There have been persistent calls to ban these two regular trolls, and I finally decided to take action. Last straw for Xera was derailing a post about incels into another one of his terminal race war threads by attacking Asian men for being weak, soft, wimpy, unattractive to women and having small dicks. He’s only said it 2000 times already!
There have been many calls to ban this guy, and that was the last straw.
I am getting tired of all the race-warring in the comments, but I am not going to ban on it unless people start complaining.
But getting rid of two of the worst trolls on the site should clean up the Comments a bit.
Month: June 2013
Hugo Schwyzer Links to Me
Here.
On the online version of the Atlantic Magazine! Wow!
He neither attacks me nor praises me, just calls me a men’s rights blogger, which is true in a sense. The article is about females calling males “creeps,” and Hugo takes the total feminist position on this, which means he thinks creep-shaming is the greatest thing since Cheez Wiz. I beg to differ. There are many comments that follow. Feel free to head on over there and weigh in.
The Male-Shaming "Creepy" Word Again
Some feminist bitch named Erin writes:
So very little of the collectivist and dehumanizing crap in the post or article merits response, but I do find it funny that this guys is all butthurt because women use the “male shaming” word “creepy” but has no problem calling women who reject him or his world view “feminist whores”.
I’ve seen this time and time again. Guy wants girl; girl doesn’t want guy. Rather than accept than some people aren’t attracted to him and that’s not necessarily a personal attack on his character (or, maybe it is, and he needs to do some self work to be attractive to his desired romantic interests), guy collectivizes all women in this shallow, predictable, narcissistic stereotype and claims it’s impossible for him to get “high status” women (because that logic doesn’t take away from the idea of women as individual human beings) because he has to “compete” with other men. If only women could blame a perpetual inability to get laid on the wrong doings of “Men’s’ Rights douche bags”.
1. I don’t have a perpetual inability to get laid. Sort of like the exact opposite actually.
2. I don’t call all women anything. I singled the feminist bitches who carry on with this “creepy” bullshit.
3. Not that it matters, but I have gotten plenty of “high status” females in my life, and I actually continue to get them somehow, even though I am lower than low status myself.
4. Guy likes girl. Girl doesn’t like guy. Guy gets the hint and backs off. Girl calls guy creepy for trying in the first place. Bullshit on that. It is male shaming. They’re attacking the poor guy for trying to get laid/start a romance/or get involved in a romantic or sexual arrangement with a female, which is perfectly normal behavior. But feminists don’t believe guys have a right to try to get laid is what it boils down to.
5. It’s not true that only Beats and Omegas get called creepy. I know a guy who has had sex with ~200 females, and he tells me he has been getting called “creep” and “creepy” his whole life. He’s the very definition of an Alpha. Creepy is just a bullshit female term for “a guy who likes me but I don’t like him.” The more sexually aggressive you, the more of a flirt you are, the more passes, pickup lines and physical gropings you engage in with women you meet, the more you are going to get called creep. It has nothing to do with success or failure or any of that.
Now mind you, the more Beta/Omega a guy is, the more he is going to get called that because the number of women who don’t find him attractive is large and the number of women who do find him attractive is very small to nonexistent. According to feminist scum, this poor shmuck has no right to even try to get laid ever, with any woman on the face of the Earth? Why? Because he’s creepy!
I say so what. I don’t care how Beta or Omega the guy is. He still has a right to try to get laid any legal way he can using any technique, trick or game in the book, and he’s not a creep for trying!
“Creepy” really just means “guy who is trying to get laid.” And what’s wrong with that? Up with the creeps! Up with creepiness! Down with the feminist scum!
Is Wurzel English a Separate Language?
Warren Port writes about Somerset English. See the link for a baffling sample of this strange form of English.
Admittedly it is a very bad English, and he is exaggerating for effect but I understand most of it except for the odd word. When I was twelve we moved from London to a tiny village called Cattcott ten miles from the Mendips where this recording is from. In the eighties there were some people who spoke that way, probably more diluted now.
I am a linguist. We don’t really call anything “bad English.” All dialects are as good as any other. I just figure if you can’t understand it, it’s a foreign language. I would like to split English into some separate languages because some of them pretty much are.
Really Wurzel is just as much of a valid way to speak English as any others. This man speaks Wurzel, and he is able to communicate just fine with other folks who also speak it, so it is a valid lect. The only problem is that rest of us English speakers speak another English language that is very far removed from this English language, so we can’t understand him. Someone ought to write this language down. It’s cool because it seems like it has a lot of new words that I don’t have in the English language that I speak.
At a minimum, as separate languages, I would probably split off:
Scots. There appears to be more more than one language inside Scots. Scots itself is already split off as a separate language. There appear to be 4 separate languages inside of Scots.
Doric Scots. Doric is spoken in the northeast of Scotland in Aberdeen, Banff and Buchan, Moray and the Nairn. It has difficult intelligibility with the rest of Scots.
Lallans Scots. This form of Scots is spoken in the south and central part of Scotland. This is the most common form of spoken Scots. Difficult intelligibility with the other lects.
Ulster Scots. This is the form of the Scots language spoken in North Ireland, mostly by Protestants. It has many dialects and has difficult intelligibility with the rest of Scots.
Insular Scots. Includes the Shetlandic and Orcadian dialects. Spoken on some Scottish islands and is reportedly even hard for other Scots speakers to understand. Of all of the Scots lects, this one is the farthest from the others.
Scottish English. We can probably split this off as well because it is probable that there are Scottish English speakers who can’t understand pure Scots very well. While some British English speakers can understand this lect well, others have problems with it. In particular, the dialect of Glascow is said to be hard to understand for many Londoners.
Hibernian English. English spoken in Ireland. There seem to be some forms of Irish English such as the hard lect spoken by the spokespeople for the IRA and its political wing like Gerry Adams, that are very hard for Americans to understand. Some English people also have a hard time with Ulster English.
Geordie and related lects from the far north of England up around Scotland. These lects are spoken around Newcastle in the far north of England on the east coast. Even the rest of the English often have a hard time with Geordie, and when people talk about multiple languages inside English, Geordie is often the first one they bring up.
Scouse. Really hard Scouse is barely even intelligible outside of Liverpool, not even in the suburbs. There is a report of an American who lived in Liverpool for a long period of time, and after 8 years, she still could not understand the very hard Scouse spoken by young working class Liverpool women. While some speakers of British English can understand Scouse, this is mostly due to bilingual learning. Other speakers of British English have a hard time with Scouse.
Potteries. Spoken almost exclusively in and around the city of Stoke on Trent in northern West Midlands. The hard form is not readily understood outside the city itself. The dialect is dying out.
Welsh English. The hard forms of Welsh English are not readily understood outside the region. There are at least 4 separate languages inside Welsh English.
South Welsh English.Welsh English is not a single language but actually appears to be four separate languages. The varieties of South Welsh English spoken in Cardiff and West Glamorgan (Swansea, Neath and Port Talbot) cannot be understood outside the region. It is not known if West Glamorgan English and Cardiff English can understand each other well. North Welsh English, South Welsh English and West Welsh English are as far apart as Newcastle, Cornwall and Birmingham; therefore, all three of them are separate languages.
North Welsh English. This language is spoken in areas such as Anglesy and Llanberis. It often has a soft lilt to it that people find pleasant and soothing. Probably poor intelligibility with West and South Welsh English.
West Welsh English. This is spoken in places such as Aberystwyth and Cardiganshire. Those two dialects are said to be particularly pleasant sounding. Probably poor intelligibility with North and South Welsh English.
Monmouth English. This form of Welsh English reportedly cannot be understood outside of Monmouth itself. Monmouth is a city on the eastern edge of Wales towards the south.
Wurzel. In particular the hard Wurzel form of West Country English spoken in Somerset at least until very recently is not well understood outside of Somerset. In addition, many younger residents of Somerset do not understand it completely. It sounds similar to Irish and has a lot of new words for things. Hard Wurzel is dying out, and its speakers are mostly elderly. The language of Bristol may be possibly be included here.
Weald Sussex English. A variety of Sussex English spoken in the Weald region of Sussex was traditionally very hard for outsiders to understand. It is dying out now, but it still has a few speakers.
Newfoundland English. There are reportedly some hard forms of Newfie English spoken by older fishermen on the coast of the island that are very hard for other North Americans to understand.
Appalachian English. Some forms of Appalachian English from the deep hollows of West Virginia are hard for other Americans to understand.
Mulungeon English. Some of the English lects spoken by Mulungeon groups in central Virginia in the Blue Ridge Mountains, particularly the lect spoken by the Monacan Indians living near Lynchburg, are very hard for other Americans to understand. They seem to have an archaic character and use a lot of new words for things that I could not identify when I heard it. This may be a type of English often said to be archaic from centuries ago that is still spoken in the mountains. The degree to which this is intelligible with the rest of Appalachian English is uncertain.
Tangier English. Spoken on an island off the coast of Virginia by fishermen, this is a relatively pure West Country English lect from 1680 or so that has survived more or less intact. When they speak among themselves, they are hard for other Americans to understand. The degree to which this can be understood by West Country English speakers in England is not known. Unknown intelligibility with Harkers Island English.
Harkers Island English. Spoken on Harkers Island off the coast of North Carolina on the Outer Banks. Has a similar origin to Tangier English. It is hard for outsiders to understand. The degree of intelligibility between Tangier English and Harkers Island English is not known.
New York English. There is a hard form of New York English, not much spoken anymore, that cannot be well understood at least here on the West Coast. Tends to be spoken by working class Whites especially in the Bronx. In general, this lect is dying out. In my region of California, we recently had a man who moved here from the Bronx, a young working class White man. Even after 2-3 months here, people still had a hard time understanding him. He did not seem to be able to modify his speech so he could be understood better, which usually means someone is speaking another language, not a dialect. Finally he learned California English dialect well enough so that he could make himself understood.
