Someone Want to Tell Me One Conservative Position I Should Take on Anything Whatsoever?

Tad writes:

Man, socialist?

I can’t believe that for a second.

Do you realize that 95% of soft-Leftists reading this blog would assume that you are rightwing or far rightwing?

In the new American socialist utopia – you can’t talk about race, DNA etc. The ‘truth’ there whatever it may be may contradict the social view of equality, and it can’t be spoken of. There are no differences between us, by definition. If you were to bring any of this stuff up at a Leftist’s dinner table, you’d be immediately banned from the group.

You realize Janet Napolitano, former Head of Homeland Security is now Dean at Cali UC system has banned the phrases: “The job should go to the best candidate” and “America is a place where anyone can get ahead” – because of the perceived slights against visible minorities who ostensibly have had the same choice? This is the new Orwellian socialism. To even declare that “the job should go the best candidate” will get you fired. Now at UC Cali, coming to Corporate America very soon.

And the PUA stuff? Ok – I get it – it’s extremely interesting from an intellectual point of view, isn’t it – but 99% of popular leftists would view this stuff as total misogynist creep show – i.e. treating women like objects to be acquired? PUA is essentially ‘rightwing’ to any leftwing female – it fully embodies the resentment they have towards men. It’s the most anti-feminist thing you can do!

Also – I do agree that PUA is very interesting because it’s ‘what works’ (i.e. what women like instead of what they say they like) and it’s frankly a little hypocritical that they say they don’t like it (your bits about womanizers alludes to this). It’s 100% frat-boy creep show to most girls, and kryptonite to feminists, who are all leftwing.

Anyhow – it’s funny that you think that you’re a socialist, because 90% of socialists would not agree with you, given your writing. Maybe you are in the academic/Frankfurt school or something along those lines, but practically/popularly – no way man. The popular Leftist narrative can’t deal with many of the simple truths you point at daily because it antagonizes their ideological narrative.

FYI – I was Googling about the new ‘human species’ discovered in S. America a few days ago, and links to your site popped up among a pile of Stormfront links. Yes: Stormfront. That’s how ‘leftwing’ your stuff is? 🙂

Anyhow – this is a really great blog, a lot of truth-bombs here, the world needs this, please keep it up.

I keep hearing this endlessly. I am a socialist mostly on economics. And frankly, when I go down the line of positions where it lists Democrats on one side and Republicans on another, I line up with Democrats almost 90% of the time.

If I am a rightwinger, how come I never vote Republican? If I am a rightwinger, how come I never support any rightwing political project anywhere – and I have seen a lot of them. Republican Party conservatism is not the only kind out there. There are all sort of other varieties of rightwing projects – I have been exposed to many of them.

Most conservatives are evangelistic and I have some commenters to this site who keep trying to convert me to conservatism, giving me papers and books to read. They show me all sorts of weird conservative hybrid stuff, syncretic stuff, Third Positionist stuff, and I despise all of it. It’s all horrible because…well, because it’s conservatism, and conservatism frankly sucks.

One thing I notice about all of these hybrids is that they mostly smell sort of fascistic in some way or another. Another thing I notice over and over is that conservatism is utterly hostile to democracy and popular role. All of these hybrid forms of rightwing politics promote aristocratic rule in one way or another. And really that is what conservatism boils down to. Conservatism is rule by the aristocracy. Always has been, is now, always will be. Liberalism is rule by democracy, or the popular rabble if you will.

Another thing I notice is that all of these rightwing hybrids promote some sort of worship or hierarchy. Yes, humans practice hierarchy. We have to. But that is more to be lamented than anything else. Liberals are dubious about hierarchy and recognize that while some of it is inevitable, it’s hardly an altar to be worshiped at.

I also notice some sort of fetishization of violence often for its own sake. I assume that is where the fascist angle comes in. Often these rightwingers explicitly disavow peace as even a goal to be fought for and believe that mankind much wage wars apparently as part of the human project.

Yes conservatives hate feminism, but what do they replace it with. The rightwing forms I have all seen are explicitly misogynistic, state openly that women are inferior to men and often with to roll back many of women’s hard fought rights. There are more rightwingers who want to revoke women’s right to vote that you would ever believe out there. Sure, feminism blows, but this reactionary nuttiness is some sort of an alternative? How about none of the above?

Conservatives typically promote traditional values and wish to go back to traditional marriage. There are good reasons for this and indeed, society would probably be better off if we did this. But what’s the likelihood that this is going to happen?

The cat’s out of the bag here. Women have been unleashed. They’re not going back to the cages and prisons we kept them in for 2,000 years. Might be nice if they did, but they aren’t going to do it. They’re roaming free, and it’s causing all sorts of problems, yes, but what are you going to do about it? Women seem to like to roam around free like this, and they don’t want to go back to the old ways. So we are stuck with this modernist feminist world in that sense. Life gives you lemons, make lemonade. Deal with it. Adjust to it.

