All of the MSM and all of Silicon Valley Is Deep State

It’s painfully obvious that there is no free press at all anywhere in the West. There is only Fake News MSM completely controlled by the US government and NATO.

There is some real news on the Internet but the Deep State is now going after all of that too. Twitter and (((Facebook))) are mass-banning any pages or users that publish anything that goes against the Deep State/CIA line.

Twitter and (((Facebook))) are both absolutely part of the Deep State now.

So is (((Google))). (((Google))) partnered with the Atlantic Council (NATO Deep State) to downgrade most leftwing outlets critical of US foreign policy as “fake news.” The Atlantic Council issued reports showing all the “fake news” or “Russian” sites.

Any site critical of US foreign policy is not only fake news but it is also always Russian. Hundreds of Americans were banned from Twitter when Jack Dorsey (Deep State) said they were “Russian propaganda bots.” (((Mark Zuckerberg))) (Deep State) also banned many pages from (((Facebook))) as either “fake news” or “controlled by Russia.”

The leadership of (((Google))) is absolutely Deep State. Not only did they bury most leftwing sites on their search engine, they have also removed many videos from (((Youtube))) on the grounds that they are “fake news” or “Russian propaganda.” Quite a few of these accounts were left up, but (((Youtube))) required them to carry warning messages saying that the creators of the video had links to Russia.

I’ve been telling people for a long time that there is nothing groovy or cool about these bitchin’ new capitalists in Silicon Valley. They’re the same old capitalist ratfucks, except possibly they’re even worse than the old kind we sort of got used to. Like any corporation on Earth, the Silicon Valley corporations are not progressive in any serious way and are in fact conservatives and reactionaries like all corporations are.

These corporations are said to be “progressive” because in addition to being rightwing corporations on anything important, they have also adopted leftwing SJWism as it’s no threat to their bottom line.

And in answer to the question I assume you are getting ready to ask me, no, supporting degenerate nonsense like Drag Queen Story Hour at your local library, perverted gay pride parades, and transsexual bathhouses for all ages does not make you a progressive because those are not progressive issues.

They fall into another category called Moral/Traditional versus Immoral/Degenerate. Supporting sick nonsense like the above doesn’t make you left wing at all. It just makes you a degenerate. You SJW degenerates proud of yourselves?

 

Alt Left: Tammy Wynette, “Stand by Your Man”

Tammy Wynette, “Stand by Your Man,” from 1968! One of the greatest country songs ever written!

Lyrics, simple but just perfect:

Sometimes it’s hard to be a woman
Giving all your love to just one man
You’ll have bad times
And he’ll have good times
Doin’ things that you don’t understand
But if you love him you’ll forgive him
Even though he’s hard to understand
And if you love him oh be proud of him
‘Cause after all he’s just a man

Stand by your man
Give him two arms to cling to
And something warm to come to
When nights are cold and lonely

Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can
Stand by your man

Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can
Stand by your man

Tammy Wynette,  “Stand by Your Man” Live. A bit later in her career.

She wasn’t very famous before this, but after this, she was a superstar.

Tammy once said:

I spent 15 minutes writing this song and an entire lifetime defending it.

Exactly.

And isn’t that why this song is just so great?

In 2010, this song was selected by the Library of Congress to add to the National Recording Registry, for songs that “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” In other words, that Registry is for the greatest songs ever written in America!

The Alt Left officially endorses this song, by the way. After all, we are the “Conservative Left” – liberals and Leftists who are at least somewhat conservative on social issues. I’m sure feminists hate the idea of this song, but they can go pound sand! I never knew how great this song was before.

Like most Leftists, I hated this song because it was anti-feminist and oppressed women and all that crap. It was a song for Republican social conservatives. Except it’s not and it wasn’t.

But that was before I had a few girlfriends who actually, literally, stood by their man, meaning me, that is. One was Jewish! Would you expect a Jewish woman to do that? Well, who knows?

The feeling of having a woman who will stand by your side through thick and thin and especially to live her life through yours is one of the greatest highs a man can experience in this life. Better than sex. Better than love. Well, it’s love with an extra helping of chocolate syrup on top, let’s put it that way. But what a syrup that is!

The strange thing is that a woman who truly loves you actually wants to be like this. She wants to stand by her man. She wants to live her life through you. She wants to be dead jealous of you.

I had one girlfriend who was so jealous of me that she used to say, “I will cut a bitch! No woman is getting near my man!” Stand by your man!

She told me she had a tattoo on her ankle, and I told her I didn’t like tattoos. She immediately resolved to remove the tattoo! If my man wants my tattoo off, it’s coming off! Stand by your man!

Hey, I like that! She wants to dress you in the morning, pick your clothes and cologne, watch you shave, iron your shirts, and listen intently to how your day went when you come home. Stand by your man!

I think most of you men on here really do want a “stand by your man” woman. Trust me, there’s no better kind.

This must be a deep-rooted need in women, in tandem with femininity, submission, a need to be dominated, ferocious jealousy in keeping other women away from her prized man. It’s got to be genetic.

If you have ever seen a woman dissolve into femininity (often because she is madly in love with you or very turned on by you sexually) you will see that she seems to melt in place right there. You can tell that she’s in her special place; she’s hitting her sweet spot. Deep down inside, this is where most women truly long to be.

Feminism is a lie. It tells women that femininity is evil and oppressive. Like Hell it is. It’s the life blood of womankind. Take it away and they go nuts. Look at modern women. Look at how nuts they are. They’re having their femininity taken away from them. Of course they’re going nuts. How else would they act? They think this is what they want because feminism lied to them and told them that and believed and fell for it. Of course it was a lie.

Once again, the Cultural Left goes to bat against Nature and the weight of 200,000 years. And once again, Mother Nature on the mound mows down another row of the Left’s pathetic pinch-hitters.

Mother Nature 200,000,  Cultural Left 0.

Final Score – Nature: 200,000, Cultural Left: 0

Tradition exists for a reason. Tradition is the human behavior, morals, norms, values, and wisdom that have withstood the test of time.

Our ancestors were experimenting. Experimenting with human nature and the human condition. Trying to figure out how to run society in the best way possible, given our nature. Tradition is the stuff that was proven to have worked over centuries.

The new stuff that the Cultural Left throws in the face of tradition is the stuff that tradition always maintained didn’t work, a notion they came to no doubt by trial and error. The human experiments, social engineering and wars against nature go on.

This is one great thing I love about conservatism. Classically, conservatism has noticed the endless social experiments of the Cultural Left dubiously. “Ok,” the conservatives said. “You all go off and do your experiments. Just leave us out of it, ok? And hey, after you do it, let us know how it goes, ok?”  But now they’re dragging everyone else along for the ride. We’re donkeys and their pulling us by these damned bridles they forced on us. As usual, it’s not working.

In a sense they are noble, these starry-eyed people of the Cultural Left. These are people who see the ways of nature as limited and backwards. They long for a better world, an engineered one, crafted with pure human intelligence and spirit, adorned with slogans, and enforced with the usual goodhearted social bullying. But one thought is important: these are people who dream of a better world.

These things go on for a bit, and then the reaction sets in, and everyone throws up their hands and wonders why humans keep going backwards. But they’re not going backwards. They’re going home.

You can go to the far ends of the Earth, run as far and hard as you can to escape from the cruel finality of nature, you wake up in Timbuktu, Bangkok, or the heart of Amazon, and it hits you. The crushing disappointment, as heavy as a heart attack. There, rising with the sun to the east, greeting you so horribly, is that fatal reminder: wherever you go on Earth, you’re always back at home. Your home called Nature.

What’s Behind California’s High Housing Costs and High Rates of Homelessness, Poverty, and Welfare Use?

Tulio: Hey RL, just a bit off topic, I was recently reading that California when adjusted for cost of living has the highest poverty rate in the country and that it also has the most welfare recipients.