Nonatum English or Lake Talk. Spoken only in Nonatum, Massachusetts, one of 13 villages of the city of Newton, mostly by Italian-Americans. Many residents came from a certain village in the Lazio region of Italy. It appears to be a mixture of Italian and Romani, the language of the Gypsies. Not intelligible to those outside the village.
Yooper. Spoken mostly in the Michigan Upper Peninsula, this lect is also spoken in the northern parts of the Lower Peninsula and in parts of northeast Wisconsin. Heavily influenced by Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Flemish and French, this lect is hard for outsiders to understand largely due to the influence of these other European languages.
African American Vernacular English or Ebonics. This lect is spoken by many Black people in the US, often lower class people in ghettos or in the country. The hard forms of it cannot be understood at all by other Americans. I once had two Black women in my car for an hour or so. They were speaking AAVE. Over that hour, I do not believe that I understood a single word they said. They may as well have been speaking Greek. Forms spoken in the ghettos of Memphis and in the Mississippi Delta by rural Blacks may be particularly hard to understand.
South African English. While some Americans can understand this hard dialect well, though with difficulty, others cannot understand it. It is not known how well speakers of other Englishes such as British and Australian English can understand this lect.
Jamaican Creole English. Jamaican English Creole is already split off as a separate language. At any rate, in its hard form, it is nearly unintelligible to Americans.
Gullah English Creole is a creole spoken on the Gullah Islands off the coast of South Carolina. Already split off into a separate language. Not intelligible to American English speakers.
Nigerian Pidgin English. The harder forms of this may be rather hard to Americans to understand, but this needs further investigation. The hard forms are definitely quite divergent and seem odd to many Americans. Already split off as a separate language.
Australian English. Some forms of Australian English can be hard to understand for people outside the continent. I found that a form spoken in rural Tasmania was particularly hard to understand. I even have a hard time understanding Helen Caldicott, the famous physician. Other forms spoken more in the rural areas of the main island can also be rather hard to understand. Nevertheless, I can understand “TV Australian” well. However, speakers of British English are able to understand Australian English well, so it is not a language but rather a dialect of British English.
New Zealand English. This is similar but different from Australian English. While most New Zealand English is readily understandable to Americans, some of it can be a bit hard to hear. In the video below, the announcer speaks in TV New Zealand English, which I actually found a bit hard to understand, but I could make out most of it. The comedians spoke in a strong rural New Zealand accent. I could make out a lot of it, but not all of it for sure. However, British English speakers can understand all of the dialogue in this video. New Zealand English is not a language but is instead a dialect of British English.
Indian English. Some of the Indian English spoken by speakers in India can be quite hard to Americans to understand. What we need to know is whether this is a first or second language for them. If they were brought up speaking this Indian English, then it is a separate language. If it is simply English spoken as a second language by a native speaker of Hindi or another Indian language then it is not a separate language. Requires further investigation.
In conclusion, it seems that there are at least 25 separate languages and 3 creoles/pidgins inside of macro-English. 1 other case is uncertain.
Naked Man Terrorizes BART Station
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQUeZx82VmU&feature=player_embedded]
This very strange incident happened at a San Francisco BART station around May 12 of this year. This naked man with a wild hairdo runs through the BART station doing acrobatics and gymnastics. In between, he terrorizes, threatens and even assaults passengers and BART personnel. Finally, police came, locked down the station and arrested him. He was placed on a 48 hour psychiatric hold and then he was released. Later a warrant was issued for his arrest on an assault charge, but he did not appear on the arrest warrant.
He was later photographed in the Market District wearing a very weird get-up and walking around on stilts. He is a 24 year old immigrant who is an acrobat. He is associated with some San Fransisco anarchist group called Acrobatics Not Bombs. Authorities have recently arrested him again and have said that they are going to deport him, as he is an immigrant to this country of some sort.
Accidents Happen
Anarchists Play "Destroy the CCTV Camera" Game in Berlin
Interesting.
I guess I am neutral on this subject. It’s annoying to think that our every move is being watched everywhere we go in public, but on the other hand, these cameras are catching a lot of criminals. These cameras are in a lot of the small corner markets, gas stations and pharmacies I go to now, and I don’t really care about that. I don’t like to see myself on the camera though. As you can see, I am obviously such a narcissist!
How do you all feel about Big Brother and Brave New World and all of that?
One Woman Is Fighting Back
Here.
11 hours, wow! I always said women have more stamina than men. It’s like they can go on forever if you know what I mean.
Women hold up half the sky!
Bigfoot News June 25, 2013
Morgan Matthews Shooting Bigfoot premiers in the UK. The movie premiered in the UK only just very recently, in the past few days. A UK researcher who is somehow associated with the Finding Bigfoot guys, went to see it with a friend of his. There was a post about it in Bigfoot Research UK, but he has taken down the post. However, it is still available at the link above. It is not known how he felt about Rick Dyer’s reported shooting of a Bigfoot before this took place, but after seeing the movie, he now feels that the shooting of the Bigfoot was faked by Dyer.
In the movie, we see Morgan in his tent. Suddenly something large rustles his tent in a very aggressive way. Morgan comes out of his tent just in time to see Rick emerging from his tent with a rifle. Next we see a very large creature, hunched over and with extremely wide shoulders, running away very fast. Rick fires a few shots at the creature, and Morgan starts yelling at him to stop shooting. A big scene ensues. In the glimpse we see of the Bigfoot running away, it looks more like a part-ape, part-man. The apey component is quite prominent, however, it has a human nose.
Next, at some point, the Bigfoot has circled back around. Next thing we see is the Bigfoot crashing into Morgan and Morgan falling to the ground. We hear more shots ring out. Then we see Morgan and Rick arguing inside of a tent. Rick is belligerently demanding that Morgan hand over his film, but Morgan does not want to hand it over. A big argument ensues.
Later we see Morgan very badly bruised up on a plane heading back to the UK. The scene with the Bigfoot running into Morgan is replayed.
It appears that this new cut may have more footage in it than the previous cut that was shown in Toronto.
Afterwards, there was a question and answer session with Morgan. Morgan was asked whether he thought a Bigfoot was shot in the movie, and he said, “My first thought when I got knocked down was that a human had knocked me down.” He also said that the force with which he was knocked down was about what he would expect from a human. But that was all he said. Once again, he basically refused to answer the question.
In addition, the UK researcher said that looking at the figure in the film, it seemed to be about as tall as a person (6 feet or so). Therefore, he concluded that Dyer had hoaxed the shooting of a Bigfoot in the movie, and he said he felt there was no Bigfoot in Las Vegas. He also said that when Dyer started selling Team Tracker memberships for $100/head, he felt that there was now a profiteering motive that one might expect with a hoax.
A number of Team Tracker members were flown out to Las Vegas on June 14 to view Rick Dyer’s Bigfoot boy. I know for a fact that at least two of those people were flown out to Vegas by Rick. I spoke to one TT member who saw the body. I asked him if he was impressed, and he said, “Very, very impressed.” I asked him if he had seen the body and what he had to say about it, and he said, “Yes I saw the body. I believe that what I saw was the same body that Musky Allen saw.” He also said that other TT members were there when he was viewing the body in addition to “other people” who he could not identify.
One of the people who was flown out to see the body was Chris Sands, who is a very good friend of Christopher Noel. I asked Christopher if he trusted Chris, and he said he trusted him completely, 100%. However, Christopher said he would not reveal to me what Christopher had seen in Vegas, if he had said anything to Christopher at all.
In addition, also on June 14, two reporters (identities unknown but possibly national reporters) also saw the body. They were carefully selected and will get the first story out when the press embargo on the Bigfoot body story will be listed. On June 21, even more people saw the body. All who saw the body are under NDA’s to not reveal what they saw until the press embargo is lifted, which according to Christopher, will be soon.
I have a hard time seeing why all of these TT members would be lying for Rick. What are they getting out of it? Is he paying them? There is no evidence that any TT member is getting any money for being in on any hoax. So why lie for Rick? What is the motivation? Also many TT members have been suffering a serious loss of confidence lately due to Dyer’s constant antics and crazy, obnoxious behavior and just a general doubting of the story. So even TT members are not hardcore Dyer followers anymore, and quite a few of them have left the team in disgust either due to doubting Rick’s story or due to disgust over Rick’s behavior.
Dyer freaks out over Dr. Jeff Meldrum book. In his website recently, Rick wrote that he first urinated all over one of Meldrum’s books, and then he set it on fire. This is some pretty whacky behavior on Rick’s part, but it all sort of adds up.
Revelations about Musky Allen’s criminal record. The Dyer skeptics have been trying to dig up any dirt they can on Musky because they think he is in on a hoax with Rick Dyer. However, I do not believe that Musky is in on any kind of a hoax. It had previously been revealed that Musky had a drunk driving conviction on his record. There is a new story out that Musky has a “conviction for beating women.” This probably means a domestic violence charge where Musky got into it with a wife or girlfriend. Unfortunately, this sort of thing is quite common even in modern US society, and many men who do this are not necessarily criminal types. And I fail to see how these charges prove that Musky is lying about the body. Ad hominem fallacy: Musky has a minor criminal record, therefore, he can’t be trusted when he says he saw Rick Dyer’s dead Bigfoot. A guy with a criminal record is obviously a liar. Fails the Logic 100 test, sorry.
Somerset English
Here.
The Somerset English dialect.
I am sorry, but this is some of the most messed up English I have ever heard in my life. I could barely make out a single word this fellow is saying. Speaker is an elderly man, about 80 years old, from Somerset County in southwest England. This area is south of Wales and east of Cornwall in a region called Exmoor. It is heavily forested with rolling hills. This is a rural area where homes are spaced far apart. Sheep grazing is a common industry.
