Month: June 2020

Why Are Serial Killers So Mean?

It’s because they’ve pushed the mean element present in everyone who isn’t trying to be holy to the max. Plenty of people are not goody two shoes, but they aren’t serial killers. But that’s only because they haven’t peered into their “bad self” enough. But the scary thing is, Who knows when somebody will go deeper into their “bad self?”

Being mean to the max involves domination and self-worship among other things – basic Cluster B personality stuff. However, who’s to say we don’t all have some Cluster B in us? Why should we toss all these behaviors onto, say, White Supremacists for instance, when we all have some of it?

Christian Moral Puritanism

Sex is fine, even polygamy, but you can’t hurt your partner. Yet so much porn is about calling women sluts, choking them, BDSM – you name it. It’s sinfully fun to be bad, but it’s still, well, a sin.

I think many get the wrong idea that being morally pure is square when it’s not that but instead that someone good simply doesn’t want to hurt their partner.

The society of evil is obsessed with domination and being mean. It’s just natural and the dedicated like those into satanic ritual sacrifices are getting the biggest high from it.

Much of society associates religion with virginity, but that’s great propaganda for keeping people out of churches. Also, the true nature of sex is probably not going to be discussed in church because it’s weird, and it makes the pastor uncomfortable, and maybe they haven’t thought that deeply about it to begin with. But no doubt sexual addiction is a real problem, even among the religious.

Making a Mockery of Sex

So much sex in our society is about doing that, and that would be a “no-no” also. That means public displays of sexuality, but if someone wants a private strip club in their basement with only their married harem, I suppose that’s not wrong.

Reforming Inner City Schools

Honestly, public schools aren’t so great in rural counties either, minus the fact there are no gangs, etc..

The leftwing argument is no money has been spent on education, while the rightwing claims money has simply not spent wisely. That’s why they’re advocating for school vouchers, which are basically saying, “Public schools aren’t worth the time – here’s public money to go to a private one.” However, if public schools aren’t worth the time, then why build them to begin with?

If People Don’t Want to Learn, Let Them Leave

Some are cynical about the public school system because so many slackers and un-reformable bad boys are in it.

This idea is applied to our cities now. If they don’t want police, then let the place rot just as long no problems reach outside the zone. The US has already practiced this somewhat with inner-city ghettos, surprisingly, for many decades before any of this rioting. There are a lot of cops there, but what else has really been done to improve the place? The schools are garbage; there’s no opportunity.

Alt Left: The Black Race and Impulsiveness and Ability to Delay Gratification

RL: “Poor impulse control. It’s been documented and it’s genetic.. 6 year old children. Pure genetics.”

TJF: At age 6, environment could very easily guide one’s behavior. In reference to Alpha’s comment I’d like to see a study with children who have an engaged paternal figure versus those who do not. I’ve seen people dismiss the out of wedlock birthrates among Black Americans comparing the similar out of wedlock birth rates in Iceland and Sweden, but those societies are substantially different (markedly more socialist), and the birth fathers may be heavily engaged, but the parents are not married.

With that said I get the impression that clear consistent guidance is probably even more required / beneficial in Black Americans than Whites (albeit any child would benefit).

It’s been replicated over and over. The first tests were done in the South. They were worried it was environmental, so they took it to the Caribbean. Same result. They didn’t believe the results, so they kept doing the tests over and over. Eventually they had done the tests so many times that they got sick of trying to replicate them and they quit doing them.

You now have to argue that Caribbean Black and US Southern Black culture are the same in producing this odd effect. If it’s cultural, that means they have the same culture. But is that true? Caribbean Black culture is the same as US Black culture? Why would that be? And why doesn’t that play into the “niggers are the same everywhere” argument used by the racists? Also and more importantly, if they’re the same everywhere due to biology or due to culture, what difference does it make? Who cares! You still have a group of people who have problems with delaying gratification, and that’s a problem in a modern society.

Also let us look at this from another POV. One idea is the tests are simply wrong. Does the Black race on average seem to have a harder time delaying gratification than other races? Just look around you at how Black children and adults act. I taught Black kids for years. Of course it’s true, but by the time they are 16-18, most of that behavior is gone because the ones who could not delay gratification are all dropped out, on the streets, in jail or juvey, or probation or parole, or dead.

Look at the behavior of ghetto type Blacks. So much of the pathology seems to be so directly related to this inability to delay gratification. It’s as clear as air.

I’m not some racist out to hate Blacks and write them off as some failed race. At this point in history, I’m not sure how much it matters how they act. We are now in the era of genetic splicing and CRISPr technology. Genetically designed humans may not be too far away. Do we really need to be so concerned about what various races bring to the table genetically?

How about something else? How about a pill? I don’t like the idea of mandating meds for people who are not mentally ill and most pathological Blacks are not disordered at all. They’re not crazy. They’re just bad. We obviously don’t have a morality pill yet (but one can dream!) but suppose we found a pill that let you delay gratification? That enabled you to be less impulsive, which in my opinion is another terrible problem with the Black race.

I don’t see how we can force people to take it, but we could always offer it on a voluntary basis. A lot of Blacks are probably sick and tired of their impulsiveness and inability to delay gratification screwing up their lives. This might be especially true in Black men over 30-35. Maybe they’re angry because they can’t seem to control themselves, and this keeps ruining their lives. Suppose we say, “Here’s a pill to help you be less impulsive so you don’t get into trouble so much.” I think there would be some Blacks, especially Black men, who would gladly take it.