The Right has been going nuts in the Trump era bashing California and called it a failed 3rd World state that looks the way it does because it’s controlled by Democrats. A lot of that is of course hyperbole, but there is a lot of struggle in California.

I’ve always found this argument a bit specious because there are 15 or so other states where Democrats control the governorship and legislature that don’t have the same quality of life problems. The Right will ignore of course that the majority of high-poverty states are red states.

But there is a question I’m wondering. Is the demographic change of California from majority White to now mostly Latino the reason for these economic problems? It stands to reason that if most of your demographic change is coming from immigrants of a poor country, it will make your state a poorer place.

And this has nothing to do with people voting Democratic per se. If tomorrow 10 million Central Americans immigrated to Nebraska I’m sure you’d see similar issues emerge.

Good question.  This is an excellent hypothesis, actually. I just don’t think there is much of anything to it.

High Cost of Housing: The Secret Behind All of the Problems

The adjusted poverty rate is due to the high cost of housing. Everything else flows from that. What are we supposed to do about it? This is a problem of capitalism. Explain what the state is supposed to do about this housing problem.

I mean we are trying to do a lot of things but the money’s not available for a total solution to the problem. Also our solutions are running into a lot of NIMBYism.

The Homeless Cataclysm

We are fairly kind to our homeless here, so other states kindly put their homeless on buses to California, especially cities like San Francisco. We are trying to deal with this homeless problem as best as we can. What are we supposed to do? The homeless problem is also tied into the housing problem.

Problems of Penal System Reform

The problem is also drugs. Face it, a lot of the homeless are mentally ill or alcohol or drug addicted. They can’t work even if they wanted to. We have decriminalized a lot of drug use here and we released a lot of inmates and reduced a lot of crimes from felonies to  misdemeanors. Also our jails and prisons are badly overcrowded. Hence a lot fewer minor offenders are getting locked up and a lot of them are just roaming the streets instead.

Problems of Drug Decriminalization or Legalization

Everyone says we ought to decrim drug use and I have always tended to agree. But this is what you end up with when you do that. In Seattle, they look the other way on minor drug use and possession, hence there is a huge amount of open drug possession, use, and dealing, a lot of it right out in the open and associated with the homeless.

The drug of choice is often methamphetamine, which can make you act pretty crazy. So you have these crazed meth heads roaming around the streets scaring everyone, certain streets no-go zones due to open drug use, homeless everywhere, even sleeping on sidewalks  where you have to step over them, and rampant crime, mostly petty thievery from stores as addicts steal like crazy to get money for their habits.

I am at a loss to do about any of these problems, sorry. I just want to throw up my hands.

What’s Wrong with Social Programs?

So we have a lot of welfare? Big deal. That’s the state trying to deal with the poverty problem. Good for the state! Keep in mind that to these guys, everything is welfare: Section 8, Food Stamps, Disability, Workman’s Comp, reduced utility bills, on and on.

Serious Limits on What a Mere State Can Do about These Things

We are a very liberal state with a very liberal Legislature that cares a lot about these problems, but they are beyond the scope of the state government to deal with, much less fix. But we are trying our best. Ask these Republicans what we ought to be doing instead.

I don’t think changing from a majority White state to a majority Hispanic state has much to do with it. There is a lot of poverty, here but there is also a lot of wealth. Keep in mind that California has the 8th largest economy on Earth, higher than the vast majority of actual countries. And we’re not even a country. We are just a state.

Should Designated Victim Minors Be Put in Special Protective “Schools for the Bullied?”

Jason: Well, do you feel there should be special education in regular schools – not special schools? I mean, honestly, the people who seem retarded are bullied but so are the retarded at the same rate simply because as you say boys (and girls) are acting according to instinct.

I don’t know. Perhaps we could set up special schools for designated victims. Of course then the “normal bullies” wouldn’t have anyone to bully, but I’m sure they will make do. They will just bully their siblings or whatever.

It is a very interesting idea. A lot of people won’t do it because there will be stigma attached with having to go to the Bullied School because you were such a fucktard that everyone bullied you. You could get bullied on that basis right there.

Also as pointed out below it might be just overprotecting kids from the hardships of life, making them unprepared for the real world.

Another problem would be as stated above that the stigma of going to Fucktard School for the Bullied might be pretty extreme right there. Maybe a lot of boys or parents don’t want that shame on the bullied one’s resume.

Another problem is that the bullied might just form a hierarchy of the bullied and bully each other. Not sure how likely that is but I’m sure it is somewhat likely.

But I’m not really a fan of bullying in sense. I have had clients and friends who got bullied, mostly in junior but also in elementary school, and they are still fucked up over this to this very day. Basically they have low self-esteem. Otherwise they function well. Perhaps some of these people were designated victims.

Be that as it may, even designated victims are human, and the bullying they get is horribly painful for them, and it even screws them up far into adulthood. I mean what did these designated victims really do? Nothing, honestly. We punish traffic offenders worse than those people deserve to get punished.

The downside is that getting bullied often toughens boys so it makes them mature. Also a lot of people get bullied hard over certain things, and then you meet them later, and they are completely normal. The behaviors they were bullied over are gone.

Did the bullying make them stop their stupid behaviors? I have no idea. Maybe they just did it on their own. But I tried to shape up after I got bullied. I tried to be a cool guy so I didn’t get bullied anymore. I think bullying probably does force some people to shape up and get their shit together.

Then others are damaged far into their 30’s.

It’s like a test of pure fire. Boys are iron and the bullying is an iron force with fire. It turns boys into men, hopefully. The ones that make it past the bullying and get their shit together are like stainless steel, forged in the fire of cruelty, harassment, undignified insults, and humiliation. On the other hand a lot iron boys walk through the fire and don’t get turned into steel at all. They might just rust or turn brittle, I have no idea.

My Position on Bullying, Again

Jason: Come on @Robert Lindsay – you’re saying bullying is natural to boys and encouraging it BUT YOU CAN’T TAKE IT.

Jason and I are much closer on this issue than you think. We only differ on a few things.

How many times do I have to tell Jason this? I don’t want to have to make these posts over and over.

  • I oppose all bullying in adulthood. Even in high school you mostly should knock it off. But I support bullying severe outliers in high school – like people who are so insanely nerdy that you can’t even look at them without laughing.
  • Also I do not justify bullying in boyhood. But it will go on, and you can’t stop it.  Of course it’s natural and normal. This is the way humans are. We are mammals.
  • I do justify bullying of extreme outliers in grade school and junior high because it’s the only thing that might force them to get their shit together. I knew severe outliers who got bullied hard from age 9-13 and I met them later at 16-18 and the behavior that got them bullied was gone. Did the bullying make it go away? And boys will never accept effeminate boys. Moral of the story: Don’t be a severe outlier, weirdo, freak, kook, or idiot.
  • Don’t be a Goddamned crybaby. Crybabies need to get bullied hard.
  • Don’t act like a Goddamned faggot if you are a little boy. You’re going to get creamed. No two ways about it.
  • Don’t act like an outrageously idiotic nerd to where you are so spazzed out you seem legitimately retarded.
  • Don’t be a psycho boy  to where you are such a weird, psycho, future serial killer that even other boys think you’re a dangerous freak. And yeah, those boys need to get bullied really hard. They’re mean as snakes anyway. Except maybe it makes them worse.

But I do not accept the bullying of ordinary boys in general, although this sort of thing does go on in the family. I will admit that I bullied my younger brother. What am I supposed to say? It was fucked up, but kids don’t understand that. I didn’t understand it was  wrong at the time. I got told endlessly that it was wrong and I was a bad person for doing it, and I laughed and thought that was the dumbest thing I ever heard.

I am saying that kids don’t understand that this sort of thing is wrong, especially among brothers with young boys. But my friends and I – we did not bully each other. And we only bulliedthe youngest brother sometimes. Bullying is ugly – nobody can handle it – I could not and honestly cannot. But it will never go away. You just have to make people tough enough to not get bullied or not care if they got bullied.