This man’s speech was probably typical of the region 80 years ago, in the 1920’s. Nowadays few young people speak like this anymore, as most have adopted the more popular London dialect.
It is said that this accent is similar to that spoken by early immigrants to America from the Mayflower era to 50 years later, who came disproportionately from southwestern England for some reason. Why? Easy access to the coast from which to sail ships? There is a town in Virgina called Tangier that retains a Restoration Era English accent to this very day. It was settled in 1670 by English form the southwest of England near where this Somerset dialect is spoken.
The entire accent in this region is known globally by the term “West Country dialect.” It encompasses most of southwest England over to Cornwall, east to Bristol or so and then southeast at least to Bournemouth on the coast. It is quite a strong accent, and it is rather unique.
I am not sure what this even sounds like. It might sound a bit like Scottish or possibly like Scouse from Liverpool. It is possible that Middle or even Old English sounded something like this. A commenter from Ireland said that it sounds something like Irish Gaelic for some odd reason. Why would an English accent sound like Gaelic? Because of the nearby influence of Welsh perhaps?
But honestly I felt that it sounded more like German, or better yet, Frisian, than anything else. There is a dialect of Danish, actually a separate language, called Jutish spoken in the far south of Denmark that sounds something like Scots and possibly like this dialect. Danes report that Jutish, at least the hard form spoken by people middle aged and older, is not intelligible with Standard Danish. However, Jutish or Synnejysk is further from Standard Danish than Danish is Swedish. If this is true, then Jutish is surely a separate language.
As Old English came from the Frisian (especially North Frisian) region of far northern Germany and far southern Denmark, it makes sense that these lects would resemble each other. Recall that three tribes, the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes, were the ones who invaded England, conquering it from decaying Roman rule. Old Saxon pretty much went to Frisian, especially West Frisian. The language of the Jutes is maintained today by the Jutish speakers.
Movie About Incels
Here.
It is called Shy Boys: IRL. This documentary was made as a student film by a young female film student. I actually thought it was pretty well done. She goes out to find and interview some guys from one of the most notorious incel sites on the Net. Basically, of these guys are young men who have never kissed a female, never been on a date, and needless to say, never been laid. One guy had had a girlfriend in high school (we meet her at the end of the movie) but apparently he was too shy to do anything with her.
All of these guys are shy, some of them extremely shy. What you get off of all of these guys is overwhelming nice guy syndrome and passivity. I would say wimpiness, but I am trying to be kind. Most if not all of these guys seem like very good people. They just can’t get laid is all. This movie shows why it is true that “nice guys finish last.” It’s well known that women, especially young women, love bastards and even criminals, and they often treat nice guys like dirt. Men who are seen as wimpy or pussy are treated with particular contempt.
There is a lot of talk about this movie on Tumblr, and the conversation is very depressing. Most of the women are feminists, and they are raking these poor shmucks over the coals, accusing them of being dangerous and of misogyny. Really, there is very little misogyny in this movie, and considering the contempt with which females have treated these guys, what is amazing is more their relative lack of misogyny than anything else.
These guys simply don’t do aggression and they certainly don’t violence. They are nice guys with a capital N. Any aggression is directed inwards at themselves if it exists at all. There are many scenes of the guys together, and they are all very nice to each other. You don’t sense any hostility at all towards the other men. They’re basically the nicest guys in the whole world. They are not dangerous in any way, shape or form, but women always think that sexual losers are dangerous “creeps,” while they swarm all over the truly dangerous men and serial killers in prison get sacks full of mail from adoring women.
The men on Tumblr are hardly kinder. These are “feminist men” who are lining up with the feminist women to pile on these poor shmucks. All of the men on Tumblr are ripping these guys into a thousand pieces.
I will always support my fellow males when it comes down to men versus women. In the case of the incels, I can either line up with these evil bitches or I can feel sympathy for these forlorn souls, trying to get laid as best they can. In cases like this, it will always be bros before hos. I am with the men and against their enemies!
Fathers and Daughters, Mothers and Sons, etc.
Ishmael writes:
Can you expand on your comment on filial piety? Most Asian (Indian and Chinese) people that I’ve known all had this type of utmost respect for their parents, which is admirable I guess, but can be extremely destructive when the kid steps out into the real world compared to kids in the West. Asians are seen as more submissive and are often used in the workplace because they don’t have the ‘balls’ or backbone to stand up to their superiors or promote ideas outside the status quo.
Robert, if you have any opinions or older posts of the effect of filial piety and its effects on children, please let me know because I’m curious. For most Westerners, that breaking out phase from their parents in their teen years was very important to their independence and personal happiness.
Well it has long been a tradition for teenagers to rebel. The Romans wrote about it. The teenage boy often needs to rebel against his father. He differentiates himself from his father and thereby individuates himself. It is a nearly necessary process, but it is often painful for both parties. The boy is quite mean to his father and argues with him a lot. This is painful for the father. Also the father is often very cruel and mean to the teenage boy, and many boys never forget that.
In addition, the boy’s rebellion is often senseless and even the father who tries best to get along with his teenage son finds his son fighting perversely against him for seemingly no reason. So this is a painful and rather stupid phase for the son because he is fighting his best friend in life and he often severs the most important male role model he will ever know. While this father-son warfare is going on, the mother often sides with the son and accuses the father of being mean and cruel to the son. I remember my father always accusing me of hiding behind my mother’s skirt during our regular fights.
In the old days, a man rebelled against his father around late teens or so, and they often came to blows, as in there was a fistfight of some sort. I had a few punch-outs with my Dad and there were physical altercations between him and my other siblings too.
In the old days, after this crucial fistfight, they young man would storm off to make his way in the world on his own and leave the family home to become a real man once and for all. He would go out into the world and typically sooner or later, he would find himself a woman, settle down to marry her and raise his own family, becoming a father himself. So he then turns into the man he punched out at age 18. Now that the son has his own family and is a father and husband himself, the son often came back to the family home, introduced them to his family, and he and the father made amends and often become good friends again.
I know grown men hate their fathers to this very day. When we were growing up, it was said that if you hated your father, you would turn gay because hating your Dad turned you into a queer. This was psychoanalytic bullshit. The truth is that surveys show that 37% of all males hate or dislike their fathers. Obviously the vast majority of them are heterosexual.
It is not that hating your father makes you gay. While growing up, the pre-homosexual boy acts feminine to effeminate and rejects masculinity, boyhood and manhood. His father tends to value masculinity and wants to raise a masculine son in his own image. His queery son is very disturbing and upsetting to the father, maybe makes him question his own masculinity and certainly makes him think he failed as a father (My son is a fag!) The father is often very cruel to the son and accuses of him of being a sissy, a pussy, a girl, etc. This is why pre-gay and gay sons fight with their fathers and have horrible relationships with them. So the homosexual scenario causes the father hatred and not the other way around.
The worst that can happen to you if you hate your Dad is you might turn into a criminal. Absent or lousy fathers sometimes create criminal sons. We see this when single Moms tend to raise criminal sons because there is no father in the house. If you go to a prison, every guy in there has “Mom” tattooed in his arm. If you say any crap about his Mom, most of them will shank you in a Manhattan minute. You never criticize a biker/redneck/tough guy/jailbird’s Mom. Actually you are not supposed to even put down his family period or he might hit you.
But people who go into prisons say that although most of the men in there love Mom, nearly all of them hate their fathers, and many say they want to kill their Dads. When these hardass guys get out of prison, often the first place they go back to is back to Mom’s place. This is because a Mom will tolerate a lot more from a son than a father will.
A father will often renounce all contact with a criminal son and just write him out of his life as a failure. But to the mother, he is still “my boy.” Even serial killers sometimes have loyal mothers who stand by them to the end. This is because the relationship between a mother and a son is a very tight one, and a son often has to be pretty evil for his own Mom to hate him. If a grown man is hated by his own Mom, he is often a pretty bad fellow.
Daughters also have an intense relationship with their fathers. An absent or hostile father, while creating a criminal son, may create a daughter who is a “whore” or a “slut.” The boys turn into criminals and the girls turn into whores. It is quite common for a girl/woman with no father to become quite promiscuous with all that that entails. It appears she is trying to “screw her way to Daddy,” or “screw her way to the father’s love that she never obtained.
It is not good for a girl to hate her father, just as it is bad for a son to hate his mother. Sons who hate their mothers often, but not always have problems with women when they grow up. After all, a man’s first and most important relationship is with his mother. Try as he might, he will still tend to see his mother in every woman he meets, including his wives and girlfriends. If he hates his Mom, he might hate them too. Serial killers who kill women often hate their mothers, and in some cases, they even killed their mothers. You hate your mother, you hate women.
By the same token, a woman who hates her father may tend to have problems with men in her life. If she hates her father, she hates men. She may also identify with a brutal father. If the father beat the mother, the girl grows up identifying with the wife-beating Dad. She will seek out brutal men who will beat her, and she will unconsciously desire to get beaten up just like her Mom was because she thinks she deserves it.
Many adult women hate their mothers just as many adult men hate their fathers. As father hatred is relatively normal and harmless for a man, many women who hate their mothers are often quite healthy psychologically. Often during the teen years, while the son is fighting with the father, the daughter is fighting like crazy with the mother. This may be because the daughter is trying to individuate herself from the mother.
The hatred for the same sex parent causes extreme individuation and this person often resolves to be as independent and adult as possible, which is a good thing in the West.