This goes beyond race. Obviously impulsiveness and inability to display gratification are human qualities, not Black qualities. Blacks simply display these all too human qualities in greater percentages. Speaking of pills, we could offer such a pill to anyone of any race who had problems with delayed gratification and impulsiveness. I’m  quite sure there are Whites who  have these problems. And I know there are Hispanics with these problems. IQ does seem to be an attenuating factor. As IQ rises, impulsiveness and inability to delay gratification seem to go down and vice versa.

I had a neighbor Hispanic, a young man who was gang affiliated, who used to hang out over here all the time. Mostly we just smoked pot. He literally could not think beyond one or two days in the future. He would get some money and it would melt in his hands in a day or two, no matter how much. Then he would be standing there dumbfounded, acting like,”Whoa! Where did all the money go? Duhhhh.”

I kept talking to him but he literally could not think beyond 24-48 hours into the future, so it was worthless. I had no idea what his IQ was. Surely in the 80’s.

He sure could rap though. I heard him rap a few times and  the guy was a flat out genius. With an IQ of 85. I’m not sure you need a real high IQ to master verbal memory, which is the skill being utilized in rap.

So these sort of interventions would go beyond being “Black things” into being “human things.”

How Straight Men Use the Words Fag and Faggot

Any of you snowflakes out there who might get triggered by this post and need another three months of therapy and hugs, please bail out right now. I don’t want your trauma on my conscience.

Faggot. This is a mean word. It’s said with this savage bite. You could almost feel the hate. Faggot is still used that way, but you don’t hear it much because it’s seen as a slur.  But now it has a new meaning. Faggots are just (male) idiots, fucktards, dumbasses, dumbshits, fools, morons, and other pinheads. It has nothing to do with gay men!

Fag. Often simply a descriptive tern for gay men. It could be negative, neutral, or positive depending on tone. People want one word for gay men, and “gay men” is two words. Fag is not used this way so much anymore because now it’s now a slur. Fag is mostly used by straight men towards other straight men! Fag means pussy, wussy, girlyman, cuck, soyboy, etc. It’s used towards male feminists, men who have declared war on the men. We call them those names to insult them to get them back on our side. Because calling a straight man unmasculine is the ultimate insult. We ain’t talking about you!

Alt Left: An Analysis of the Armenian and Greek Genocides in Anatolia in 1915-1923: The Truth of the Events and Number of Victims

From 1915-1923, a few massacres were committed against the Christians of Anatolia. There were three genocides: an Armenian genocide, an Assyrian genocide, and a Greek genocide.

I just did a significant amount of research on the events and numbers around these events. I did it because Turks on the Internet were claiming that Armenians started the fighting by slaughtering Turks.

There were also posts from Turks talking how if things got bad in Turkey, Armenians and Greeks would start slaughtering Turks. I work in mental health, and this is clear and naked projection. They’re accusing Armenians and Greeks of doing to Turks everything the Turks did to the Armenians and Greeks. Most Turks on the Net absolutely hate Armenians and use the word “Armenian” to mean something like “the worst enemies of the Turkish people ever.”

So I did some basic research on the events. I was especially confused by the Turkish claims that these events started when  Armenians in Anatolia started massacring Turks, and Turks were just fighting back. Were they right? Of course I had always believed the Armenian side of the story, but what if they were wrong and the Turks were right? As I am extremely open-minded person (far more open-minded than most people), I had to find out.

First, the numbers. They’re wrong. Way off, all of them. The official figures run from 700,000 to 1.8 million. Simply by adding up all of the totals listed on Wikipedia, I got 2.5 million Armenian victims of the Turks in this period.

Now, I did include some massacres that occurred before the actual genocide because I felt that they were all part of some larger event, a slo-mo Armenian genocide that lasted from 1880-1923. I believe there was a slaughter of 300,000 in the 1880’s amidst similar Turkish recriminations as I outlined above: “The Armenians were killing our people, so we had to fight back.” And possibly another with 25,000 number of victims around 1908. And the killings absolutely extended to into the 1920’s until 1923.

I had previously thought that there were 40,000 Turkish civilians killed by Armenians in retaliation, but now I cannot find that data. What I did find what that Russian Cossaks killed 45,000 Turkish civilians in a Turkish river valley in 1916.

2.5 million Armenian civilians killed by Turks (as aggression).

0? Turkish civilians killed by Armenians (as retaliation).

I also checked on the Turkish claim that Armenians started it. No, they didn’t. Incidentally, it seems like most of the genocide occurred in maybe a couple of years – 1915-1916. The rest of the years were more like window dressing.

The Turks claimed that Armenians killed Turkish soldiers when Russia invaded Turkey in the east in 1914. This is correct. There were quite a few Armenians in that force. These were Armenian volunteer battalions that also included Assyrians and Greeks. They numbered 40,000.

They had been treated terribly by the Ottomans over centuries of land, food, and business theft, beatings, jailings, tortures, murders, pogroms, and massacres. So these were Christians living in Russia who were out for some paybacks due to Ottoman crimes. I had previously thought that Turkish civilians were killed in this battle, but now I can’t find any data.

This was during a battle in late 1914 in which the Turks were beaten badly by a Russian invading force in the East. The Turks blamed the Armenians for their loss in the battle, but the real cause was that the Turks fought the battle very poorly, and the Russians fought it in a much smarter way. It was a fair fight.