Also I was bullied quite badly in elementary school, junior high, and even high school.Not a lot of times but some. Those were some of the most traumatic events of my life.

But these were like mean, antisocial, psychopathic boys who were preying on normal boys like me in a really evil way. They preyed on many other normal boys too. I told you that I opposed the mean, bully boy, psychopath types bullying normal boys.

But that’s going to happen too. I was probably doomed to be bullied at least a bit. SHI bullied other boys when he was in grade school, junior high and high school.

Right, nobody can handle it. I don’t know I have to keep reiterating my position here over and over. And I oppose all the mean boy psychopathic bullying done to Jason as a boy, as I don’t think he was a severe outlier. And of course your getting bullied as an adult is absolutely outrageous.

Jason: Especially, you can’t handle the sissification. It’s kind like stuff I endured being called Faaaagooooot (mocking a goat sound).

I did not get bullied too much like this, but at age 16, yes, I was bullied by some local juvenile delinquents who were tormenting me because they legitimately thought I was gay I guess. I thought they were my friends and I was hanging out with them trying to be “cool.”

They were running up to me, hitting me and running away again and laughing. I just stood there saying over and over, “I’m not gay. I’m not gay. I’m not gay.” I knew I wasn’t gay and I thought if I could convince them of that, they would leave me alone. But that was one of the most traumatic events of my life.

Jason: Especially, you can’t handle the sissification. It’s kind like stuff I endured being called Faaaagooooot (mocking a goat sound).

Did they actually think you were gay? I mean for real, a homosexual? Or did they know you were straight, and they were just bugging you?

Jason and I are not effeminate. I don’t agree with gay-baiting boys like us.

I don’t like people to think I am wimpy or gay, correct. But they have thought that a lot in my life anyway, especially when I was younger.

It sort of traumatized me in a sense though because I do have a deep neurotic fear that people think I am gay, especially a girlfriend I am having sex with.

The idea of having sex with a woman and having her legitimately wondering if she is fucking a gay or bisexual man is something I cannot reconcile. It’s a crazy fear. I have been trying to work my way out of it forever, but I can’t seem to.

I think it is an OCD symptom, honestly. It goes round and round and never gets resolved, and that is OCD (ruminations). There! You all wanted to know some my OCD symptoms? There ya go! It’s stuff like that. Sort of embarrassing to talk about because it seems to stupid to worry about stuff like that.

It’s happened before – one girlfriend was convinced I was bisexual, and another was convinced that I used to be gay. I fucked the second one all the time anyway, like 3-4 times a day. I fucked her so much my dick almost fell off. I never discussed with her why she thought that. I was 26 and 28 years old then in the former and latter cases. Perhaps I acted different, no idea. I hardly hear it anymore. Perhaps I changed my behavior?

I have always rejected the idea that I am effeminate. It makes me angry. I am quite soft though, and I can have a very soft voice sometimes. You can hardly hear me sometimes. But it is sort of a very soft seductive voice, and a lot of women told me it drives them crazy.

People think soft men, wimpy, passive, or soft-voiced men (like Mr. Rogers) are gay, but honestly, I have known many guys like that in life, and generally, most men like that are simply straight. Wimpy men especially tend to be straight. There are some gay men who act like that, but those are the ones they call “straight-acting.”

If you know anything about psychology, can’t you see that this macho thing I push is called compensation? I’m not being a macho jerk-off. It’s an internal matter in my head. Get it? We’re all screwed up in the head, man. Even us adults.

Well, nobody can handle it. That’s why I quit the church across the road from me. That’s why I essentially live in a hole – isolated in my room on computers all the time.

Of course  nobody can handle it.

I cannot reiterate what a catastrophe this. We on this blog need to maybe figure out how we can help poor Jason here. This sort of stuff should not be going on with an adult man. And this is no way to live your life. Of course I oppose this. Bullying in adulthood is nonsense.

Repost: Why Are Some Animals Gay? Are There any That Do Not Reproduce Due to Being Gay? Wouldn’t That Be an Evolutionary Disadvantage? If It’s Just a Selected Few in a Group, How Do You Know That It’s Not an Anomaly?

Posted last year. Updated and reposted as it’s getting some comments lately.

Answered on Queera, I mean Quora.

The PC line is that homosexuality is widespread in the animal kingdom. “All animals are gay!” is how Gay Politics propaganda goes. Actually it’s not.

This line is taken to extremes recently, and it is not uncommon to hear PC types say that 10% of all types of birds and mammals are gay. That’s clearly nonsense.

Both claims are simply examples of the typical retarded lying that Gay Politics constantly engages in. It shares this with other forms of Identity Politics, all of which are forms of chauvinist propaganda for various groups based on massive retarded lying and victim worship for the identity group along with demonization and irrational, often bizarre and extremely dishonest propagandized hatred of out-group “oppressors” of the same group.

There are cases of two same sex birds incubating an egg, but apparently there was a shortage of the opposite sex that gave rise to this. Also they didn’t have sex with each other.

I had a cat once that went into heat. You can hear and even observe when a cat is in heat. I won’t go into details. You will have to figure it out for yourself. When this cat was in heat, one of my female cats tried to mount the female in heat!

If you drive mice crazy enough in the lab or subject them to very crowded conditions, male mice will attempt to mount each other. They don’t actually have sex. This is called lordosis. This pseudo-homosexuality is a side effect of the mice being driven crazy by overcrowding or whatever. This suggests that homosexuality may be a psychological or sociological behavioral disturbance in some cases.

Bonobo chimpanzees (at least the females) are apparently often bisexual, but I am not aware of any gay or lesbian bonobos, nor am I aware of male bonobos having sex with each other.

However, sheep are a good case for homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Approximately 6% of male sheep prefer to mount other male sheep. I am not sure what they accomplish when they do that, but that’s what they do. They don’t have sex with female sheep. That is quite an excellent analogy in the animal world to male homosexuality among humans. As far as why sheep are like this, I have no idea at all.

At My Age, There are Tens of Millions of American Humans Who I Am Never Allowed to Even Speak To

Polar Bear: Key words “hot” and “young”. In certain areas of the modern West, young and hot are off limits to old White men. You’re welcome to a young homely girl or a hot older woman. But combine young and hot and that’s something sacred. A Time to Kill, “now imagine the innocent victim was White”. Today it’s, “Now imagine the innocent victim is young and hot!

Yeah, it’s been going this way for some time now.  Every year it gets worse and worse. Young women and high school girls – forget it. I can’t even say hello, hi, or the most basic things to them. If I do, they look at me like, “How dare you even fucking speak to me! I cannot believe you are even talking to me! I’m going to call the cops!”

Also I am not allowed to even look at a lot of them. Every year, as I get older, young women and teenage girls get more and more hateful. Their hatred of me is almost at psychotic levels now. Maybe I should just quit talking to them unless I get a real go-ahead.

The other day I was in a Starbucks waiting in line, and this female, looked like a high school girl, was after me. We were waiting and waiting. I walked over to her and said, “Hurry up and wait, huh?” She acted like, “How dare you even try to fucking talk to me! I’m calling the police!”

This bullshit is all new. I don’t ever flirt with any girls or even young women in general unless they give me a go-ahead, which almost never happens. I just comment on the weather or the most basic things. I have not flirted with any of these girls or young women who gave me this attitude. I just said something like, “Hello.”

But increasingly they act like I have no right on Earth to talk to them or even in many cases, to look at them! Some are outraged that I even dare to look at them! They act like they are going to call the police for me looking at them.

Unfortunately, most of the other Normie shitheads in my society seem to agree with these hostile little twats, these children, these bratty little  babies.