During the teen years, the girl’s budding sexuality becomes an issue. The father feels it is his duty to police the daughter’s sexuality and in a sense guard her virginity or chastity from other roving and competing males. The mother is often sympathetic to the girl’s blossoming womanhood, and if the girl starts having sex, the mother is very understanding and provides her with contraceptives such a birth control pills. The mother understands. After all, she was a horny as Hell teenage girl once herself.
Alt Left: India As a Poisonous Culture; Indians As Poisoned People
A good, decent, Indian Hindu woman named Sittingonthefence writes:
An advance warning.. this is going to be a long comment:
I am a Hindu Indian, and I felt a sting every time people are chided on this blog for being Hindus. However, I landed on this blog because I am frustrated and wanted to see what people out there think about India.I was brought up to be an honest, hardworking girl. My parents taught me all the right things, lying and cheating is bad, work hard for what you want, everybody should be treated with respect, etc. Needless to say I grew up feeling like a misfit. Actually, my family was a misfit even among our relatives.
I was brought up to believe that a Hindu is a person who lives by his Dharma and lives a morally pure life, and this is what I try to live by.
I think the main problem with Hinduism is that it confuses ritualism and superstition with religion and God. Everywhere around me I see people having different values for themselves and others. Nobody respects other peoples time and space (be it on road…where people keep driving deeper into gridlocks, or in personal relations…where elders decide whom their children marry or what they study etc.)
My sister is married to an American (whom she met in Singapore while working there), is settled abroad and barely has any Indian friends. She is not in touch with any relatives except us (her immediate family). Me and my husband were also in the US, where I did a Masters in Social Work, and this urge to work for the betterment of my country took me over. Hence, we came back last year.
However, I am already frustrated…how do you help people who do not want to be helped or even understand and accept the deep-rooted issues in this country.
I have also met some amazing people here…Many of them are born Hindus, and all of them are either spiritual (not ritualistic) or agnostic.
However, I have to add that maybe religion is not the only culprit because I have seen corrupt, selfish and unreasonable people of all religions, castes and genders.
I want to delve deeper to figure out why? Is it because of insecurity (due to centuries of foreign rule), is it because of a corrupt upper class with absolute power (I am guilty of being born one)? Could it be a distorted interpretation of Hinduism? Could it be the genes (but i know many amazing people born out of the same gene pool)? I do not know the answer…however I do know that I don’t want my daughter to feel like a misfit growing up.
Welcome to the blog. You are a good Indian Hindu. Apparently there are a few.
India and Indians are sick and messed up because their culture is sick. It is like a poison that poisons everything coming out of it. Most Indians get culture-poisoned, so they are damaged people, poisoned and damaged by their culture. They could get rid of it, but that would mean renouncing just about everything they were brought up with. Few people are prepared to do that.
Indians are not really bad people. Most of them are good people who have simply been poisoned by a sick and perverse culture. So they are damaged people. They can be cured, but most of them don’t want to get better. I work as a therapist, and if people don’t want to get better, they won’t. Indians don’t want to get better because they don’t think anything is wrong.
Plus being an amoral, parasitic, opportunistic, somewhat sociopathic human is very profitable in a way. Sociopaths often clean up in life. Morals get in the way of getting all the money and stuff you need in life. The person mostly likely to clean up in life is the most selfish, opportunistic, parasitic and rather sociopathic person, as they are not encumbered by morals in getting what they want.
3 Jews, 10 Opinions
Hizzle writes:
I should add that the only intransigence to this project of transformation that I’ve detected from the Left came from the Jews Bernie Sanders and James Howard Kunstler.
What? Bernie Sanders is opposed to mass immigration?!
I thought maybe Kunstler was. He is a great guy, totally outside the box.
The thing about Jews is they like to think outside the box and take all sorts of wild, unorthodox opinions. They are natural rebels. 2 Jews, 3 opinions. Or rather, 2 Jews, 10 opinions.
Jews do have a herd mentality on some stuff, mostly Jewish ethnic stuff, but there are always Jewish rebels no matter what cause you are talking about. Even Jewish religion says so. Jewish religion says that the Jews are always rebelling and God is always punishing them for their rebellion.
Maternity as a Basic Human Right
Hizzle writes:
Republicans like to say “If you can’t feed ‘em, don’t breed ‘em.”
I do not agree with “If you can’t feed em, don’t breed ’em.” I believe that every woman has a right to have a kid or two, except maybe if they are retarded, have a psychotic illness or are in prison.
There are Black women in the ghettos in their 20’s who have no man in sight but are starting to get the urge to have a kid. Some of them just go out and have a kid with Tyrone or Demont or whoever, knowing that he won’t support her. Basically none of the men in this environment are going to marry or support their kids, so it’s have a kid with a deadbeat or have no kids. These women are going to try to raise kids on their own, and that’s ok.
My Mom doesn’t think these women have a right to have kids, but I disagree here. She said, “Well, you know, having kids is not as great as it’s cracked up to be.”
People have the right to one or two kids, no more than that. You’re poor, so you can’t have kids! You’re not married, so you can’t have kids!
Well, screw that. You can have a kid or two even if you are not married or even if you are poor. It is a basic human right.
Why Do US Liberals Hate White Rednecks?
Hizzle writes:
Good post, especially the last paragraph, which I found incredibly profound.
The thing is, I don’t care about the reasons that most liberals or the Republican elite agree on immigration. Whether the reason is racial tolerance or greed, both of them are hurting me, and no argument is going to dissuade Republicans away from their greed, and no argument is going to dissuade liberals away from their religion of racial tolerance and multiculturalism.
I’m not sure that liberals hate all proles, but there are certain kinds of white proles who they enjoy eviscerating, and they can be very mean about it, i.e. on most threads on Huffington Post talking about gun control, they will ignore any rational reasons the conservative proles might have for wanting guns, and they will rant about “Billy Bob wantin ta get his shootin irons” and all of this kind of mockery of the inbred racist rednecks, ectetera. Liberals have an anti-intellectual visceral hatred many times for these tea-party types, who, no matter how misguided they are, are people who are at the very least more functional and responsible than the liberals’ clients and foot-soldiers (voting booth fodder) in the ghettos and barrios.
Illegals consume quite a bit of welfare in emergency services, and if you consider border security, prisons, and other tools used to combat the flow of illegals something that is paid for with our tax dollars, then the cost burden is even worse.
There was a huge jump in disability claims under Obama that a lot of the conservatives love to harp on, but I think this is BS. I myself am now partially disabled due to a shoulder injury I sustained in Iraq. I’m sure many other people who were injured in a war started and supported heartily by Republicans are now receiving this compensation. Republicans like to say “If you can’t feed ‘em, don’t breed ‘em.” I say “If you can’t feed ‘em, don’t bleed ‘em.”
Raising taxes on the rich would be nice, but not only is it a political third rail, it’s just not feasible when there are nations that are still tax havens, and it takes .5 seconds to transfer your entire fortune over the internet.
Thx for this.
We should oppose policies due to their effects, not due to their motivations. Who cares what motivates conservatives or liberals for their support for mass immigration?! It’s bad for me and bad for the country, so I am against it. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and I am starting to believe that even conservatives want to believe they have good intentions about most of their project. It is not a whole lot of folks who want to believe that they are pushing something nasty, but I respect those that do.
We liberals don’t like those rednecks because they are conservatives, not because they are stupid inbred proles. I guarantee you if those stupid inbred White redneck proles in the mountains, swamps and deserts were down with social liberalism or socialism, we liberals would be falling all over them or at least we would not say such bad things about them. We hate conservative inbreds and rednecks, not inbreds and rednecks per se. Most of liberal dislike for various groups is due to their politics, not their behavior.
It is true that Tea Party types are more functional than ghetto or barrio types, but we dislike them due to their politics, not their behavior. And ghetto and barrio types are a great vote bank for us liberals. Without them, our liberal project would have died a long time ago. So while these folks don’t act very good, they have great politics, and they vote very well, so at the end of the day, we liberals and not going to trash our political supporters.
Most liberals are not anti-intellectual. If anything, they are anti-idiot. Conservatives are way more anti-intellectual and pro-idiot, although there are millions of bright to very bright conservatives in the US.
I don’t agree that raising taxes is futile because the rich will just shift all their money overseas. Raising taxes in the past couple of decades has been conclusively shown to increase government revenues, so it’s not worthless.
Ex-Army on Mass Immigration
Ex-Army has a new post up reprinting one of my posts and putting up one of his own. Here it is:
Despite what they say, just about the entire political class is in favor of amnesty first of all, and then more and more and more immigration, legal and illegal. And you can extend that to the whole MAG (Media, Academia, Government). Now, they all want it for their own grubby little reasons, but they all say it will just improve the bejeezus out of the economy and everything else, to have unlimited hordes of uneducated, unskilled, Third-World immigrants pouring in over the border.
It seems that even an idiot could figure out that when you have an oversupply of a commodity (unskilled labor), the price (wages) of that commodity falls. When it falls far enough, unskilled Americans can’t afford to take the unskilled jobs, because they can get more money from welfare, so that’s what they do, and they get zero work experience, and stay unemployable forever.
Then the immigrants catch on to the deal, they go on welfare, and then we need to let a few million more uneducated, unskilled, Third-World immigrants in, and the cycle continues. Make no mistake about it, people. If you are a worker, or would like to be a worker, amnesty is going to hike your taxes and cut your pay.
The left, of course, couldn’t care less about actual working people. They think of them as a bunch of nasty Archie Bunkers who ought to lose their stupid jobs. Serve ’em right. Racist bigots.
There are some problems with this at it is typical of the contempt that US conservatives have for liberals, who according to them are just bad people with bad motives. But that’s where the Right goes wrong. US liberals are not bad people with bad motives. They are good people with good motives. They are “do-gooders.” Now, the Right can feel free to bash do-gooders all they want to, but after all, in doing so, they are displaying contempt for people for trying to do the right thing.