The loss of this battle was humiliating for the Turks, and they quickly accused Armenians in Anatolia of stabbing them in the back and causing their defeat.

This is exactly  what Hitler said about Jews that set off the Holocaust – that German Jews had stabbed Germany in the back, causing it to lose the war. It wasn’t true and neither was the Turkish claim, but it worked. Turks quickly demonized Armenians and other Christians in Turkey and scapegoated them. Which is once again exactly what the Nazis did to Jews.

The Turks used the paranoia set off by this event to set off the genocide of the Armenians (and Assyrians and Greeks) in Anatolia on the grounds that they were some sort of infidel 5th Column in wartime and hence were dangerous traitors. There’s not a lot of evidence that this was true.

These massacres were committed by the Russian Army, not the Armenians of Turkey, and neither is there evidence that the Armenians sympathized with the invaders. Interestingly, around this time, many Turkish Armenians became patriots and either joined or tried to join the Turkish Army to fight the invaders. This is left out of many accounts.

I also looked into the Greek genocide and got a figure of 715,000, larger than most estimates. Greek retaliation killings were only 15,000, and all occurred years after the initial slaughter of the Greeks.

715,000 Greeks killed by Turks (as aggression).

15,000 Turkish civilians killed by Greeks (in retaliation).

Which number is bigger? Which represents the much larger crime?

I haven’t gotten to the Assyrian genocide yet, figures of which seem to be between the Greek and Armenian numbers.

Maybe in an upcoming post

Under Siege Politics

Whatever is done in the short-term, no matter how seemingly terrible, is justified to prevent long-term evil. Who’s to say which group using this philosophy is correct? It would depend on your political orientation.

Well, in Latin America, as @Robert Lindsay has mentioned, there’s pretty much no middle ground between fascists and communists. We see the “under-siege” mentality. It’s obvious that right-wing freedom in Cuba would lead to a government overthrow. It’s obvious that left-wing freedom would lead to the current Brazilian government being overthrown. Maybe Brazil has less of the “under-siege” thing going on, but it’s still there.

Of Course, SJWism is Women Picking on So-Called Weak/Ugly Men, But Never Players

Look at how society is gamed. There’s no push for marriage because our society frowns on it until you’re about 40 – LOL.  Also, there’s no polygamy. It never even occurs to people! So you’d get a bunch of players looking at porn and banging chicks and a lot of nerds banging porn.

It’s simply anti-sexual world we live in. In other words, there’s not any morally acceptable way for a man to express his real sexuality. However, that’s not reality but rather some type of corruption of the actual truth.

There is such a thing as morally weak men, as in sexually so. Of course, there are taboos in sex that are justified. However, Western society demonizes all sex outside of monogamous marriage, and it also wants people to wait along time for monogamous marriage.

Then are we surprised that nerds gawk at SJW women, who then call the cops? Is it surprising that nerds get unjustified rape accusations?

Who Are the players?

These are bad boys practicing illegal polygamy. They’re happy in a sense because at least they’re expressing their true male nature.

Game/PUA: SJWism Is Based on Female Thinking

Really all SJWism is based on female thinking. I believe I read this somewhere else but I’m not sure how well it clicked with me at the time. But now that I understand women so much better, I finally get it. Of course SJWism is female thinking. Of course Identity Politics is female thinking.

Hence, all IP and of course all SJWism is pussy, and real men should not indulge in this pussy crap. That goes for Men’s Rights too. Men’s Rights is often based on female thinking, so it’s a pussy movement. The best Men’s Rights Movement would employ cold, hard logic and scientific thinking to promote the cause of men. This is no problem because logic is in our favor.

We are just too afraid to use it because once you go logical, you don’t get to play black and white, good and bad, good versus evil, the same splitting game that all IP movements play. In other words you have to play fair.

Ever tried to argue fairly with a typical fucktard human?

It’s based on emotional logic and it has the contempt for science and logic as tools the strong use against the weak, which is precisely how women see science and logic, neither of which they have much use for. SJW’s see themselves are completely weak and their enemies as completely strong. This is just the way female thinking works. According to female thinking, women are weak and men are strong and therefore, women get to break all the rules or follow no rules at all simply on account of being weak.

They are correct that the only way a weak party has a chance in a fight is if they fight dirty. Only the strong can afford to fight by the rules, which is why they always insist on rule-based fights. In a rule-based fight, the strong party always wins. Weak parties are smart enough to realize that if they play by the rules, they lose, so they all tend to fight dirty.

Women are weak and men are strong. Women realize that on a fair playing field, we will kick their asses in no time. So women don’t fall for the “let’s play by the rules” game that men set up for fights. And women believe that since they are weak, they have a right to fight dirty because all parties to a fight must appear to be on equal grounds. In  fact, according to women, men demanding rules for fighting is profoundly unfair itself because it will result in men always winning and women always losing.

Being Dumb Isn’t the Problem; Being Dangerous Dumb or Dangerously Ignorant Is

I don’t hate lower IQ people. A lot of the people I hate have high IQ’s too. I hate stupid people. Stupid people who don’t think properly. It’s more like ignorance and what I call a “dangerously stupid” attitude. By ignorant I mean it is completely opposed to science and driven more my mass hysteria and emotional societal panics.