When I was growing up it was never like this. Adults walked up to us and talked to us constantly. We spent a good part of our time with adults, mostly adult men of course. Adult women didn’t really talk to us very much. But adult men would walk right up and talk to us all the time.

We often went on trips to the beach, fishing, or backpacking with adults, generally adult men. Those men taught us how to be men! I worry that these boys growing up nowadays are going to grow up with zero exposure to adult male role models, and the results are going to be catastrophic.

Back in the day, an adult man or even women could walk up to any kid, especially a teenager, and start talking to them.

Even if an older man talked to high school or college girls, if the stupid little twats complained, everyone, I mean everyone, all women included, would ask, “Well what did he say? What did he do?” As long as he just talked about the weather and didn’t say or do anything sexual, the adults would basically tell the little twat to shut the fuck up.

Somehow now adults cannot talk to kids or even teenagers, or, if you are an older adult, even young adults, ever. There’s no way this is going to end well. Minors are always assisted in learning the roles of life and growing up by adults of both sexes. Now this is all banned except for the parents, who may be just one parent (a woman) in a lot of cases.

I blame these feminist cunts from Hell for all of this crap, along with conservatives, especially femiservitives. But a lot of liberals are on this Pedophile Mass Hysteria too. The whole thing is so ridiculous and absurd, I don’t know what to even say.

The whole idea that there are tens of millions of human beings in my own nation who I am not allowed to make the most innocuous comment to without getting accused of “harassment” is absolutely insane and bizarre.

Some Examples of Permanently Flawed Utopian Rules and Laws Under Feminism: Domestic Violence, Assault and Battery, and Statutory Rape

As I have mentioned before a number of times, Female Rule (feminist rule) is always doomed to fail. It’s not so much that it’s evil (though it is a bit evil, especially towards us men) but more that it simply causes chaos. Any attempt to enforce and legislate rules and laws that go against human nature is doomed to cause chaos and eventually fail.

Because Mother Nature bats last, that’s why. She also always gets the last laugh, don’t forget.

Female Rule is failing horribly right now in Sweden, probably the best example of Female Rule on Earth.

The UK is increasingly under Female Rule, and the results seem to be the usual chaos.

The US is increasingly coming under Female Rule, and the result is the usual criminalization of much normal male behavior; increased arrests and jailings of men for simply being men; utopian and often irrational or even grossly unjust, preposterous, and unworkable laws; extreme injustice in divorce courts, etc.

Domestic violence laws are now profoundly unjust. Defend yourself against a physical attack by a woman, and you are going to jail. This law is extremely biased on favor or women and very oppressive to men.

Female Rule has now been extended to conflicts between men, something which women know nothing about. These new laws lack common sense. The ancient rules of Man World – the rules of the “fair fight” – are now gone, and when two men get into a physical fight for any reason, both of them are always going to jail.

This is profoundly unjust but a woman will tell that this is justice! “We can’t figure out who started it,” the woman will say. “So we have to put them both in jail.” Somehow this is just!  Actually it is unbelievable unjust for the man who was defending himself.

Many to most men only act decent primarily or perhaps only because in Man World, if you act aggressive in a number of ways, someone is going to hit you. Punch you in the face. Man World runs on the threat of a punch in the face.

Most men are aware of this, are terrified of other men, and do everything they can to not get penalized. Now women have taken this form of law away from us, when it was one of the main things that held male society together and made it halfway calm and peaceful. Now that the punch in the face penalty will send even the umpire to jail, male society is much more dangerous and chaotic.

Only women would come up with something so insane as to say that a woman who has been drinking alcohol or taking drugs cannot consent to sex. How on Earth can she not consent? Of course she can consent! If this Female Rule law were actually enforced, most men would be jailed within the year.

Only women would come up with the idiotic notion that a teenage girl cannot consent to sex. Except that in most states she can definitely consent to having legal sex with an underage teenage boy. Women will say that somehow this precious flower of Ultimate Purity can consent to have sex with a boy her age (How? I thought she can’t consent?) but somehow, automagically, when he turns 18 or above, she’s not able to consent anymore!

Women will say this is completely logical and just. Of course it’s not. It’s not even sensible. It’s downright preposterous, illogical, and idiotic.

Now, there are reasons that especially older men (say past early 20’s) should be kept away from these girls for both their own good and the good of the girl. I definitely prefer for it to be illegal for me to touch those young girls. I fear for myself if we get rid of the law. And those girls need to be protected from me and especially other men less scrupulous than I. It’s good for us and it’s good for them. It protects us from ourselves and it protects them from us.

But of course those girls can consent! They can consent to have sex with any man of any age, really. I would just like to keep statutory rape illegal to hold up basic societal rules and in order to avoid what looks like excessively exploitative relationships. But not because they can’t consent! What are they? Retarded? Schizophrenic? Deaf, blind and dumb?

I challenge these women to produce a philosophical argument proving that these girls can somehow be unable consent some of the time and yet able to consent at other times.

The Fallacy of Feminism: Trying to Create Utopian Universal Justice in an Inherently Unjust World

Female Rule (feminist rule) tries to create universal justice in an inherently unjust world.

Obviously that’s a fool’s errand. Female Rule always tries to rewrite and even criminalize human nature (mostly male nature) because women dislike human nature and especially male nature. They think our natural male behavior sucks, and they want to make it against the law.

Whenever women take power in the world, the first few things they usually do is outlaw pornography, gambling, and alcohol. You know, the three things that keep most of us guys from blowing our brains out.

Women tried to outlaw porn in the West and failed badly. Gambling is becoming legal in the West again. And of course, it was idiot women who were behind the utopian Prohibition which failed so miserably.

The attempt to create Utopia and Universal Justice by ignoring or criminalizing basic human and especially male nature is why Female Rule always seems to fail.

Feminism Is Shoveling Sand against 100,000 Years of Tide

The fact that Players are typically treated as heroes in most societies by both genders and across age groups is another reason why feminism goes against human nature.

That is why this new feminist reaction that somehow Players are evil, scumbags , pedophiles (!), creeps (!), losers (!), criminals (!), and deserving of contempt and increasingly arrest and imprisonment for the crime of being a male mammal is bizarre. Feminists are part of the Cultural Left. As usual, the feminists, as part of the SJW Left, are trying to destroy human nature.

They are acting like 100,000 years of human history of continuous biological behavioral trends either never happened or are irrelevant. You hear feminists say over and over, “But we are modern now. We have decided you can’t be that way anymore,” about this or that. Feminists, like all SJW’s, are trying like the Communists to create a New Man, in the Communists’ case free of capitalism and selfishness and in the SJW’s case liberated from 100,000 years of evolution.

We are supposed to shrug off a hundred millennia of biological habit as if it never occurred. We are supposed to create a New SJW Man torn free from the roots of his past.

Feminists are also trying to create some New SJW Woman or at least they are lying about the basic nature of women, which is extremely consistent across thousands of cultures and over millennia of written record.

According to feminists, and the Cultural Left in general:

  • Everything your grandfather taught you is wrong.
  • Every human society that ever existed was wrong.

The New Feminist Woman is not working out. Women are simply being women just like they always have in spite of the feminists. Feminists are reacting to the intractable nature of female behavior by both denying it is happening now and denying that it ever existed in the first place.

In other words, feminists are lying like all SJW’s  and IP types. Since all SJW’s and IP types are about denying everything negative about whatever identity they are about, all SJW and IP movements are characterized by constant lying of nearly tidal wave proportions.

The new hatred and even criminalization of Players goes against 100,000 years of human evolution and ultimately shows that Female Rule fails, probably because Female Rule ends up being utopian and based on universal justice when unfortunately, there is no such thing.

My Actual Position on Sexual Harassment and #metoo

SHI: 2- I think I’m more pro-feminism in Identity Politics mold. Robert’s more of a pro-masculinist I believe, which is fine. My dad is like that and many others. I think it’s a generation thing.