Despite what they say, just about the entire political class is in favor of amnesty first of all, and then more and more and more immigration, legal and illegal. And you can extend that to the whole MAG (Media, Academia, Government). Now, they all want it for their own grubby little reasons,
This is not exactly true. The entire US political class it not in favor of amnesty. They entire US Democratic Party is. The Republican Party is divided. Before, they were against amnesty, and it is in this way that I am a conservative, as I am against amnesty. The Republican Party is under extreme pressure to cave in on amnesty, and it is only the hardliners such as the Tea Partiers that are holding the line on this issue, but it keeps coming back like a whack a mole. The political class of the Republican Party is now 100% down with amnesty, and that’s why the monster keeps rearing its head over and over. Tragically, it is only the awful Tea Partiers that are saving the nation from this catastrophe.
Ex-Army is correct that the entire media class is pro-amnesty. Why this is is uncertain. Most reporters are liberals, and many are Jewish. Many newspapers are owned by Jews who have ethnic reasons for supporting mass immigration. Most other newspapers are simply owned by corporations who support mass immigration because of the wage-lowering and more consumers = more business effects.
Academia supports mass immigration because they are liberal do-gooders. They really believe that the whole world has a right to come here to better their lives and that it is cruel to keep them out. They have blinded themselves to the massive downside that this will have for us as a nation because they want to think of their causes are pure good causes that will not have any downside.
but they all say it will just improve the bejeezus out of the economy and everything else, to have unlimited hordes of uneducated, unskilled, Third-World immigrants pouring in over the border. It seems that even an idiot could figure out that when you have an oversupply of a commodity (unskilled labor), the price (wages) of that commodity falls.
It is true that both the Left and the Right all insist that mass immigration is the greatest thing for the economy since sliced bread. This is probably due to the more consumers = more business line.
However, something that is good for the economy is not necessarily good for labor. Obviously, mass importation of unskilled labor lowers the cost of that labor and ultimately depresses wages. We have seen it right here on the ground in California, and I don’t care how many lying studies they produce to show that mass immigration does not lower wages, we here in California know firsthand that it does.
The Right is overjoyed that mass immigration lowers wages. The Left simply denies that it does as that would go against their ideology, and they blind themselves to the downside of their projects for ego-defensive needs. Do-gooders can’t exactly be pushing things that have bad effects. Then they would not be do-gooders anymore. Instead they would be do-badders. In order to protect the ego from this attack, they deny that their agenda has bad effects.
When it falls far enough, unskilled Americans can’t afford to take the unskilled jobs, because they can get more money from welfare, so that’s what they do, and they get zero work experience, and stay unemployable forever.
The Right is obsessed with welfare. That’s what they are all about. All they talk about all day and all night is welfare. Which is a good reason for the Left to never discuss it at all. Discussing it at all makes you a rightwinger. The truth is that it does not pay more in the US to “go on welfare” than it does to work.
In some highly advanced welfare states such as Britain, under certain circumstances it did, especially if you were a single Mom raising kids as you got a child allowance. Get your kids on disability and into government housing, and you’re in like Flynn.
I knew a woman who was scamming the British system in order to stay home and raise her kids, who by now were teenagers. She flat out told me that in she was working the system to the extent that she would lose money if she went to work. We should design welfare states so that you always make more money if you go to work than if you stay on relief. That’s the only way a welfare state makes any kind of sense.
In the US, it’s never more profitable to “go on welfare” than it is to work. Forget it. First of all, in the US, you can’t just “go on welfare.” If you lose your job, you might get unemployment, but it’s a pittance, and it doesn’t last long. That’s all you get. You might be able to get some Food Stamps, but I don’t know anyone who refuses to work because the Food Stamps might end.
You can stand in line and wait for 2-3 years for Section 8 to open up, but I don’t know anyone who refuses to work because they will lose their Section 8. The system is designed to reward you for working. If your income falls low enough, you can get Medicaid, but I don’t know anyone who refuses to work because they won’t get Medicaid anymore.
If you don’t work, you can’t eat, pay your bills, drive your car, buy anything or pay your rent. If you don’t work in the US, you can’t survive, period, so everyone pretty much has to work at something. You can go on disability, but this is very hard, and if there is nothing wrong with you, you won’t get it. Even if there is something wrong with you, you will get turned down over and over before you get accepted. Then everyone will hate you for being on disability.
You always make more money working than being on disability. I do know people who stay on disability rather than work because if they go off, they lose their medical coverage, which is either Medicaid or Medicare. The problem is that there is no national health care system in the US due to conservative opposition. So the conservatives have created this problem for themselves. But the truth is that you can’t survive on disability even if you are really disabled as it pays so little. It doesn’t even pay enough to survive to be honest. No one is living it up on disability. Most are grubbing by in a very depressing existence at a near sub-survival level.
Many are working a bit on the side to supplement the disability, but most of them are not really capable of working fulltime anyway. Even those who stay on disability due to fears of losing medical care are not really capable of working as I see it. Most would not be hired by anyone, and if they were, they would soon be fired.
so that’s what they do, and they get zero work experience, and stay unemployable forever.
The number of people in the US that unemployable due to no work experience is very low. I have honestly never met one in my entire life. I know a person who was on disability for mental stuff, and they had never really worked. At one time, they got much better, and they got a job. They got fired after a few months, which is typical for people on disability for mental stuff, and then they deteriorated and apparently decided never to do that again. But they had landed a good government job even with no work experience because they had a university degree.
The Right loves to talk about “unemployable” people. Perhaps there are unemployable Americans. I haven’t the faintest idea. But I am not sure if I have ever met one, and most that I did meet were already collecting disability. The unemployable Americans due to no work experience must be very small in number.
Then the immigrants catch on to the deal, they go on welfare, and then we need to let a few million more uneducated, unskilled, Third-World immigrants in, and the cycle continues.
This is not true. Immigrants to the US do not “go on welfare.” They are banned from most social programs as it is, since they only take citizens. Most legal immigrants also don’t “go on welfare.” I have never met a single immigrant, legal or illegal, who was on any kind of welfare program of any type.
Most immigrants to the US have a very strong work ethic, often stronger than Americans. It is an endless rightwing trope that illegal aliens flood into the US “to go on welfare.” Go to any conservative anti-illegal website, and this is all they talk about. “They come here for the welfare!” And it’s the biggest lie on Earth. The number of illegal aliens who come to the US “to go on welfare” must by vanishingly small. First of all, that would be a very stupid reason to come to the US since illegals are not eligible for any programs, and those they are eligible for through their kids don’t even pay the bills.
It is certainly not true that millions of illegals “go on welfare” creating a labor shortage, necessitating importation of more illegals. The only way this is somewhat true is that if if you legalize illegals, many of them don’t want to work in the fields anymore, so you need to import more illegals to work in the fields. But it is simply not true that there is a labor shortage in US fields. I live in the biggest agricultural region in the US, and there is no farm worker labor shortage here. In fact, farm worker unemployment is around 15% at any given time as the work is seasonal.
Certainly there is no need for mass immigration to combat labor shortages. These labor shortages do not exist in the US and exist only in the lying mouths of US businessmen, particularly farmers and owners of high tech companies and their lying lackeys in media and politics. The fake labor shortages are constantly conjured up by US capitalists in order to import more immigrants and guest workers to drive down wages even further.
Make no mistake about it, people. If you are a worker, or would like to be a worker, amnesty is going to hike your taxes and cut your pay.
He is correct that mass immigration will cut your pay if you are worker, but probably only if you are a low skilled worker. Some workers such as tech workers are also being impacted. However, it will not raise your taxes. Conservatives like to say that everything on God’s green Earth is going to “raise your taxes.”
Lately, the Democratic Party has gotten in on it too, claiming that some rightwing projects are going to “raise your taxes.” This is stupid. Liberals should not be decrying anything that raises taxes. If you are a liberal and you bemoan things that are going to “raise your taxes” you’re not a liberal anymore. Liberals support taxes. We love taxation. We can’t get enough of it. Taxes in the US are far too low and need to be vastly increased, mostly on the rich and the corporations.
The truth is that almost no political project is going to “raise your taxes.” National health care would probably necessitate some sort of a tax increase, but it is uncertain how that would work out. Most projects that increase the size and scope of government functions need to be paid for in some way or another. Mass immigration does increase the costs to government as the immigrants cost more than they produce in taxation to pay for themselves. Immigrants simply don’t pay for themselves; they cost money.
The increased costs will probably just be dealt with by cutting more and more services and running up bigger and bigger deficits as raising taxes is a political death wish anymore. Bottom line is that illegals or mass immigration in general does not really raise your taxes. Instead they increase the costs of government, leading to large deficits and major cutbacks in state services.
The left, of course, couldn’t care less about actual working people. They think of them as a bunch of nasty Archie Bunkers who ought to lose their stupid jobs. Serve ’em right. Racist bigots.
This probably isn’t true. In my whole life I might have met one White leftist who felt this way. Your average middle class liberal likes proles about as much as rightwingers do. Like or dislike of the working class is a class issue, not a politics issue. Both rightwing and liberal middle class types don’t really care to hang out with proles all that much, as they both think they are low class.
But the only people I have ever met who had utter contempt for low wage workers were all rightwingers, and most of them were young men. It is hard to find a liberal who expresses contempt for working class people. I am not even sure that they exist.
Some of the rich have contempt for working class people, but those are mostly young rich males. Contempt for proles does not seem to be acceptable in US culture. As one moves further to the Left, you will find more sympathy for proles, so support for proles and working class people is actually a function of politics in a sense in that it is almost a requirement for being a true liberal or Leftist. There are liberals who are fairly rightwing for a liberal who are dubious about “the workers and peasants.” But they came from an upper class background, and they were not that liberal anyway. As they moved further to the Left with time, their support for and comfort with proles increased.