Being stupid is one thing. If you are just stupid but you are not dangerously stupid so you might harm me, I don’t hate you 1%. You could have an 85 IQ but if you are smart enough to not get taken in by societal bullshit and intelligent enough to think for yourself and come up with your own answers instead of being a sheep, I love you to death.

An 85 IQ  person need not be an ignorant moron with repulsive and dangerous views. He’s a lot more likely to but that’s not guaranteed. On the other hand, it’s perfectly possible for someone to be high or very high IQ and be dangerously ignorant to where they have attitudes that are dangerous to me and others. A lot of these types are wrapped up in fanatical movements like feminism and SJWism that tend towards wild irrationality or no rationality at all, and contempt for science and logic in favor of emotional reasoning.

It might be hard to connect with you, but IQ’s no reason to hate a man. I guess I should say that what I hate is dangerous ignorance, but ignorance and dangerous, emotion-driven ignorance does tend to be more common as you go down the IQ scale. As you go up the scale, people can shut off their emotions more and see issues in the clear light of pure logic, in which case, they usually arrive at an answer that’s compatible with science and reasonable policy-wise.

Most People Are Simply Incapable of Arguing Fairly or Using Logic in Argumentation

Let me tell you something. Most people don’t believe in fair argumentation. It’s just too male, and humans are too insecure to engage in pure male thinking. Nietzsche was onto this. In fact his strong man was not a fascist but someone strong enough use cold hard logic and live with the results without dissolving in emotional insecurity like a little bitch. In other words, an ubermensch.

So most people argue in a very dirty way. Everyone I argue with takes the black and white position. My guys/my side 100% good, 0% evil. They won’t admit to one bad thing about their side. The other side 100% evil, 0% good. You can say anything good about the other side. If you say 99 bad things about them and one good thing, you have gone over to the enemy.

Sometimes I will praise Trump. Of course I hate him as much as any Trump hater, but now and then, he does the right thing, especially on foreign policy, where he is actually halfway different from the usual bloodthirsty imperialist maniac US president. But whenever I point out that I support some one thing Trump did, my idiot Democrat friends smile and say, “You going to vote for him?” Other times they will positively scream at me, “Don’t praise him! Don’t say anything good about him!”

Well, I hate Trump 98%. A few times he’s right. Because I think he’s right 2% of the  time, that means I’m going to vote for him! Because if you don’t oppose someone 100% (99% is never good enough) that means you support them!

Nice Guys Can’t Get Sex

Yeah, they can’t but they could if they married and better yet married many women. But now we have a society where polygamy is illegal, so the most horny guys who can attract fortification simply have illegal polygamy. However, imagine a society where all men can simply find many wives. Look at all the problems that would solve.

Again, our society hates polygamy because much of its morality flows from Judeo-Christian teaching which is corrupted, not true to its roots. There’s nothing in the Bible saying polygamy is wrong, which implies that Western civilization shouldn’t hold it in contempt.

Where can nice guys find wives? Maybe these types can’t get so-called laid, but they might find it easier to get a wife/wives and if they can’t even do that, beautiful Filipinas, etc. would gladly marry them for money.

Sex in Heaven, Bible Permitted Polygamy?

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/scotty-smith/article-is-there-sex-in-heaven/

Much of Christianity has an anti-sex obsession just like it has an obsession with torturing people in Hell eternally. However, have people really examined the Bible to see what it really says?

Everything on earth is analogous to something in Heaven. Heaven neither simply removes nor simply continues earthly things. If we apply this principle to sexual intercourse, we get the conclusion that intercourse on earth is a shadow or symbol of intercourse in Heaven. Could we speculate about what that could be?

It could certainly be spiritual intercourse–and, remember, that includes sexual intercourse because sex is spiritual. This spiritual intercourse would mean something more specific than universal charity. It would be special communion with the sexually complementary; something a man can have only with a woman and a woman only with a man. We are made complete by such union: “It is not good that the man should be alone.”[25] And God does not simply rip up His design for human fulfillment.

The relationship need not be confined to one in Heaven. Monogamy is for Earth. On Earth, our bodies are private.[26] In Heaven, we share each other’s secrets without shame, and voluntarily.[27] In the Communion of Saints, promiscuity of spirit is a virtue.

The relationship may not extend to all persons of the opposite sex, at least not in the same way or degree. If it did extend to all, it would treat each differently simply because each is different-sexually as well as in other ways. I think there must be some special “kindred souls” in Heaven that we are designed to feel a special sexual love for. That would be the Heavenly solution to the earthly riddle of why in the world John falls for Mary, of all people, and not for Jane, and why romantic lovers feel their love is fated, “in the stars”, “made in Heaven”.[28]

http://www.isawthelightministries.com/polygamy.html

The Bible is full of God-approved polygamy. Why might it be a good thing:

Men are Naturally Polygamous

We know that when men are stuck in a traditional western marriage of only one woman, that many times he will cheat behind his wife’s back. To be realistic, most men would cheat on their wife if given the opportunity, if he felt very confident that his wife would never find out. God created men with very intense, natural sexual desires that are very difficult to control, especially with all of these women walking around in very short skirts/shorts and showing much of their breasts.