For example, I support #MeToo although it’s slightly hypocritical of me, as I have violated many women while accosting them for sex. Why do I do it? I think a lot of powerful men exploit women, which I find very disturbing. So, the world is already masculinist (maybe California isn’t). I like to cede some more political and social space to women.

Essentially, if you’re a broke man and making a move on a hot woman, I would look the other way. I’ll even buy you a beer later because I admire your guts.

But if you’re a rich businessman exploiting a prostitute just because you paid for her services, I’ll stand with the prostitute and protect her. And I have done that before. I was in a resort in Goa, and in the next room, a businessman was abusing a female escort. She was begging him to stop and go gentle on her, but he seemed a perverted BDSM freak.

I alerted the hotel staff and knocked on his door telling him to stop what he was doing. He yelled back at me to “mind my own business”. Soon the hotel staff came and opened the door. The girl was half-naked and chained to a window sill. He apparently wanted to use some blunt instruments on her.

Apparently the businessman had paid a lot of money for that suite, and he was shameless enough to scream at the hotel manager that he would “complain” and whatever he was doing to the poor girl was “consensual”. After they unchained her, she immediately ran towards me, and I hugged her.

Of course he wasn’t arrested or anything. That hotel was well-known for attracting perverted guests like him. At least that girl left. She even refused to take money, but I convinced her that she needs to take the money, as she deserved it for harassment.

I also asked her to file a police complaint. The businessman just laughed: he was on good terms with the corrupt cops and knew a prostitute never stood a chance with her.

I saw how vulnerable the poor girl really was. She immediately bolted and left. Unfortunately, she has to be back on the streets someday and will meet more such sadist clients.

This is an extreme example but good way to highlight that #MeToo is justified in many such instances where powerful men exploit girls.

I actually support the girl in this case, so maybe Shi and I are not different at all. I even support the notion of sexual harassment. I just think the new definition of it is insane. The official US government definition is reasonable: Sexual harassment that is so severe, persistent, and repeated that the person is unable to function at work or school.

I absolutely support a notion of sexual harassment along those lines! Not to mention I support the notion of quid pro quo sexual harassment.

It’s just that the #metoo psychos have taken this to mean “any unwanted sexual advance is sexual harassment.” I’m sorry but that’s completely insane! No it isn’t! See those words “severe”, “persistent”, and “repeated”? Sexual harassment is when she communicates to the guy to knock it off and he keeps on keeping on. It’s fine to go after chumps like this for sexual harassment in my book.

But other than that, I agree with the French actress Katharine Deneuve: “Men have a right to hit on women.” Damn right we do. My own mother objected to that comment, so you can see how deep this feminist insanity goes.

The “Blacks Are Genociding Whites!” Nonsense

To listen to the hysteria of White nationalists and other racists, Blacks are waging some sort of a jihad against Whites. They are deliberately singling us out and hunting us down. One sociologist reported that Blacks preyed on Whites with a “hunter’s mindset.” He tried to factor in a notion that most Whites did not live near large Black populations into his fancy figuring.

There are sites out there showing White victims of Black crime, mostly homicide, and I admit it’s not a pretty picture. I don’t link to those sites for obvious reasons. This whips up hysteria among racist Whites that Blacks are slaughtering us like flies.

Indeed Blacks are slaughtering some people like flies – they’re own people! We get off pretty easy. If there’s one thing that gets Whites whipped up about Black people, hey, it’s the crime. But Blacks have as much reason to hate Blacks for crime as Whites do. In fact, they have much more reason to because we Whites get off pretty easy.

Via the FBI crime report from 2019, I obtained the figures below. The problem here as usual was that the “White” figure for both victims and perpetrators, included Hispanics! Untangling Hispanics from Whites and then subtracting everyone all the perpetrators’ figures proportionately resulted in what is probably a mess, but I think it’s actually pretty accurate. The figures below are approximate.

Incidentally, they were about the same when Hispanics were wrapped into Whites as when Hispanics were disaggregated, which implies that Blacks prey on the category called Whites + Hispanics as much as they prey on Whites alone, which seems to rule out this idea that they single us out to victimize us.

For instance, Blacks were 15% of the killers of Hispanics + Whites and 16% of the figures of Whites alone. Ok, Black criminals “single us out for homicide” at a rate of 7%. Big deal.

             Killers of Whites

            Pop %  Offender %

Blacks      13     16

Hispanics   18     22

Whites      65     60

Whites are 8% less likely to kill a White person compared to other races.

Blacks are 23% more likely to kill a White person than other races.

Hispanics are 22% more likely to kill a White person than other races.

This whole argument doesn’t seem to add up to much of anything. Hispanics appear to be just as likely to murder Whites as Blacks are, and neither group murders Whites at a much higher rate than Whites kill themselves. Granted, Whites tend to live away from concentrations of Blacks, which adds a protective factor here. Perhaps if they did not do so, Blacks would prey on them more.

Conclusion: This whole idea of Black criminals running amok massacring and Holocausting the White population are ridiculous. A White is as much at risk of a Hispanic than a Black. Granted this doesn’t take into effect the likelihood of seeing a White, Hispanic, or Black who might kill you on any particular day. Certainly for Whites who live around large Black populations, the risk of victimization of all sorts is going to be much higher.

There is no crisis of Blacks murdering Whites. It’s nonsense. The crisis is Blacks Shoahing their own kind. If we Whites are going to feel compassion for any victims of Black crime, first of all our hearts should go out to Black victims. There’s the real crisis.

Two Types of Masculism

This blog definitely supports masculism, which is simply support for the normal sexual and non-sexual behaviors of regular, everyday heterosexual men. We don’t think masculinity is toxic. this is a feminist notion that we reject. We  don’t think that male heterosexual sexuality is automatically toxic, dangerous, and  needs to be attacked: this is a feminist position.

A lot of you probably don’t know what masculism is. While it holds the potential, like any IP, to be toxic and senseless, there is a good case to be made that normal masculine behavior and normal male heterosexual sexuality are things that should be safeguarded and not attacked as the enemy, which is what the feminists are doing. In that sense, masculism is a valid position.

From Wikipedia:

Christensen differentiates between “progressive masculism” and an “extremist version”. The former welcomes many of the societal changes promoted by feminists, while regretting that some measures reducing sexism against women have increased it against men.

The extremist version promotes male supremacy to some degree and is generally based on a belief in women’s inferiority. Nicholas Davidson, in his book The Failure of Feminism, describes an extremist version of masculism which he termed “virism”: “What ails society is ‘effeminacy’. The improvement of society requires that the influence of female values be decreased and the influence of male values increased…

The more progressive version sounds better to me. I don’t believe in male chauvinism, and I don’t believe that women are inferior. There is definitely a problem of our society in general being taken over by female thinking (feminism), with the result being a mass pussification of American “men,”most of whom have become the equivalent of gender traitors.

I also don’t believe that society should be run on the basis of female thinking. It’s too chauvinist and irrational to serve as philosophical basis for society and its laws, mores, and rules. Female Rule doesn’t work, sorry. I’m not sure how many times we have to prove this until people start believing it.

Black IP Has a See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil Attitude Towards Black Problems

I want to help Black people. Not the Blacks who hang out here. They don’t need my help because there’s nothing wrong with them. They don’t need to be fixed. But maybe there’s a lot of others who do.

I think Black behavior as a race, a whole, is a serious problem. Not on an individual level. But there’s enough “of us acting bad”, as Tulio puts it (“Face it, we don’t act very good”) that it is a serious problem.

That problem is not solely my concern. These problems hit Black people more than any other race. In fact, it out and out nukes them. Well, maybe Black people enjoy being Holocausted like this. But I doubt it. It’s not an openly suicidal race in the way that any human is suicidal. Blacks don’t like it, they think it’s a problem, but they have no idea what to do about it. And for the most part they refuse to talk about it as it hurts their ego to do so.