Yes the growth in single Moms and one parent families is causing all sorts of problems, but what are you going to do about it? What possible political proposal could you put forth that would ameliorate the single motherhood problem. The Right goes on and on how terrible single Moms are for society, but what sort of proposals does the Right offer to deal with the issues of single motherhood? Do they offer anything? What are they going to do about single Moms? Line them up and shoot them? Force them to marry men? Once again, the Right bitches but offers nothing in the way of concrete proposal.

Conservative solutions to the traditional morality issue make no sense.

Get rid of no-fault divorce? No.

Get rid of abortion on demand? No.

Prioritize parents rights over schools and social workers? No.

Once again, conservatives off no workable solutions. Abortion isn’t going to become illegal again. The old divorce laws are not coming back. Parents’ will is not going to trump that of society or the schools. All of these cats are out of the bag and the changes look permanent because no one really wants rollback. Is there a downside to all of this modernism? Sure there is. But people seem to like it anyway, they want to keep these changes in place and they don’t want to go back to the old days.

Sure, the Left is insane about race as it is about most social issues, but what does the Right offer about race? The more radical sections of the Right offer only segregation and a return to legal discrimination. Allow counties, cities and towns to determine their racial makeup. That means maybe a Black couple could not move to Podunkville if Podunkville decided that they had already fulfilled their share of Blacks. I should support this?

Roll back the Civil Rights Acts, the Housing Rights Acts and the Voting Rights Acts. Overturn Roe v. Wade. I am supposed to support this?

Other than the conservative position on illegal immigration, which I support, can someone please point to one single conservative position, project or proposal anywhere in the US that I ought to support? Come on. Throw them at me. I am probably going to oppose every single one of them. Give me your best shot.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “Someone Want to Tell Me One Conservative Position I Should Take on Anything Whatsoever?”

  1. “The Right goes on and on how terrible single Moms are for society, but what sort of proposals does the Right offer to deal with the issues of single motherhood? ”

    They want to cut welfare and make divorce more difficult so that women think twice about raising a kid alone. Any woman that has a kid can collect money and divorce goes entirely in the woman’s favor.

  2. Yes the growth in single Moms and one parent families is causing all sorts of problems, but what are you going to do about it?

    First, there was the liberal sexual revolution. Then, there will be the socialist sexual revolution.

    We can repeat Bachofen’s conception of the establishment of early patriarchy, a reestablishment of sexual “primitive communism” in our times.

    What we need to do is offer young men an alternative to the humiliating and predatory capitalist model of sexual relationships which is force-fed to them in their adolescence. We need to ruthlessly critique the ideology of the sexual marketplace, with its “losers” and “winners”.

  3. Why don’t you show me one single Third Positionist proposal that I should support. Show me one single 3rd Positionist party or movement that I should support. I have looked at a lot of 3rd positionist proposals, parties and movements and I am against all of them.

  4. What am I supposed to say about women? How am I supposed to criticize them? Are they going to listen to me? I have no particular beefs against women, and contrary to popular lie, I am not a misogynist at all. Quite the opposite in fact. All of the problems with women are due to their inborn biological nature and there’s probably no way to change that. There’s nothing much to be done about any of this stuff.

    1. Most sexual relationships in urban areas are now mediated by telecommunications, so we could use the resources of ECHELON and the NSA to monitor and enforce proper sexual behavior. Women who continue to behave in a way which is detrimental to society need help, and we need to raise awareness of the suffering of women afflicted with sexual pathology. To that end, a new social services bureaucracy could be created which would identify such women and prescribe them with the chemical and electrical intervention necessary to remedy their problems.

      1) Women’s sexual behavior reduces their fertility and group fitness.
      2) Therefore, it is objectively pathological and a public health crisis.
      3) The state has a sacred duty to do what it can to stop this epidemic of sexual pathology.

      http://www.technologyreview.com/news/527561/military-funds-brain-computer-interfaces-to-control-feelings/

      Once biology becomes just putty in our fingers, why should we be shackled by our primitive animal natures any longer? When we can accomplish the total mobilization of the physical and spiritual potential of man, the question is no longer “why”, but “why not”. The future is the total subordination of the atavistic female nature to rational planning and control, the triumph of the titanic power of technology over the Earth.

    2. “However, the prospect of biogenetic manipulation opens up the much more radical possibility of manipulating psychic identity itself. Although this argumentation is impeccable in its simplicity, there is one big problem with it: does the very fact of the possibility of biogenetic manipulations not retroactively change the self-understanding of ourselves as “natural” beings, in the sense that we now experience our “natural” dispositions themselves as something “mediated,” not simply as something immediately given but as something that can be in principle manipulated(and is thus simply contigent)? The key point here is that there is no return to the preceding naive immediacy. Once we know that our natural dispositions depend on blind genetic contingency, every stubborn sticking to these dispositions is as fake as sticking to old “organic” mores in a modern universe.” — Slavoj Zizek

  5. Funny, it’s socialism that has caused the single-mother problem. So that’s one right there. Conservatives can end this problem quickly.

    Trade – true conservatives oppose global trade agreements which send jobs and companies overseas, allow cheap products made with slave labor to enter tariff free, and align with cheap labor immigration policy . There is a branch on the left who is against this as well but not mainstream Democrats.