74% of men say they would have an affair if they knew they would never get caught. Source: Associated Press, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. Date research was conducted: September 7, 2016. The same study said 57% of men admit to have already committed infidelity in a relationship. But the truth is, the same study said that 74% of men would cheat if they knew they would never be caught, therefore the other 17% are lying. This is confirmed by a study conducted in India, which says that 75% of all men cheat on their wife. Source

Of course, just because 75% of men are having sex with multiple women doesn’t prove that it’s the will of God. But nevertheless, it does prove the natural instinct of men. Most men desire to be with more than one woman. That’s not because of the devil but rather because God created men to have a very powerful sex drive. But most women want to be with only one man. These natural differences were created by God.

Alt Left: Conservatism (Neoliberalism) Tends Towards Fascism Almost as a Mathematical Law of Political Science

Conservatism tends to always dissolve into fascism. Show me anywhere on Earth where conservatism, especially conservative, neoliberal economics has been sustainable? It’s not. If it were sustainable it would not have to go fascist but neoliberalism and its monstrous 3rd World cousin is never sustainable? Why? Because despite conservative lies, neoliberalism is generally shit for the lower 80% of the population. Under neoliberalism, the top 20% get richer, usually a lot richer and the bottom 80% lose money. And this setup never changes.

Neoliberalism always causes a crisis or a crash sooner of later (see the 2008 Crash, caused 100% by neoliberalism). It was in fact a Neoliberal Crash, like most economic crashes. This 2020 Crash in the US has been caused by the Coronavirus, but US neoliberalism has made it so much worse.

Furthermore, since neoliberalism is without fail horrible for the bottom 80% of the population by its nature, it always engenders a Left backlash.

Except in places that have already had some sort of a revolution and social contract has been reached, neoliberalism will often put up a huge fight against any threat from the Left at all. The less the regime tolerates the Left, the more radical and extreme the Left gets because extreme conservatism tends to cause extreme Leftism via a law of nature, sort of like a scale that must be balanced or better yet, the Balance of Nature itself.

Pretty soon you’ve got Latin America or even Southern Europe, where the Left is socialist or Communist and the Right is fascist, with little in between. This tends to be the case especially in Catholic countries because Catholic countries tend towards collectivism and tend to despise individualism, which is itself only a product of Protestantism. See Weber on that. He’s immaculate.

In  a collectivist society, all political movements are collectivist. Left collectivism is always socialism or Communism. Right collectivism is always fascism. So in these Catholic societies you tend to end up with Socialists/Communists versus Fascists, in other words, a chronically violent tinderbox in which both Left and Right will tend to get more authoritarian because that’s the only option left to you in a place like that.

Democracy’s not sustainable in an environment like that. In a place like that, democracy just means a lot of unrest, often violent, and eventually the overthrow, violent or otherwise, of your government, lawfully elected or not. Most governments don’t want to get violently overthrown, so in order not to do so, they have to become less democratic.

Fascism is properly seen as a rightwing revolutionary movement of capitalism that rises due to a threat from the Left. Fascism is a palingenetic popular dictatorship against the Left. Therefore, there cannot be any Left fascism. If it’s on the Left, it’s not fascism. Period. And fascism, being a popular dictatorship against the Left, is necessarily not particularly socialist or great for workers. Why would it be? Why would a popular dictatorship against the Left institute leftwing policies?

Game/PUA: For the 800th Time, Why Women Hate Nice Guys and Love Abusive Assholes Who Treat Them Like Shit

As I mentioned previously, I’m a nice guy, and really there’s no reason on Earth I should have gotten laid even one time in my life, but nice guys never get laid, anyone knows that. Why? Because women refuse to fuck them. Why? Because women prefer extroverted Alpha assholes and pieces of shit who abuse the living Hell out of them to nice guys. Why? Because they find nice guys boring and wimpy. They think they’re pussies.

On a more fundamental level, it is absolutely essential that you dominate your woman. Female sexuality is such so that if you’re not dominating her, she won’t be turned on. You have to dominate her in order to turn her on at all. That’s why putting women on a pedestal, simping, etc. doesn’t work.

Women have 10,000 lies about why they don’t like nice guys and prefer assholes. The biggest lie of all is that most women say that’s just not true. So they deny it out the starting gate. Obviously we’re not getting anywhere here. After they deny it exists, they say why they do this. You see the fundamental flaw with this argument. As with so many female arguments, it contradicts itself laughable almost before it even starts, so we don’t even get to hypothesis. We are stuck with tautologies and unfalsifiable arguments, which makes up most of women’s thinking.

Ok, now that they get honest, they say that they hate nice guys because most of them are not even nice. Well, that’s obviously a huge lie, although it’s true of Nice Guy (TM) types. So they’re not nice. They’re really assholes in disguise. Except that women actually preferentially select assholes and no even that but they prefer the biggest assholes of all when they do so. Who are far worse than your average nice guy, I might add.

Next argument is entitlement. I get very tired of this argument. If women had to live like men, they’d blow their brains out in a year. There’s no way they could handle this. They’re too pampered. Male life is so awful that women wouldn’t be able to take it. They’d break down, flip out, go neurotic, suicide out, who knows? It’s women who are entitled. Entitled every single day from the day they are born. Women are addicted to entitlement because it’s all they’ve ever known. Take it away from them and  they’re gone.

Of course men are not entitled to sex. Everyone knows that. But women think that every man on Earth out to be perfectly happy or better yet ecstatic about the possibility that he might live his entire life without ever having sex.

Women to a one insist that this is no big deal and that every man ought to just prepare himself for this possibility and be ok with it. Well, most men are not going to be very happy about that to say the least.  A certain number of them are going to go ER (go Elliot Rodger). That’s terrible, but that’s just the way it is. If you deny men sex, a certain number of them will flip and go on massacre sprees. Incels in China have been doing this for some time now.