And when antiracists shut down the whole Black  public health, incarceration, and behavioral crisis etc. in the Black community, it is curious. Bottom line is Black IP folks don’t want to help their own people. Saving their pride is more important than helping their people.

89% of Black homicides are at other Blacks. The rest of us get off easy. Blacks are going out of their way not to murder us! And they are going out of their way not to rape us either. Or not to victimize us at all. White Nationalists scream about how many White women Black men rape every year. Well, it’s a lot. They throw up how many Black women White men rape, which is around zero. Well, so what?

There are 5X fewer Black women than White women. And 5X more Black women get raped by Black men every year than White women. You do the math. Black women are 25X more likely to get raped by a Black man than White women. Why aren’t Black women screaming about this? I mean some are – check the website What about Our Daughters?

But mostly it is this conspiracy of silence, and everyone who brings it up gets called racist and shut down. Standing up for Black victims of Black crime, murder, and rape victims is racism? Wow. So we better not discuss it? Amazing. Because talking about victims and standing up for Black victims is racism. Incredible. If you do that, you’re a Nazi. Unbelievable.

Why the Liberal View of Black Pathologies Is Not Only Wrong But Leads Us Nowhere

I shouldn’t have to justify myself for speaking of the pathologies of the Black race. Whip out any list of statistics that we keep on important human behaviors. It’s sad. Blacks lag in most of the good things and are vastly overrepresented in a lot of bad things. I’m not racist for saying that. You can go look up the figures you want if you don’t believe me. A few examples:

Black rates of:

Murder                        8X White rate

Robbery                       10X White rate

Rape                          6X White rate.

Children born to single Moms: 3X White rate

We could really go on and on here but I don’t feel  like rubbing it in or kicking a man while he’s down. I’m simply pointing out that looking at obvious, uncontroversial statistics, we have a lot of problems with Black people in our society.

Now that we hopefully have that out of the way,  we get to the meat of this post: what exactly is causing these pathologies?

Mostly I blame Black people for these problems. Look: What’s the reason for  these pathologies?

Three choices:

  1. Evil racists forced a lot of Black people to act terrible.
  2. Bad Black genes make a lot of Black people inherently messed up and dangerous.
  3. Lousy Black culture causes a lot of Black people to act awful.

I reject #1. There’s simply no evidence whatsoever that it’s true. The evidence against this theory is as big as a mountain.

I don’t feel like supporting #2 at the moment, though there might be something to it. Anyway, genes are not destiny.

I’ll take Door #3. But when I do that, I am an evil racist. See?

The only acceptable answer is #1. Project the blame over on Whites, blame Whites for all of this, and wage forever wars against racism that never end because bad Black behavior never ends. The theory says that if Blacks act bad, it’s racism that’s doing it. And Blacks will keep acting bad. As long as they do, there will, by this theory, be a horrible racism problem in the US. Which we need a forever war against.

But what if the theory is wrong? What if it’s not racism that is causing the problem? Then the endless wars on racism are worthless. We are using the wrong cure for the problem. That never fixes anything.

Even if you cannot observe the racism in society (we are getting there), there always must be horrific racism even if it’s invisible. Bad Black behavior proves that. Nowadays you can’t see a lot of anti-Black racism. But it’s obviously still horribly there. Black behavior proves it.

So we get all these theories to explain the obvious racism. How can there be racism if we can’t even see it anymore? Well, it must be invisible. It’s must be “structural racism.” The structures themselves are horribly racist, but we can’t really see it. They just are.

Then there’s all this invisible racism. Turns out Whites have racist minds even if they don’t act racist. Well, those racist thoughts of White people are forcing Blacks to act bad. So White people are thought criminals and need to start thinking differently.

Not much obvious discrimination and hate? Well then, that must be invisible too. It can’t be seen because it’s at the micro level. Hence we have microaggressions. Every little tiny micro-behavior hurts Blacks and makes them act bad.

Well, no matter how many wars on microaggressions and structural racism we wage, they will never go away, since as long as Black people act bad, these invisible racisms will still be there. So we are waging a forever war against something we can’t see, isn’t even causing the problem in the first place, and will always be there, no matter how hard we fight it.

White People Are Far Too Altruistic for Their Own Good

Polar Bear: Whites, maybe even Nordics, are more accepting of racemixing. This fits with their lower rates of Identity Politics.

Yes, White IP tends to be a nasty beast. You don’t have to look back that far in history to see that. I can understand people’s visceral negative reaction to White IP. Face it, White IP movements can create some huge monsters, whole populations of basically “White orcs”.

Face it. We Whites are too nice. We’re too good. We are the most self-sacrificing race on Earth. Name another race that voluntarily cedes its power and advantages to others on a regular basis.

I’m waiting…

Truth is that we Whites are so good, so damned altruistic and other-oriented, that we are out and out committing what boils down to racial suicide. And most of us could care less.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s fine to be a saint. But there is such a thing as being too good. Taken too far, saintliness can be downright suicidal.

I’m not against a world that’s less White. But in my own society, I would prefer the non-Whites to be high quality people: higher IQ, educated (college or grad degree preferred), well-behaved. I don’t understand why that’s so evil, racist, and controversial. Non-White races and groups have a huge number of high quality people in them that I would be happy to share my society with.

The quality debate refers to whole races and groups, not individuals. The problem with a lot of non-White races and groups that while they have many high-quality people among them, they also have vast numbers of lower quality people who won’t be good for my country. That’s why you can’t just let them in willy-nilly like you could with Norwegians and Japanese. Sorry, some races and groups simply call for more scrutiny.

If non-Whites meet those criteria, who gives a damn that they’re not White? They are going to act like us for all intents and purposes. We Whites say that if you are well-behaved (and it helps to be intelligent too), you “act like we do.”

That’s why all the talk of Black culture being so different from White culture is just silly. As long as Blacks act good, we will say that they “act like we do.” Any differences in their culture will be waved off as unimportant because to us they are.

We Whites don’t particularly care what non-Whites do, believe it or not. We have better things to worry about, like getting laid, making rent and paying bills. Instead, all we care about is that you are well-behaved when you do whatever it is you do.

On the other hand, if you don’t select the non-Whites by quality, you might end up with Brazil – lower IQ, poorly educated, terribly misbehaved non-Whites that almost create a Dantean Hell on Earth.

White extinction is a long ways off. I recently went to a shindig in the Sierra Nevada, right here in California of all places, and I swear every single person there, of all ages, was White. Plenty of pretty redheads running about too. So in a way this is hue and cry over nothing. I will be gone in 25 years and I assure you that there will still be huge numbers of Whites in this world.

Identity Politics of Superior Groups Is Particularly Dangerous

White IP parallels the fall of angels, th 1/3 that fell from heaven felt superior to humans and were in a lot of ways. With their advanced technology, precision, etc. some Whites develop a sort of elven elitism. Elves, angels, and Whites can be more ruthless than orcs. Perhaps they are more capable..

Face facts, some races and ethnic groups are superior on at least certain metrics. That’s not even controversial science, yet anyone who states this fact may well have their life and career ruined by SJW psychos.

But look:

Germans and Japanese both score very high on IQ tests – superior to many other groups, and objectively speaking, both developed advanced societies in a variety of ways. Their societies were also superior to many others 70 years ago. The Germans were considered to be one of the more attractive White groups, albeit a subjective notion.

In short these two groups could be seen as superior on a number of metrics. So logically, it was easy for them to feel superior. Those who achieve superior results in society tend to feel superior to others.

The odd part was that Jews were superior on a number of metrics to Germans  (let’s face it) and there’s no good evidence that many Slavs, such as Poles, are inferior to Germans (Poles score higher in IQ tests than Germans).

However the superiority of the Germans caused them to see other groups, even other groups that were on the same level or even higher than they were, as inferior. A sense of superiority isn’t necessarily logical. The problem is that that sentiment exists at all.

