. It signals that that women don’t matter and that they are disposable — not only to frat boys and Bill Cosby, but to us.

The real problem with this rhetoric is that it lets everyone off the hook for responsibility for their actions. Men, who are all considered rapists, are now able to shrug it off because whether they rape or scrupulously avoid it, people will call them rapists. Women no longer have any responsibility to avoid getting in situations which facilitate rape, like getting blackout drunk and surrounded by naked football players in the basement of some frat house.

I suggest, in line with my article “Legalize Rape,” that we take a more realistic view. We should never knee-jerk believe the accusers because it makes someone powerful for being an accuser, thus creates an incentive to “be raped” and then accuse. Even more, we should stop worrying about rape entirely and by doing so, create an incentive for women to avoid it.

Of course, that’s politically taboo. Young women, their minds bloated by years of advertising and political promises, want a reality where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, and if they cannot it becomes someone else’s problem the instant they claim it is rape. But this sets us up for a terrible situation, which is trying to tell the difference between casual sex and rape. In both cases, two people got blind drunk, groped in the dark and fornicated. In the “rape” case, the next day the woman says she did not consent. These cases boil down to his word against hers.

A sensible system would direct its energies toward avoiding bad results. When men and women disappear in the dark for casual sex, it inevitably results in he-said-she-said situations, and from the distance all of us have to the issue, morning after regret and full-on rape look identical. Any sane court would throw the case out as impossible to judge. This is a change from 50 years ago when we expected women to, if they were being raped, fight back and draw some blood. That produced something called evidence which is highly useful in deciding court cases. The court would have thrown out any claim by a woman who was too intoxicated to stand on the basis that she not only could not have consented, but could not have known if she did or not either and thus was an unreliable witness.

When we tell women to behave in dangerous ways, and that we will then believe them when they make an accusation arising from those dangerous ways, we give them too much power. We also encourage the same dysfunctional behavior that has been shown by the last forty years of disasters to be a completely destructive way of life. Instead, we should send a strong signal to young women that preventing rape is their responsibility and so they should avoid rape-prone situations and, if attacked, be sober and present enough to fight back and get some real evidence.

The Choom Gang in the White House

Monday, November 17th, 2014

the_choom_gang

Jonathan Gruber triggered a political tempest when videos surfaced of him admitting, nay, bragging, that he and his comrades not only deceived voters, but manipulated them by using key terms to mislead and then delivered something else entirely.

Whether or not Gruber’s actions are evil, acceptable or merely predictable, he raised an interesting point for the American voters: would you elect yourself to the position of voter? After all, it seems like every year confidence in government falls and yet the voters keep consistently electing bad leaders.

As they say in the hills, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. It turns out the Barack Hussein Obama presidency has brought unprecedented levels of corruption, failure and reduced national prestige, but voters seemingly excited about his half-African origins and strong liberal credentials voted him into office twice. Is it time for the voters to step down?

The question of whether voters are to be trusted at all leads us to the fundamental question of whether groups of people can be trusted at all. As individuals, most humans show poor judgment in managing their personal lives; this is why very few people actually have their acts together. In groups, humans behave like every committee meeting any of us have ever sat through, which is aggressive individual drama followed by the usual compromise.

We the people may be not-so-sane. The Obama presidency is the result of Baby Boomers and their effect on politics. It may be that this does not reflect a political opinion so much as the human tendency to vote according to the mental image they have based on past media, trends and social tropes.

For example, Baby Boomers influenced our culture and created The Narrative: the notion of independent rebels, cast out by society, joining together in a kind of second American Revolution to bring tolerance for all. Barack Obama is entirely a creation of this narrative of the Baby Boomer generation:

While in high school at the Punahou School in Honolulu, Obama began associating with a group of boys who “loved basketball and good times,” says Maraniss. The group — “decent students and athletes who went on to become successful and productive lawyers, writers, and businessmen” — dubbed itself the Choom Gang. A favorite hangout was a lush hideaway called Pumping Stations, where they parked their cars, turned up Blue Oyster Cult on their stereos, “lit up some ‘sweet-sticky Hawaiian buds,’ and washed it down with ‘green bottle beer.'”

Young Boomers raised on West Side Story (1957) identified with the poor Latino protagonists (who were in gangs with equally awkward names to “the Choom Gang”) and saw themselves as rebels against a stultifying social order. And who were the forces of evil in that universe? Old white guys. That thread of underdog versus oppressor runs through all popular media, even hipster millennial favorite Napoleon Dynamite.

Getting the Big Choomer into the White House helped the Baby Boomers act out that vision of rebellion. Take back the power from those old white guys! Get one of us in there — he was a rebel, smoked weed which signals his hipness to the “tune in, turn on, drop out” generation, and even better, he’s not part of the historical majority — and take over the wheel. Other generations, indoctrinated by Baby Boomer writers and politicians, follow the same knee-jerk response.

When history records their influence, Baby Boomers will be seen as a generation of rebels stranded in perpetual adolescence. They grew up in the Dale Carnegie 1950s when the ideal occupation seemed to be salesman. After a disastrous world war, people cashed in on the remaining industrial economy by selling each other stuff. They created a society worth rebelling against: driven by commerce alone, directionless, and wracked with pretense and an impulse to hide its fetishistic misdeeds and corruption.

Their parents, having fought this war, presented a prime target. These were the children who partied their way through the 1920s and flirted with Communism during the 1930s, then suddenly got “conservative” in self-interest as they aged. This group bore with it the sense of inevitability that came with the first World War, namely a sense that our society had reached its ultimate position in history and there was no other path. Industry had replaced agriculture, science replaced religion, and in that light it only made sense that democracy replaced kings and authoritarians.

During the 1940s, this group experienced the transformative event of total mobilization. To their surprise, they liked it. For the first time, their lives had purpose. But with it came resentment. Rosie the Riveter, late the hero of the aircraft production line, did not want to return to being Martha Barnsley of Deep Hill, OH. As a result, the “Greatest Generation” became the biggest group of addicts to keeping up with the Joneses and other social status activities, horrifying their children.

Their children perhaps justifiably hated them, and did the one thing they could do to shatter the WWII revolution: call their parents pocket Hitlers and demand a movement that supported the Other Side, which in the 1950s and 1960s was the Soviet Union. This was rebellion in its purest form: support the enemies of the tribe, criticize the tribe by its own principles, and demand autonomy from the parents. It was designed to shock, disturb and destroy the world their parents had created.

These youngsters viewed themselves as anti-heroes who would tear down the empire of evil by electing differentness and destroying all that they had known. Iconoclasm became their behavioral pattern; whatever their parents did, they did the opposite. This inversion is characteristic of all rebellions which first labor to prove they are not like whatever power has the authority against which they are rebelling.

Unfortunately, the Baby Boomers kicked off the biggest upheaval in Western society since the Enlightenment. The 1968 revolutions led to a de facto adoption of socialism within the West, even as the end results of socialism could be seen in the Soviet bloc countries. But in contrast to the deskbound world of their parents, it seemed like a new frontier.

As the world watches the Barack Obama presidency wind down like a Choom Ganger feeling his weed and beer wear off amidst the chaos of his life, voices rise in opposition to The Narrative. Could we be leading ourselves in circles, telling ourselves comforting lies and then voting on them, then telling ourselves the same lies to explain the failure? But then other voices shush them and tell them everything is fine, to just go back to sleep and wait for a morning that will never come.

Recommended Reading