The problem is that most of the Right’s rhetoric is simply untrue. Most of their talking points are frankly falsehoods, but they are things that conservatives want to believe, as they want to believe that the world actually works in the twisted way that their vision says it does.
They don’t want to confront reality either. No one does, not the Left, not the Right, really nobody. It is much more comfortable to lie about the world than to see it for what it really is. When you see the world in realis, most of the ideology that you have carefully constructed over a lifetime is stripped bare and revealed to be either lies or nonsense, mostly set up to make you feel good about the world or your view of it in some way. Revealing your lifelong biases as a pack of lies is very painful, and most people just do not want to confront that monster, so they content themselves on comfortable illusions.
Mass Floods in India Bring Out the True Character of Indian Hindus
Mass floods have hit northern India. I don’t know a lot about what happened, but many homes were washed away and apparently a number of people have died. In addition, quite a few people are without food and shelter.
Here India Land of Rapes, one of our finest commenters, lays out the real deal on Indian morality, or the lack of it as such.
Only in a crisis can the real character of people and society can be understood. When the earthquake and tsunami hit Japan, the people who survived stood in queue and took whatever their government gave them to eat and remained disciplined and organized without any violent incidents.
The true culture of Hinduism is getting exposed in the recent Himalayan floods.
Politicians rushing to save their own kith and kin. Traders selling food for 2000% high cost during the tragedy. The so-called spiritual Hindus taking whatever gold ornaments left on dead bodies. People fighting with each other for food. Women becoming prostitutes after losing their bead winners and hoteliers using these women prostitutes as a easy trade for hotel booking and necessary massage facilities in town.
This is a true opportunistic culture folks. You wonder why India, despite all its fake spirituality, is such a shithole?
It is because everything in India is a lie.
You have to lie, stab each other and be a hypocrite to survive in that filthy place. Everyone in that nation is a crook; to be honest you have to be a worst crook and hypocrite to survive in India.
Read the great story of Hindu morality. All the idiot trolls who spend their time spamming this blog and bullshitting their nonsense about glorious Hinduism, read the fucking comments on that article.
This is a reminder to all those who believe in Hindu spiritual nonsense. Spirituality is for sale in India. It has always been up for sale, and morality is the last thing you will find in these people. Don’t let their fake smiles, cries and obedience fool you. As long as you have something they need, they will respect you. The moment you end up with nothing, these people stab you and move on to next host without any guilt or shame.
Hindu culture at its best for you. It’s far worse than the USA in many ways. That’s why to most hypocrite Hindus, the USA is paradise.
No wonder USA is turning into a shithole like India. Once Hindus entered US Companies and started their nepotistic work ethic, the entire business culture became corrupt. One wonders if there is a pattern here.
Left Support for Mass Immigration: The Role of Bullying
Hizzle writes:
Don’t know how you feel about linkage, Rob, but this is an interesting fellow whose post is very related to the anti-worker social pathologies of the Left:
It’s not really true that the Left is anti-worker. They think they are pro-worker. They are just blinded fools, that is all.
However, there is a type of White Far Leftist who does seem to hate US workers. They repeat the lies that US workers (especially White workers) are fat, lazy, rightwing and crappy workers. They say we need to import millions of illegals because US workers are such crappy workers.
These types are actually rare, but I did meet one once. He was an “anarchist” in his 20’s. He found out how I felt about illegals, and he went fullon nutso at me, screaming and yelling. He called me “fascist.”
This is the type of bullying they do to their fellow Lefties and liberals. If you are on the Left, most of your friends are also on the Left. Probably a lot of Lefties (especially liberals) are dubious about mass immigration (especially illegal immigration), but the other Lefties simply browbeat and harangue them about immigration until they fall into line. If they continue to be non-PC on immigration, most of their Left-liberal friends will scream and yell at them, calling them “fascist,” “reactionary,” and “racist’ and you don’t knuckle under, they simply end their friendship with you in a really mean and cruel way.
Further, they go around telling all your friends on the Left what an evil fascist racist you are, and then you lose even more friends. Left-liberals are very fanatical about politics and they will actually end friendships over political issues. They will remain friends with a conservative because they think they are hopeless, but they will end a friendship with a heterodox Leftist who wanders off the plantation. Most people don’t like to fight, especially with their friends and allies, and having your ally friends break up with you in a very mean and vicious way is painful, and most folks will just chicken out and avoid it by going along to make peace.
Also, liberal-Leftists are very susceptible to name calling. We hate being called reactionaries, fascists and racists by our fellow Lefties, so those terms are very effective at bringing us into line. It is still painful for me to read the things Lefties say about me on the web – it really hurts my feelings when they call me racist, I have to admit it.
Project Middle Class Death: Rightwing Version
On the Right, of course, there is indeed a plot by all of the neoliberals and globalizers (even the super-rich “liberal” type) that intends to replace as many US workers as possible with scabs and slaves of various types, illegals, guest workers, offshoring, whatever. On the Right, the agenda is simply “low-wage conservatism” which has always been the philosophy of the US rightwing dating all the way back to the US South, where it got a lot of its impetus. It is simply baffling and amazing that so many working class Whites have gone along cheering themselves hoarse at “low-wage conservatism.” If you are a conservative US worker, I need to ask you, “How exactly is it that low wage conservatism benefits you as a working class person?”
There is also a segment of the transnational neoliberal elite (of which Obama and Rahm Emanuel are part) that wants to dissolve all nations and have corporations and the super-rich (themselves) rule the world. They actually intend to create some sort of a modern neo-feudalist or caste like society because this best serves their economic self-interest.
Project Middle Class Death: Leftwing Version
BAG suggest in the comments that the US Left cares noting about working class Americans anymore. This isn’t exactly true, and to the extent that labor struggles in the US exist at all, it is the Left that supports them. And in many other ways, the US Left supports US workers politically in opposing anti-worker projects and supporting pro-worker projects at the state level.
So, the Left does support US workers, but they also advocate flooding the US with illegal aliens that have a catastrophic affect on US workers. They are also silent about the huge tidal wave of “guest workers,” – the Hindu 1-B’s and whatnot.
The problem is that the Left has a phobia about attacking immigrants. It’s not that they are plotting to destroy US workers with immigrants – though some on the Far Left do seem suspiciously like that. Mostly they just don’t care, and they find the whole conversation unseemly and racist. For the most part, they will insist that mass immigration of illegals or even guest workers has absolutely no affect whatsoever on the earnings of US workers. Then they will whip out 10 “scientific studies” that actually show that, and also show how great hordes of illegals and guest workers are for the US economy. For the most part, the Left and liberals have simply drunk the Koolaid about immigrants. They really do believe the immigrants of all kinds are the greatest thing since sliced bread.
In some ways, it seems that only workers that the Left loves in the US are the foreign workers! It’s not that the Left hates US workers. It is more that when it comes down to a conflict between US workers and foreign workers in the US, the Left will always support the foreigners and oppose the natives. This is a very anti-nationalist position and it is opposed to the interests of the Homeland. In this way, the Left is extremely unpatriotic.
But if you point out that the Left supports foreign workers over US workers, they will get mad and say that there is no conflict in the first place and you are racist for suggesting that there is. So their support for the foreigners over US workers is more unconscious than conscious. People on the Left really are goodhearted people, but too many of them have just drunk the Koolaid of various flavors and they end up promoting nasty stuff more out of naivete and self-delusion than out of actual desire to do harmful things.
Modern Identity Politics Is Insane
Hizzle writes:
I ask because your stance on illegal immigration and George Zimmerman is pretty heterodox for a Leftist, and it’s part of what drew me into your orbit (and could make more conservatives amenable to the economic Left). The less identity politics the Left plays, I believe, the more amenable people become to economic leftism (which I have no problems with).
I am Left on economics, and I am basically a liberal, but the modern Western Left is simply insane on Identity Politics. None of it makes any sense. All of these people are insane. Modern feminism is lunacy, but women do deserve equal rights. Thing is that here in the West, they already have them.
The Left is insane on the subject of race, first saying that there is no such thing as race (and violating modern science and common sense) and then saying that White people are evil and elevating Blacks and to a lesser extent Browns as permanent, bleeding, reeling victims of “White Supremacy” which has been fading for decades and now barely even exists.
I do not agree that Black folks are the greatest thing since sliced bread. Instead, they cause a ton of problems in America, most of which are 100% their fault and 0% anyone else’s fault. Racism doesn’t cause them to screw up like this; Blacks simply screw up, fail and act bad of their own ridiculous free will. They just choose to act terrible.
I do not agree that White people are evil.
I do not agree that mostly Blacks but also all non-Whites are reeling under horrific White Supremacy.
I do not even think racism is very important in modern America.
I do not think that women are brutally subjected to a Dictatorship of Patriarchy. It’s just not true anymore.
I do not agree that men and masculinity are evil, and women are all that.
I do not agree with female puritanism and a rejection of the sexual, which is the modern feminist agenda.
I do not agree with man-hating, political lesbianism, lesbian separatism and other forms of psychopathology if not outright lunacy.
As a radical environmentalist, the stupidest thing I can think of is flooding this country with millions more humans. Flooding millions of poor 3rd World peasants here is a terrible idea; they will just reproduce their failed 3rd World culture here in the US. 3rd World peasants and their offspring behave at a low level, cause a ton of problems, degrade functioning neighborhoods and cities, and cause an unholy mountain of gang and crime problems. They’re just lousy immigrants flat out.
I am very much uncertain of flooding the US with backwards, reactionary, ultra-racist Indians who come from the most failed state on Earth. They come from a poisonous culture, and most Indians come out of their culture poisoned by it to one degree or another. We let these poisoned people into our culture, and they will start to reproduce their poisoned culture here in the US.