    Immigration obviously.

    Ridiculous wars – both mainstream parties are all for it and again true conservatives and a branch on the Left is against them.

    If you make a huge deal about religion and abortion (anti-religion, pro-abortion) then you’ll want to stick with the left – not real mature thinking in my opinion. Why anyone would fight for abortion or against religion is beyond me though – it’s way down on the totem pole in things I think are important.

    Complete servitude to the Jews – not with true conservatives.

  6. Sounds like you don’t like conservatives because of their stance on religion and abortion.
    So you vote democrat for that nonsense and watch the country go to hell – makes no sense. I think the issue is that you don’t have kids Robert – people without kids don’t have to worry about the future.

    1. I do not support conservatives on one single issue other than illegal immigration. It’s not just abortion and religion.

      PS You need to stop talking like this. You can’t attack the Democratic Party and promote the Republican Party on here. This is a socialist blog.

  7. To Heaviside,
    “1) Women’s sexual behavior reduces their fertility and group fitness.”

    It isn’t always true that a reduction in fertility reduces group fitness. There is such a thing as fucking yourself away from the table. There are other resources, such as living space, that become less available per capita as there are more people.

    “2) Therefore, it is objectively pathological and a public health crisis.”

    There is a dangerous and chronic public health problem. It’s the set of mental disorders that keeps the socially and technologically advanced cultures of the world from defending their borders.

    “3) The state has a sacred duty to do what it can to stop this epidemic of sexual pathology.”

    Individuals are acting individually to correct overpopulation. There is no need for state intervention to correct a false problem. Bear in mind that bureaucracies don’t go away just because the problems they were meant to solve do.

    I perceive a reluctance in much of society to let our problem solving be done through voluntary means. How about we just calculate how much it costs the state in welfare payments for someone to raise a child and offer a similar amount to childless women to voluntarily have a hysterectomy.

  8. “Someone Want to Tell Me One Conservative Position I Should Take on Anything Whatsoever?”

    Peace is good. War is bad and not to be resorted to over trifles, lies or delusions.

    That is actually a conservative position. Those who call themselves “conservative” in politics are either deluded or lying.

  9. I am sorry that I did not live up to your misogynistic hopes, my friend. I am somewhat conservative on social issues, not real conservative. I’m not really a social conservative, but I hate SJW’s and the Cultural Left too. I guess I am in the middle between the Cultural Left and social conservatives.

    You are right. I don’t criticize women too much on here. But they still keep screaming MISOGYNIST at me anyway? What’s wrong with women anyway? Is that the only word they know how to say anymore? Anytime you say anything they don’t like, it’s MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST MISOGYNIST.

    Shit is so tiresome man.

    1. Just like nonwhites only know how to say “RACIST”, and pro-immigration types only know how to call us NAZI?

      Although if you look into any history book that doesn’t need to be colored in, Nazis weren’t the ones defending their borders, they were the ones breaching other cuntries’ borders and stealing their resources, and overwriting their culture.
      So to be truthful, anti-immigration types need to be called “FRENCH RESISTANCE” but it doesn’t roll off the tongue, doesn’t have the same negative connotations, and doesn’t shut people up as fast.

  10. Lindsay would fit in well with mainstream Leftism… a half century or so ago.

    I mean the hardcore old school Marxists would write stuff like this;

    Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?

    Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don’t know what they’re talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction. .

    This is sure to trigger any SJW who delves deep enough because it would starkly reveal to him the truth that he only serves oligarchic reaction, as even Engels back then was prophetic enough to perceive.

  11. From your headline I was going to say “Given your bitching and whining about dark people, obviously you’d like the conservative position on immigration….DUH!!!” But I see you’ve addressed that. I think the reason conservatives think you guys have common ground is very much your writing on race. The difference is they think the solution is “conservative values” and you realize that this is not only a bullshit solution, but believe (or suspect) that dark-skinned low class behavior is genetically wired, so what the hell can conservatism offer when it has trouble accepting the basic facts of evolution?

    Conservatives are just dumb. They often think that if you agree with them that X is a problem you automatically agree with them that the solution is Y.

    There is plenty to complain about the modern left, especially the cultural left. But the idea that the right is therefore correct is like finding a couple of limitations in Einstein’s theory or relativity and therefore assuming that Newton’s version was therefore correct.

    1. It is not so much that I think that the bad behavior of some of those in the darker skinned races is genetic, it is more that conservatives have never showed me how they have any proposals that will seriously deal with these bad behaviors. I mean they have nothing.

      Conservatives are just dumb. They often think that if you agree with them that X is a problem you automatically agree with them that the solution is Y.

      Exactly!

      1. I believe that if whites feel guilty and want to make things better for Blacks, they should pay them to move to Africa, pay the bottom 90% to not reproduce, and pay the top 10% to have large families in order to offset the population reduction.

        Are you kidding me? This is a serious solution? That is completely unworkable. Furthermore, it’s immoral. On top of that, no one is going to support it. It’s undoable. Wait a minute. This is not even your radical solution? This is your modified radical solution that is not so extreme? Jesus Christ man. Are you even living in the real world?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.