In Central Africa, the Tutsis were taller, lighter skinned,  had fairer features, and were perhaps more intelligent than the Hutus, who looked more like typical Africans. So the Tutsis were superior in a number of ways. Look what happened. 1 million Hutus murdered in only three weeks.

Problem is that when hugely superior groups develop an IP, the results can be out and out genocidal. Their sense of superiority allows them to regard many of the groups around them as inferior, and mass murder can flow from that.

Whites do score superior to many other races on objective testing, particularly intelligence testing. One could argue that they have achieved superior results in technology, science, the arts, innovation, and civilization in general. So when objectively superior Whites develop an IP, it’s typically pretty ugly stuff.

Take-home point: Objectively superior groups developing IP is very dangerous. Their sense of superiority, already validated by facts, gets blown out of proportion. There’s a tendency to regard many other groups as inferior – and face it, on a lot of metrics, they are.

These validated senses of superiority of themselves and inferiority of others leads to disdain and contempt for those below them and to savage IP in which they can be quite cruel, vicious, murderous, and even genocidal.

The more objectively superior the group, the more brutal the IP. Not true all the time, but definitely true a lot of the time. Superior group’s IP is a dangerous thing. It’s no wonder that people get alarmed when certain groups develop IP.

The Blacks in My Town

They make up 4% of the population. I wouldn’t say that they all act bad, but a lot of them do. The thing is that with only 4% of the total and only 3,000 population, the local Blacks simply don’t have any numbers, so all the typical pathologies associated with a certain type of Blacks (which they are for the most part) never arise.

I mean those pathologies of a certain type of Black are there all right, but when they don’t have any numbers, these Black pathologies are only present in a few isolated folks here and there, and they don’t tend to coalesce into large numbers of pathological folks, which is a whole different ballgame. It’s interesting that you can have small numbers of pretty pathological people, but they don’t really cause many problems as long as they do not coalesce together in large groups.

Actually that makes sense. Pathological individuals or tiny groups often act a lot better than when they are in a large group of pathological people.

As the group grows, the pathologies tend to coalesce and increase, and also perhaps “the boldness of numbers” seems to spring a lot more pathologies to the surface, whereas in small numbers, a lot of these people would hide their worst aspects because there aren’t the numbers present to “set off” or “trigger” their worst behavior.

Perhaps small numbers of pathological people tend to keep their heads down to some extent also. With numbers comes boldness, arrogance, riffing off and amplifying one another’s pathologies, the growth of a large scale actual pathological culture, etc.

Think about it. You see one homeless person and no matter how messed up they are, they’re really no big deal. We have ~600 homeless here. I actually know some of them. But you only encounter them as individuals, so they’re not a problem at all. Now think of large cities that have whole armies of homeless – particularly large groups that coalesce in large numbers and high concentrations in certain areas. A whole other ballgame, no?

I’m sure there must be literature in sociology about how isolated pathological people act far better than when they get together in groups, but I’m not aware of any. I assume that the study of that sort of thing would be sociology or possibly social psychology (sort of the same thing).

Most of the rest who are not like those people are deep into what I call “Black culture” – that is, they are more into being Blacks than being, say, Americans or Californians. In other words, Identity Politics Blacks.

To tell the truth though, I think most Blacks are into Black IP. But it’s not good for them. Blacks deep into Black IP and Black culture tend to be rather hostile towards Whites even if they are otherwise fairly well-behaved. A lot of them have a serious beef against Whites. They often look angry a good part of the time. I think the Black IP and Black identity tends to get them all riled about race relations in the US, hence their sense of anger and grievance.

I can usually handle them anyway because I just return their hostility with kindness (just like Jesus, my main man), and a lot of them soften up and say, “Hey, you’re all right,” and things like that. Obviously that means I am a horrible, vicious racist like my critics insist, right?

I have a Black neighbor who is a fine human being, but she is way off into Black Culture and Black IP. There’s a list of subjects you can’t bring up with her because it sets off her Black IP. I tried to mention Black men not sticking around to raise their kids, and she didn’t’ want to hear that at all! She was a definitely ride or die girl as far as Black people go! And she was raising a teenage daughter alone. Where’s the father, ha ha?

There is no Black part of town here, thank God – they’re mixed in all over in very small numbers mostly on the “bad side of town” which is of course where I live (Where else would I live?). To tell the truth, I am having a hard time thinking about the local Blacks here as examples because there are so few of them. When there are hardly any of them, they barely even register, even if they are pretty damned lousy as most of the ones here are.

There are a few more middle class Blacks here, but the ones like that mostly live in the local large city with a population of 575,000.

There are a surprising number of mixed race Blacks – Black and White mixes. There are also a surprising  number of mixed race couples or single women with a mixed race brood. It’s almost always a working class White woman and a Black man.

As a general rule, the mixed-race Blacks tend to act much better than the full Blacks. Whether that is down to genes or environment, I have no idea. Some of these folks are almost shockingly “un-Black” in their behavior. Some act like nerdy Whites – brainy, quiet, and introverted. Others are just well-behaved regular folks.

But they generally act more White than Black. Note that we Whites think that anyone who acts more or less like we do and doesn’t appear to have an ethnic culture “act White.” Whether they are really acting White or whether they are just “acting American” is unsure because we Whites think acting American and acting White are the same thing, sorry.

The Basic Law of Human Beings

Polar Bear: Black women basically operate on jungle law. I have seen it with old model blacks even. If an injustice favors them personally, they are all for it. A White Dudley Do Right will demand equality for his coworkers at his own expense. A house slave will be harder on her fellow slaves because only master butters her bread.

I don’t think this is particular to Black women. Blacks period seem to operate on this crude calculus.

And in fairness to Blacks, most groups are like this. Why do you think Identity Politics is so nasty and toxic? Because that’s what IP supporters are like – all IP movements support any injustices against the enemy group that benefits the identity group in question. SJW’s aren’t really about justice at all.

They’re for injustice as much as they are for injustice. Most SJW’s believe we need to commit injustices against certain bad groups to benefit certain good  groups. That’s not exactly justice if you ask me. It’s just sheer vengeance and retaliation.

Feminists are like this, and most women support these feminist injustices that harm men but help women.

I think most ethnic groups feel this way too, but I am having a bit of a hard time proving that at the moment.

Also, Whites supported injustices against other groups for many years on the basis that it was good for us. This whole thing of Whites turning into Dudley Do Rights and voluntarily surrendering power is a fairly new thing.  It is not just Whites who do this. It is also men. Whites and men are two of the few groups in the world that I can think of who have voluntarily ceded power to other groups and who have dismantled injustices that benefited us.

And what do we get for this saintly, self-sacrificing behavior? Endless attacks from the groups we gave up our privileges to attacking us for being the essence of pure evil. You can’t win.

I think that Whites and men, specifically White men, are some of the most moral people on Earth at the moment. You see anyone else voluntarily surrendering power and supporting things that harm their own group simply because they think that the policies they benefit from are immoral and hence should be dismantled?

White women have been in on this to some extent, but since feminism, they have become very angry and selfish. In a word, due to feminism, women are all hopped up and looking for paybacks.

An awful lot of people in the world believe:

Right/Good: Anything that benefits me.
Wrong/Bad: Anything that is bad for me.

Paybacks Are a Bitch

In order to live outside the law, you must be honest.

– Bob Dylan

Anyone who has spent any amount of time amongst street types – lawbreakers, either victimless or otherwise – that line in that song instantly rings a bell and makes perfect sense. I think people who don’t know much about street life would be more likely to be baffled. “What do you mean, to be a criminal, you must be honest? That makes no sense. Crooks aren’t honest.”

Oh yeah? Crooks have no sense of justice? Get yourself locked into a prison or jail sometime and start victimizing the other inmates. A lot of the time there are going to be some very serious  retaliatory consequences coming your way.