Women can bitch till the cows come home, but this is simply a law of nature. It’s the natural, normal, expected reaction when huge numbers of men are denied sex for much of their lives. Yeah, no one’s entitled to anything. But you women are therefore not entitled to live a life free of the fear of being massacred by maniacs that you created by the policies that you set up. Fair is fair.

Furthermore, ha ha. Alphas aren’t entitled? Players aren’t entitled?  Macho guys aren’t entitled? Don’t make me laugh.

The guys who have sex with the most women are the most entitled assholes of all. They commit 50 times more sexual harassment than nice guys. They are 50 times rapier than nice guys. But women don’t really mind because behavioral or better yet statistical Alphas get to be about as rapey and sexual harass-y as they like.

Women don’t mind being raped and harassed by Alphas. They mind it but they never go to the cops. They never try to get them fired. They let Alphas hit on them annoyingly all night long and try every sleazy trick in the book  and women just say, “Tee hee,” and let them get away with it because Alphas get away with everything forever. Until they don’t. But at least they get a nice long run.

Meanwhile the nice guy of behavioral Beta gets in trouble for looking at women. Literally looking at them! He’s not even allowed to look at them! For a woman, a Beta looking at them is exactly as bad as an Alpha date-raping them. It’s literally the same thing.

A Beta gets in trouble and gets fired for mildly flirting with a woman even one time, for asking a woman for her number or out on a date. Meanwhile, Mr. Alpha POS acts 100X worse and he gets away with it forever, drowning in pussy the whole time until life caves in. Even then he’s only out temporarily and you check back in a bit and he’s back on his feet again, doing the same dick moves as ever.

Another one: Nice guys are only being nice to us to try to get into our pants! Yeah and Alphas aren’t? Anyway, most men are only being nice to you to try to get in your pants. If you women didn’t have vaginas, most of us men wouldn’t even give you the time of day.

Yeah. This is the world, ladies. Most men are trying to fuck you. Terrible, isn’t it? Get used to it. It will this way until your looks go and you turn ugly and then you will brag and swoon every time a man flirts with you or checks you out. The same attention that made you suicidally depressed when you were pretty will be sorely missed and painfully missed when your looks are shot.

Also, Alphas are only being nice to you to get into your pants too, and they are much worse about it than nice guys. They do something called the Honeymoon phase. That’s when they don’t just callously pump and dump you by showering you with love until you give it up and then dumping you out with the trash afterwards.

If they bother to try to have a relationship with you, you get the Honeymoon phase, typical of all Cluster B scums. They shower you with love and devotion as part of a scam to wind their way into your heart. It’s all completely calculated in the most cold-blooded way. And then once they are in and have you nice and trapped and cut you off from all your friends and support and have no where to go and are at his mercy for a place to stay, the abuse begins. And gradually gets worse.

Because all Cluster B’s can do is abuse people, especially in sexual relationships. They literally cannot be any other way. Relationship = abuse for Cluster B’s. That’s how they play it.

Would You Like to Have 20 IQ Points Fewer or More?

Do you sometimes wish you had 20 fewer Iq points? So you can relate to people better. Or 20 points higher? But you may think 95% of people are dumb and end up like Ted Kaczynski.

20 points higher would be very interesting. I love my brain, I love thinking. I’m in love with my brain. We’ve been carrying on a love affair for a long time now. It’s like the most wonderful toy you ever got to play with. 20 points more seems like a total blast, but no doubt it would alienate me from everyone even more.

At 147, I have a hard time (statistically, anyway) with everyone under 117 IQ, which is 85% of the population. So I’m already alienated from 8-9 out of every time people I deal with on some fundamental level. At 167 I would have a hard time with everyone under 137 IQ (statistically, anyway), which is 99% of the population.

What’s important here is the meaning of alienation. If you asked me if I were alienated from everyone with an IQ below 117, I would say of course not! Don’t be ridiculous.

But maybe that’s not what’s important. Maybe what’s important is that everyone with an IQ below 117 is alienated from me! I just now thought of it that way. Of course there’s no way to test that out without doing a very uncomfortable study that is very hard to do, but if you are asking me intuitively, yes, it does seem to be correct.

People just seem to be weirded out and disconnected from me on a fundamental level. That’s been much more the case as I got older, but maybe it was always the case on some level. It’s hard to describe but it’s like there’s some sort of a massive disconnect on some fundamental level. Like there’s a wall up between other people and me and can’t be breached no matter what. I have no idea what the wall or why it is there or anything about it or or whether it has anything to do with IQ.

Perhaps I’m just a freak, but I think it’s deeper than that. For instance, the smarter the person is, the more fascinated they are by me, the less they think I’m a freak and the more they think I’m an especially desirable and valuable person. They’re not alienated from me at all usually. The smarter someone is, the less of a wall or disconnect there is with them.

This is all boiled down to my intelligence because that’s what smarter people find fascinating. But I probably have other pleasant aspects to my personality too. I’ll never fight with you. I’m the least irritable person you will ever meet. I’m funny and I can be quite warm and loving if you ask me. I am actually very kind and  considerate. I’m the stereotypical nice guy.

I guess there’s more to that list even. The funny thing is most people just see that exterior and they say, “Damn, he’s weird,” and they never look under the hood to see what’s there. They’re just as capable as seeing how smart I am as anyone else is, and I probably ought to blow them away more than people near my level.