Guest workers and illegal immigrants have caused massive job loss among Americans. Illegals nuked jobs for working class Americans, and now the guest workers are ruining the lives and livelihoods of countless upper middle class and even upper class American workers. I am pro-worker, and I say that mass immigration, especially guest workers and illegals, is a catastrophe for US workers.
This is a project of the US rich and corporate America designed to use low wage immigrants to destroy US workers and their unions, ruining the American middle class and even upper middle class. The US elite and corporations want to reproduce some sort of feudalist, caste-like society via mass immigration, and incredibly the Left is going along in this project.
The Left is on board with destroying working class, middle class and even upper middle class US workers by replacing them with foreign coolies and slaves. What we have here is a Left that is full of hatred for Western workers and pushes an anti-US worker project designed to destroy them.
George Zimmerman is a hero, period. He killed a Black thug. The Left and the antiracist nuts have long since left real equal rights behind and now all they do is push extreme racism and discrimination against Whites in addition to promoting and defending Black criminals. All of the recent Black and antiracist heroes have been criminals, often very evil young Black men.
The Left is basically cheering on Black crime. Black Marxists often see Black crime and rioting aa revolutionary acts of sticking it to the White man. That’s crap. Black people riot because too many of them act like a bunch of animals. Black people commit crime not because they are revolutionaries but because far too many of them are depraved, wicked, debased, sociopathic lumpen criminal-minded human beings who belong in jails and prisons and away from civilized humanity.
It is painful for me to rebel against Leftist dogma like this, but the truth is that the modern Left is simply insane in many ways. In rebelling against them and taking “rightwing” positions, I am simply being logical and rational. I look out at the world commonsensically and see what I see, then I develop my opinions based on reason and basic common sense, Right, Left, Center and all the rest of the political BS be damned.
Jesus Was a Socialist/Communist
Hizzle writes:
Rob, short of going through all the trackbacks and previous entries, as a communist-socialist (or someone sympathetic to that outlook) is it your view that Christianity needs to be jettisoned, that it’s only real purpose is to keep the peasants under control for their master? You know, cooperating with the feudal lords in the hopes of attaining something in the hereafter?
Well, I have no opinion at all on religion. I am actually pretty pro-religion for a Leftist. I am a Christian myself. I identify with Catholic Liberation Theology. Religion is basically here to stay at least for a while. We just have to make some sort of an accommodation with it. It is simply not going away. However, there is an interesting momentum in the US towards agnosticism and atheism. Now 15% of Americans are agnostics/atheists. This is a remarkable increase over only a decade, and it is driven entirely by young people.
Down in Latin America, they have some really progressive forms of Catholicism and Christianity. There are Christian Catholic Communists in Cuba, and a lot of Liberation Theology types in Venezuela and elsewhere. The FMLN in El Salvador, the URNG in Guatemala, the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, the ELN in Colombia, were armed Left guerrillas whose cadre were all Christians. There were Catholic priests running around with machine guns. This is where I am coming from. Even Sendero Luminoso in Peru was full of Catholics. About 1/3 of their cadre were Catholics and their leader Abimael Guzman says he is still a Catholic. A lot of the FARC cadre are Catholics too.
So in Latin America, the Left is not even really anti-Christianity. The same thing is going on in the Philippines, where a lot of the NPA cadre are Catholics and there are Commie priests who administer to their armed flock.
So anymore, it can’t even really be said that Christianity, especially Catholicism, is an anti-people force pushing opium for the people and pie in the sky. Liberation Theology practices “the preferential option for the poor,” and many Liberation Theologists have even promoted armed struggle to overthrow social fascism and bring in a state of democratic rule.
I think the Left blew it by being so hostile to religion. Buddhism is of course compatible with the Left as is Islam and of course Catholicism is too. Protestantism is harder sell, and Hinduism seems impossible.
Christianity is so easy though. Read the Bible, the New Testament. Jesus was a socialist, a Communist. He threw the moneychangers out of the temple. He said it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. He hang out with the poor and the downtrodden, with the lowest of the low, the proletarians and even the lumpens. He railed against the crooked rich Jews. He was not anti-government. He said to render under Caesar what he was due.
Anti-government, radical rightwing capitalism has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Jesusist New Testament Replacement Theology. It is sacrilege. It is heresy. It’s not even Christianity. The marriage of Christianity with rightwing economics makes no sense in any possible universe, but that is what we have now. One can make an excellent argument that capitalism itself is anti-capitalist at its very core.
"Dog Is Dead, or The Crucifixion Reloaded"
Got this off the Internet. Nice. It is actually from The Thirst for Annihilation: Georges Bataille and Virulent Nihilism, by a very strange philosopher named Nick Land. It didn’t have a title. I gave it that stupid title. Improve it if you can or dare.
I wiped the blade against my jeans and walked into the bar. It was mid-afternoon, very hot and still. The bar was deserted. I ordered a whiskey.
The barman looked at the blood and asked: ‘God?’
‘Yeah.’
‘S’pose it’s time someone finished that hypocritical little punk, always bragging about his old man’s power…’
He smiled crookedly, insinuatingly, a slight nausea shuddered through me.
I replied weakly: ‘It was kind of sick, he didn’t fight back or anything, just kept trying to touch me and shit, like one of those dogs that try to fuck your leg. Something in me snapped, the whingeing had ground me down too low. I really hated that sanctimonious little creep.’
‘So you snuffed him?’
‘Yeah, I’ve killed him, knifed the life out of him, once I started I got frenzied, it was an ecstasy, I never knew I could hate so much.’ I felt very calm, slightly light-headed. The whiskey tasted good, vaporizing in my throat. We were silent for a few moments.
The barman looked at me levelly, the edge of his eyes twitching slightly with anxiety: ‘There’ll be trouble though, don’tcha think?’
‘I don’t give a shit, the threats are all used up, I just don’t give a shit.’
‘You know what they say about his old man? Ruthless bastard they say. Cruel…’
‘I just hope I’ve hurt him, if he even exists.’
‘Woulden wanna cross him merself,’ he muttered.
I wanted to say ‘yeah, well that’s where we differ’, but the energy for it wasn’t there. The fan rotated languidly, casting spidery shadows across the room. We sat in silence a little longer.
The barman broke first: ‘So God’s dead?’
‘If that’s who he was. That fucking kid lied all the time. I just hope it’s true this time.’
The barman worked at one of his teeth with his tongue, uneasily: ‘It’s kindova big crime though, isn’t it? You know how it is, when one of the cops goes down and everything’s dropped ’til they find the guy who did it. I mean, you’re not just breaking a law, your breaking LAW.’
I scraped my finger along my jeans, and suspended it over the bar, so that a thick clot of blood fell down into my whiskey, and dissolved. I smiled: ‘Maybe it’s a big crime,’ I mused vaguely ‘but maybe it’s nothing at all…’
‘…and we have killed him’ writes Nietzsche, but—destituted of community—I crave a little time with him on my own. In perfect communion I lick the dagger foamed with God’s blood.
Why a Moral Capitalism (Social Democracy) Is Hardly Even Possible
A rightwing capitalist from India posts:
So the problem that you have is basically with the ideals and goals of capitalism, which are to make money. I really don’t have a problem with talented and deserving folk making money with the sweat of their brows or the tapping of their keyboards or whatever.
I also realize that some sort of socialism is necessary, say, for making public parks, public roads, public hospitals and schools and so on.
But you need to weigh practicalities of each system. While I applaud the lofty ideals of Marx and Engel, I agree with the far more practical considerations of Machiavelli, who considered humans to be motivated by selfishness and greed. That selfishness and greed are what drive the economy, at least in capitalist countries.
Want more money? Work harder, work smarter, find out new ways to get the shit done, indulge your selfish fancy and think up new stuff that plugs in a wall socket… so on. Thing is, such systems tend to have a better overall life quality, because opportunities are inherently legion. It’s no wonder that while nobody would want to cross jungles full of poisonous snakes and swim dangerous waters for getting to India, a whole lot of Indians would cheerfully do so to get to the US.
Let’s consider a country still mired in socialistic ideals: India (China cannot be considered, thanks to Deng Xiaoping). In the 1990s, things got so bad they had to ship their gold bullion to the Bank of England just to meet the deficit. They then realized they had to get rid of their over-bloated behemoths of Public Works companies. These companies were a direct result of socialist practicality: they devoured huge amounts of money to feed their officials and never got anything done.
How did things go that way? I call it “crony socialism”. The government officials, perpetually in power, simply did not give a shit about anybody or anything, and answered to no one. The socialist government reveled in its poverty and penurity, and wore it like a crown.
The mindset of the government, upon acquiring power, became so draconian that a for-the-people, socialist state saw major uprisings, like the Naxalite movement and later secessionist movement in Punjab and the Jayprakash Narayan Movement in Uttar Pradesh and Behar. And these weren’t exactly occupy wall street stuff, these were very serious and sometimes armed insurgencies, and resulted in actual bloodshed and thousands of deaths.
Coming from an inherently socialist state, I say socialism is evil, having experienced it myself. Coming from an inherently capitalist state, you say capitalism is evil, having (I assume) experienced its excesses yourself.
No system is perfect, I suppose.
PS> I’ll give you a good point of attack: you can say that since Indians suck, their version of everything sucks, even socialism. However, socialism has been abandoned the world over. China abandoned it, and later USSR states abandoned it too.
We do not think that they ever had any real socialism in India. Indian socialism was a sick joke. It was “crony socialism.”
The world is not giving up on socialism. Most countries on Earth are a mixture of socialism and capitalism. A place like the USA has too much capitalism and not enough socialism, and a place like Cuba has too much socialism and not enough capitalism.