But it seems like the more you blow someone away mentally, instead of being fascinated by you, they’re either bored or repelled. The boredom and repulsion increases as IQ goes down. And people at my level who should be less impressed by my brain (because it’s near their level so it’s nothing special) are actually the most fascinated by it.

I have no solution to this conundrum. A theory suggests, however. Perhaps the only people who can appreciate the wonder of people with very high IQ’s – the most intelligent people of all – are other smart or very smart people.

Maybe I could have gone somewhere in life, but more probably I would have ended up like those people in The Outsiders – living alone at 40, no friends, celibate or incel, extremely introverted, job paying minimum wage. That’s the typical endpoint for a man with an IQ over 160.

20 points less would give me 127. I say now that I don’t want that but if I had been that way my whole life, maybe it would have been just fine. Most people I know at that level are happy, and people with 127 IQ statistically do much better than people with 147 IQ.

The Elite Obsession with IQ

They’re obsessed with it because they don’t like the common people. It’s as plain as the nose on Pinnochio. Elites like Ted Turner, etc. are sick creeps, and their narcissism, vanity, and arrogance has pushed them toward wanting a final solution, ultimately.

Much is made about how many Cluster-B psychos there are in White Nationalism, but honestly SJW’s or any other elitists aren’t any different.

Does IQ matter?

I don’t think it means much. Again, this is elites expressing their hate for real people.

The US Has Always Mirrored the Third World

The problem with the Philippines, a place I lived for a time, is that it is full of beggars, and you don’t find that in the US due to the vast safety net.

What is the dark side of a social net? The US is over-medicated, over-obese (no offense to the decently fat), and inhibited toward supporting a family, all leading to family breakdown.

The end scheme of a safety net by the elites is slaughter because they don’t like the common people anyway.

In this case, pick your poison. A place like the Philippines is full of no love from the government, while the US has a government that loves its people, but it’s all a scheme/trap.

The Elites Despise the Common People

https://beyondhighbrow.com/2020/06/23/i-admit-im-a-misanthrope-and-its-one-of-my-worst-flaws/

I mean elites of any type – Left, Right, etc. In the end, they just want to slaughter them. How is this different from a God promising annihilation, or worse – everlasting torment? I don’t believe in either, preferring a purgatory. It’s more in line with God’s character.

You can despise God, the Bible, whatever, but no doubt, the elites don’t like you. Now they might toy around with you like Jeff Epstein before a Satanic ritual murder, but in the end, you get it!

Blacks Have a Thing for God

They sure do! That’s probably why African-descended areas are plagued with the worst demonic oppression. Haven’t you ever noticed Blacks are either angelic and holy or quite the opposite!

It makes me wonder even if Blacks are chosen people like the Jews. That would explain a lot! I don’t believe that but certainly the Devil wants his teeth in African people.

Again, the Left Radicals Are in a Bubble, Just Like Their Opponents

They’re defacing and tearing down statutes in big cities. Big deal! Would they do that in the rural South? No chance! They’d get mowed down with shotguns! So where’s the bravery? If they’re the tough heroes they think they are, then why not go to where there’s real opposition?

It would be like Klan people picking on everybody locally but not willing to do it in Harlem.

The Birth of a Nation Come to Life

What else is all this rioting and looting? Gun sales are through the roof, and that’s not shocking!

I never liked the original movie because of its Klan anti-miscegenation propaganda. Nonetheless, its portrayal of societal breakdown at the least is dead on. It’s what’s happening now!

Sinister forces have brainwashed lots of people – mostly non-Black – to terrorize our cities with anarchy. My dad’s head would be spinning (he was a Fox News conservative)!

Final Thought

I never dreamed society breakdown would happen like in that movie. It seemed to be U.S. rightwing propaganda. You know, Red Scare stuff. It was a joke. Come on. I didn’t think hippies/college radicals could bring on the stuff Richard Nixon wet-dreamed about. But look at what’s going on now.

Africa and African Descended Areas: Demon Controlled Hell

I don’t want to be self-righteous and racist and say they’re the only places like that. Nonetheless, this provides an understandable reason why African/African-descended areas are full of poverty, violence, and crime.

I’m making generalizations as I can’t say all US Blacks are in a nightmare situation. Many are doing quite well and are normal.

Rap Music

Listening to this as a Christian, one needs the power of exorcism. It’s that evil! With music this evil, is it no wonder demons have an enslaved the African race?

What is it telling Africans and others? Be a ho, a pimp, indulge in outrageous sexuality. Probably that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Christian Africa

Great strides have been done in Africa, but it’s not been enough.  It’s because as mentioned in the Liberation Theology article, either God provides or he doesn’t. If a place is this Hellish, then there’s some disconnect to the Almighty.

Therefore, I take it that a great many Africans are still pagan, or they simply embrace very weak Christian beliefs.

The African-American Church

There are dedicated holy members, but the faith simply hasn’t taken a hold on enough African-Americans to make Stormfront shut up, or even Fox News.

What About IQ?

Either God provides an abundant  living or he doesn’t.

Plenty of Unbelievers Exist in White/East Asian Nations Too, but Those Places Are Fairly Stable

There could be real differences in African IQ, and rest assured, demonic forces exploit them.

Liberation Theology – The Real Story

The Bible does speak of economic oppression, but Liberation Theology throws it into hyper-drive. Seriously, if God truly provided, then wouldn’t prayers, etc. make Liberation Theology unnecessary? Well, either God is lying or he isn’t. He said he would provide our needs.

If a whole Latin American nation truly did pray to God, I’d figure all their problems would be gone. Well, the people might not become rich, but they would be happy and content.

Now as for individuals stuck in a Hellish Third World situation surrounded by many that don’t believe, I think they can be pulled out to something better.

Am I Supporting Capitalism?

Nah, no way. I don’t think the Bible espouses Communism, fascism or  anti-people capitalism, and they all have the high potential for evil.

Anyway, there has been a trend in churches known as Prosperity Theology – endorsed by Joel Osteen and the like – but it’s a heresy because considering The Book of Revelations, there isn’t much a future anyhow.

Alt Left: Conservatives Say That Inequality in Latin America Is Caused by Socialism

Transformer (to Jason): I notice you don’t write about Latin America a lot.

I was hoping for Robert to respond to this article but would like your thoughts. I think the issue of inequality in Latin America is very deep. Conservatives like to blame the left and Communism (think Fidel Castro and the current Venezuela government under Maduro), but the situation is more complex.

Conservatives say inequality is caused by socialism and Communism? See what liars they are? Conservatives are the biggest shmucks. See? They can’t even lie properly. The best liars are at least somewhat believable. Conservatives are like the 13 year old pathological liar. He’s just a kid and you can safely dismiss almost everything he says. Seeing as they are such awful liars, why do so many people fall for their laughable, pitiful lies?

It’s the greed, right? Conservatives sell greed. They say support conservatism if you want to make lots of money or keep all the money you have. Support liberalism is you like being poor and having most of your money taken away and wasted on boondoggles and ne’er do wells, many of them disgusting criminals, and the rest at least repulsively amoral and stupid.

I guess if you are selling greed, stupid humans will believe everything you say. Tell him if he wants to be rich he will realize it’s pitch dark outside when it’s 95 degrees and high noon, and he’ll go outside and insist it’s true. Tell them he can keep all his money if he’ll only acknowledge that the sun comes up in the west and sets in the east, and he’ll swear they knew it along.

The truth is the opposite. The more socialism you have, the greater the economy. Venezuela before the crash was the most equal country in Latin America. Belarus and the Scandinavian countries are some of the most equal countries on Earth, with GINI indexes of 25-30, which is about where any country should be.

I admit that conservatives have their good points about their Latin American capitalism, but saying that Latin American inequality is caused by socialism isn’t one of them.

The more rightwing economics you have down there (or anywhere else in the world, for that matter), the more unequal things get. This is because capitalism is exactly how Marx said it was. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer is the natural, typical, expected, and totally ordinary outcome of any pure capitalist system. You could almost write a Goddamned mathematical law about it. I know you can plot it on a linear chart.

The only countries that split up their wealth in any sort of fair way other than, “Everything for the top 20%, and nothing for anybody else!” are societies that have seasoned and moderated their capitalism with ample helpings of socialism. Capitalism is great for growth and crap and distribution. Social is bad at growth and great at distribution.

I think it’s clear that some sort of mixed economies with private, cooperative, family, and public enterprises work best of all. And the commanding heights of the economy must be ruled by the state. This is one thing the Chinese got right. And incidentally, in Japan and even South Korea, it is much the same. And both of the latter countries model their economies in part on, believe it or not, Nazi Germany. There were a lot of terrible things about the Nazis, but their economy was not one of them.

In such a system, the state owns the commanding heights and has the last say in everything. And both quite-capitalist countries use state economic planning to guide their economy. So it’s not true that a planned economy does not work. When state and private actors work together to guide the economy of the country forward, the results are very good.

I Admit I’m a Misanthrope and It’s One of my Worst Flaws

I’m pretty disgusted by humans. I don’t even really like them. Actually, I hate to admit it but I am a misanthrope. And I hate to say it even more, but the majority at least here in the US deserve every bit of my hatred. I hate them because they are stupid, and stupidity itself is a little bit dangerous by its very nature, so they frighten me.

They’re idiots. I hate idiots. Actually they’re worse than idiots. They’re dangerous idiots, and that’s the worst kind of idiot of all. So, yeah, I hate most Americans because they are goddamned dangerous idiots who threaten my peace of mind, well-being, reputation, and maybe even ability to earn a living.

If you study people with very high IQ’s around my range and up, you will see that they almost all feel this way. Worse, as IQ rises, misanthropy seems to rise in tandem just like clockwork.

Above IQ 160, it’s not to find a complete misanthrope. They hate people because they think people are stupid. And to them, most people are stupid.

When you are up here in the stratosphere, every people with average intelligence almost seem literally retarded. It’s disgusting but you feel bad about it for hating them and keep beating yourself up and trying to be nice to them and turn off the misanthropy. Which can  be done.

But when it comes to close friendships or meaningful relationships, about 30 IQ points is the limit. If someone is 30 IQ points above or below you, you will have a very hard time communicating. Some say that meaningful communication is either very difficult or even impossible. Yes, you can become friends, but it will be quite difficult. Leaders who have IQ’s 30+ IQ points above those below them are poor leaders. Their underlings don’t listen to them, and rebellions are common.

The best leaders are not geniuses. The best leaders for White people would have an IQ below 130. Above that and you will not be able to connect with your followers.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)