China is still a very socialist country, but they have gone much too far in the capitalist direction. It’s been a catastrophe. For instance, millions of Chinese are now dying for lack of healthcare. THIS is what the capitalists all over the world are cheering about! All those people dying!
You can’t have any kind of functional state under capitalism with public roads, schools, health care, parks, etc. because the capitalists hate all of that stuff and will always try to dismantle it. Most capitalists are not like you. Most capitalists do not even believe in public schools, health care, roads, parks, etc. They want to get rid of all of that stuff, especially the roads, schools, etc. So the media and the state in capitalist society soon get captured by these capitalist radicals, which are the super-rich and their bought politicians and owned media outlets. So the schools, health care, roads, and parks in a capitalist state gradually start to wither away and get destroyed.
Examples:
Schools: Since 1980, conservatives have declared war on public schools in the US. They have defunded public schools at all levels out of ideology. The want it to that only the rich can afford to go to college. They are also ideologically committed to privatization of schooling and they oppose public education out of ideology. Since 1980, countless public schools in China have been closed down. Many of these were opened during the Cultural Revolution. In most of the 3rd World, public eduction is defunded and the rich send their kids to private schools.
Health care: Since 1980, there have been continuous attacks on the NHS, the British health care system. That is because the Thatcherites and the neoliberal rightwing “Labor” are ideologically opposed to the NHS because they don’t believe in public health care.
Austerity has been delightfully pushed by the capitalist classes (the very rich) all over the world since 1980. It ruined Africa and Latin America for decades. Now they are pushing it in Europe and the US. There is no real reason to engage in austerity, but the rich simply see this as an opening to destroy the public sector which they hate, so they are using this opportunity. In any fiscal crisis under capitalism, the rich and the capitalists will use this crisis to engage in austerity to destroy the hated public sector.
Roads: US roads are falling apart because the rich and the capitalists do not believe in funding them out of ideological opposition. They simply think it is a waste of money.
Parks: US parks have been defunded for many, many years now, ever since Reagan. The rich and the capitalists always hate public parks and they always try to defund them and shut them down. Here in California, many of the parks have shut down. They probably do this out of sheer ideology. You can’t make money off a park, and the capitalists and the rich only care about things that make money. If you can’t make money off something, it’s worthless by definition.
I actually think that capitalism is absolutely evil, but I also agree that it works better than its alternatives. It’s the worst system on Earth, except for all the others, something like that, borrowing from Churchill.
Mogwai, "Yes I Am a Long Ways from Home"
Video here.
Great music video by a band called Mogwai. The song is called, “Yes I Am a Long Ways from Home.” Beautiful song, makes you want to hug the whole world. Love it. Sounds a bit like the space-rock of old. Reminds me somewhat of a French band called “Gong.”
Hezbollah Fighting in Homs
Video here.
Fascinating video shows Hezbollah fighting in Homs. At first I thought it was Al Qusayr, but I think it is Homs instead. The video was all in Arabic, so it was hard to figure out what they were talking about. Here you see the high spirits of the Hezbollah fighters as they move into the bombed out, ruined city.
Take note of the horrific footage where the fighters find a room full of men, bound and executed. Who executed them? Who knows? My guess would be rebels, but it’s hard to say for sure.
At one point, they meet a Christian, still living in the ruins of his home, who complains that the rebels were vicious to the Christians.
Towards the end of the video, Hezbollah takes a couple of prisoners and seems to treat them fairly.
Hezbollah has pumped a large force into Syria, and I think that was the right thing to do. Hezbollah’s army is so good that they are quickly turning the tide in favor of the Syrian regime. Their victory at Al Qusayr was a huge defeat for the rebels. Now Hezbollah will move onto Homs and then onto Aleppo and Irbil Province. If the rebels are defeated in the north, the war will for all intents and purposes be over.
The Arab Sunni world is outraged that Hezbollah has gotten involved in the Syrian Civil War. Some Gulf countries have recently started throwing out Lebanese Shia who are residing there in revenge for Hezbollah’s role in Syria. This war is increasingly turning into a Sunni-Shia sectarian conflict.
The Swedish Model Versus the American Model
I grabbed this pic off of a forum, so it was hard to figure out what they were getting at. Apparently only 10% of Americans prefer the US model. Americans were apparently asked which model they preferred without labeling the models. The outrageous maldistribution of the US model was apparently only favored by 10% of Moronicans.
Fully 90% of Moronicans stated that they preferred either the Swedish model or the equal model. Of course, once you slap labels on the models, no doubt the survey changes, because equality is Communism and Swedish Communist-socialist. Votes for the US would automatically go up because Moronicans support everything about the US, even the most awful and disgusting parts of it, because, you know:
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! We’re number 1! We’re number 1! We’re number 1! We’re number 1!
And all of that crap.
It’s amazing to look at that US model and how outrageously unfair it is. Incredible that Moronicans seem to actually prefer it that way. Think if our GDP was the same yet it was split up more fairly. Think how much less the rich would have and how much more the rest of us would have. What’s not to like?
This also shows the lie about “capitalism.” According to Moronican fools, the only way you can possibly have this thing called “capitalism” is if the pie ends up divided up like you see in the US model. In other words, if it’s not ridiculously unfair, it’s not capitalism. Wow, sounds like a good reason to junk capitalism right there.
But the Swedish economy is 93% in private hands. If you walk down the streets of Stockholm, you will see small businesses everywhere, stacked to the rafters with every product you could possibly imagine at reasonable prices. And business is bustling right along. Sounds downright capitalist to me.
The thing is, there is generally no pure socialism and no pure capitalism. Pure socialism may have existed at one point, but it’s gone from everywhere now, even Cuba and North Korea. And pure capitalism doesn’t exist anywhere either. Every state on Earth is some combination of capitalism and socialism, some sort of a mixed economy. The vast majority of Moronicans are too stupid to figure this out, and they think that “socialism” and “capitalism” are some sort of polar opposites that cannot co-exist, and that if you have one, you don’t have the other.
I would add that the US mass media, including the “liberal media,” is all owned by very rich people, in the top .1% of the US population. They all know full well what that US pie is shaped like, and they like it just fine that way. Either that or they want to make things even worse and give even more to their fat asses.
Part of the project of the US mass media and increasingly both political parties is to maintain that US pie in its grotesque division, and not to make it the tiniest bit fair. A tremendous amount of media effort goes into brainwashing Americans into thinking that that US pie tastes just as good as an apple one, baked by Mom herself, fresh out of the oven. Not that they would ever let you see that pie chart yourself. That would be showing their hand, no?
PFLP-GC Battling Syrian Rebels in a Syrian Palestinian Refugee Camp
Video here.
This is a great video showing fighting between the PFLP-GC and the Syrian rebels in a Palestinian refugee camp in Damascus. The rebels entered the camp where the PFLP-GC has a huge presence, and the PFLP-GC, a very well-armed and well-trained force, fought the rebels. The Syrian Army unfortunately would not enter the camp to help the PFLP-GC fight the rebels. Quite a few of the Palestinians in the camp, including PFLP-GC members, joined the rebels to fight against their Palestinian brethren. However, over time, the PFLP-GC defeated the rebels and rousted them from the camp. In the meantime, much of the camp was destroyed.
The Palestinians are getting dragged into this conflict despite their best efforts to stay out of it.
The PFLP-GC is a pro-Syrian split from the PFLP group. The group is an old-line secular group that used to include quite a few Christian members. They strongly oppose the new radical Islamist turn that the Islamic world has been moving towards. They consider these new Islamists to be intolerant and fanatical.
The PFLP-GC has high praise for the Syrian regime. It is true that Syria has treated Palestinians better than most Arab regimes. Palestinians are allowed to work in Syria, whereas they often cannot work in other places. In addition, the PFLP-GC says that Syria still stands with the Palestinians while the rest of the world has abandoned them. There is certainly quite a bit of truth to that statement.
In terms of its relationship with Israel, the PFLP-GC is a pretty hardline group. Recently in the West Bank, there was a gathering of Palestinians at which both Hamas and the PFLP-GC spoke. Both groups praised each other although the PFLP-GC is about as secular as Hamas is Islamist. The reason both groups praised each other is because both of them take a very hard line against Israel.
The fighting in Syria has split the Palestinian movement badly. In particular, the PFLP proper has called for the PFLP-GC to be thrown out of the PLO (the PFLP-GC, along with a number of other organizations, is part of the larger PLO) for needlessly endangering the lives of Palestinians by getting involved in the Syrian Civil War. One might argue that as the rebels entered the camp, the PFLP-GC had little choice but to fight. Some say that the PFLP-GC is fighting alongside the Syrian army in other places in Syria, but this is dubious. The PFLP-GC also has training camps and a presence in Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, in particular in the south of Lebanon.
This group is rather unpopular among Palestinian groups, but after reading an interview with some of their elder members who edit and write the party’s newspaper, I rather like them. Old-time secular Arab nationalists, just like the Palestinians used to be.
Arab American Vedantist & Idol Worshipper Was Banned
Look folks, you cannot come here and spam the blog with endless one-note posts. A lot of people do this, and I have a lot of tolerance for this, but this guy just went too far. In particular, you cannot make endless off-topic posts about your one-note theme. No matter what the subject of the post was, this guy somehow found a way to tie it into his obsession with the New Age Eastern religion he was pushing. You can’t do that. If the post isn’t about New Age Eastern religion, don’t make comments about New Age Eastern religion.
I also note that his endless spamming was starting to make a lot of the other posters pretty angry. I felt that he might have been driving off other commenters too. This is a problem with these off-topic, one-note spammers – they tend to drive off most of the other commenters and soon all you have left are trolls, one-noters and spammers of various types.
Most of you regulars are ok, so don’t worry about this.