And as the saying on the street goes, “Paybacks are a bitch.”

When I lived my victimless street criminal life, I used to hear this all the time. If someone was going around committing injustices like ripping off the local dealers, the dealers and their friends would get together and really fuck the guy over hard.

My friends and I put a bomb on the windshield of a car and blew it up once because the owner of the car had been going around ripping the local dealers off. Two dealers participated in the bombing, another guy and I, and we had both been ripped off by this guy.

There really is a sense of cruel morality to the street. You can almost get away with more as a “legal criminal” than you can on the street. Sometimes I also think a good motto of the street is “the street has a thousand eyes and a thousand ears.”

Not only that but perversely enough, the street believes in justice. People who run around actively harming other street types usually have a pretty rude awakening coming to them. As in paybacks. It’s not uncommon for such victimizers to even end up dead.

“You don’t mess with the street” would be another saying of mine. Don’t mess with street types. They’re basically criminals, for Chrissake! They’ll kill you! A criminal will hurt you for an injustice committed against him far more than a law-abider will. They don’t have a lot compunctions about committing nasty crimes to get back at you. They’re used to committing crimes, being criminals after all.

Face It: A Lot of Young People of Both Genders and a Lot of Races Act Pretty Bad

Polar Bear: Black female morality: A local Italian place has cheap food that didn’t sell during the day, so I stopped by a little bit ago. Me and another White man get their first but let all the ladies go first. A fairly diverse bunch of women take their food before us – fine.

A black lady takes as many plates as she can carry, so me and the other gentlemen get none. Me and the other guy looked at each other and both thought of a word.

That word you were both thinking of is exactly what this lousy women is, sorry. If Blacks don’t want to be called words like that, just act decent and civilized, and most of us won’t abuse you with slurs. If you act terrible you deserve every slur hurled your way.

Blacks do this sort of thing a lot, far more than any other race I can think of. The one adjective I think of when I think of a certain type of Black person is “inconsiderate.” Very inconsiderate and self-centered. You’re either not there or you don’t matter. All that matters is them getting whatever the need, come Hell or high water. Other people are either nonexistent or in the way.

In fact, I would say that most of a certain type of Black women are like this. I think there is something wrong with a certain type of Black person. You all know exactly who I am talking about. I’m not surely what exactly is wrong with them and why they act this way, but one of the purposes of this site is to explore questions like that.

And yes, it is typically a Black woman who is trying to more or less scam or semi-scam, thieve or semi-thieve, this way. I don’t know about the extent to which Black men engage in this behavior, as I really don’t deal with them.

On the other hand, it’s not just Black women. This thing: low level more or less thievery or at least very inconsiderate behavior, is very common among women of all races. It is mostly young women who pull this shit. In my opinion, 1/3 of young women are basically thieves. And the people they steal from are men.

Many young women age 18-30 are virtually psychopathic. There’s something terribly wrong with them. I don’t understand why so many young women act this way.

After age 30, women do a lot less thieving. And whoring for that matter. Thieving (from men) and whoring are a young women’s game, and they excel at both of these things. The thieving is often tied in with sex in a way or at least that is used as an enticement. After age 30, women seem to have a lot more morals. Things they would have done without a thought when they were young now elicit frowns of disapproval and statements like, “That’s wrong.”

I really don’t get why but young men are pretty horrific too. Sure, Black men have an extremely high crime rate, but the Black men doing that are mostly 13-33.  After age 33, Black testosterone levels return to White levels or even lower, and an awful lot of Black men who used to act really bad calm down.

Really though, Hispanic and even White men age 18-30 don’t act real great. The vast majority of male crime in both Hispanics and Whites is committed by this cohort. I suppose you could say that a lot of young men period are almost psychopaths.

Youth is the time for a Hell of a lot of fun, potentially anyway, but young people of both sexes seem deficient in morality, and quite a few of them act pretty damn bad. Both males and females calm down after age 30-33 and even seem to grow a sense of morality where little existed before.

It’s also our society, as I talked to a man from Yemen, and he said that no woman would ever steal one dime from a man in his country. It’s simply unheard of.

These feminists wonder why some men pine for patriarchy, vicious as it is. If you offered me a society to live in where female thieves and thieving whores were basically nonexistent, I would probably want to impose a society like that.

For us men the benefits of such a system are obvious. It’s not just we get to be cruel and lord it over the ladies. I don’t care for that part of it. But a serious patriarchy cuts way down on the thieving and whoring tendencies of women, especially young women, so it spares us men from being victims of whole armies of predatory and amoral females who specialize in victimizing us.

PUA/Game: Women Fight Dirty and Don’t Believe in Rules

Jason: Those women are being bitches – specifically picking on unattractive men. HOWEVER, it was noted recently on this blog that men unfairly target skinny men for “picking on”. Isn’t that the same thing?

Real Men Don’t Fight Dirty

I don’t know. I don’t know any men who pick on skinny men. That stuff is usually over by age 20. Maybe guys in high school might, I dunno. I’ve never known any skinny guys in my life that got picked on but YMMV.

According to male morality, it’s immoral to make up lies about another man just because you hate him. Sure, men do this all the time, especially in politics and war. But you’re not supposed to. You see a lot of men fighting dirty on the Net because they are completely unaccountable for their actions. If you let everyone be anonymous, you will get a society of psychopaths.  Most people only act halfway decent because they are forced to, sorry to say.

To a lot of men like me, a man fighting dirty is severely pussy behavior. A real man doesn’t fight dirty. A real man is honorable and he even fights honorably. I only fight honorably for the most part. I won’t make up a sheer lie about anyone, even my worst enemy.

Fighting dirty is chickenshit and pussy. It’s for little bitches, not real men. Frankly, fighting dirty is extremely feminine behavior because that’s how women fight. When you fight dirty you acknowledge that you are weak, as weak as a woman. It’s pathetic.

Women attack men they see as unattractive far more than other men do. Really, we men don’t really give a fuck about the rest of men. Hell, I don’t even look at other men most of the time! I see no men bullying other men ever in my day to day life and haven’t seen any of this for many years.

Fighting Dirty Is Natural and Normal Female Behavior

Now that we armed these dumb cunts with #metoo, they are using it to go after any man they don’t like. They will specifically single out men who they think are weird or unattractive and accuse them of #metoo violations. Most of the accusations will be straight up lies.

Young women are basically cunts. Evil cunts. Women get a lot less evil as they get older. Most women over 30 will not make up some #metoo lie about some man just because they think he’s weird or ugly.

But young women absolutely will. I would say 1/3 of young women are such evil cunts that they would straight up make up a #metoo lie out of whole cloth just because they think some guy is ugly, weird, or creepy. 1/3 of young women are pretty much psychopaths. Just pure cunts. The other 2/3 are ok. Young women are a field of landmines though. Most are good but a lot of them are very, very bad.

You must understand female thinking. Women think it is 100% acceptable to make up sheer lies about ugly, weird, or creepy men just because they don’t like them and they make these women feel “uncomfortable.” According to female “morality” that is 100% moral. This is how female “morals” work.

Women don’t believe in rules. Women think that rules are for men, not for women. They think men make up those rules to disarm women because men are so much stronger. As the weaker party, of course women fight dirty, and the acceptability of fighting dirty is a part of female “morality.” Women think, “We’re weak and men are strong. If we have to play fair, then they will destroy us. The only way we can fight men is to fight dirty.”

It’s like weak guerrilla groups going up against powerful national armies of nation-states. The only way that guerrillas stand a chance at all against national armies is if they fight dirty and throw out most of the rules. Face it, forcing guerrillas to fight fair means they are guaranteed to be wiped out. I don’t like terrorism, but a lot of guerrillas think terrorism is justified because they are weak, and terrorism is the only way they have a chance at all.

Until you figure this out about women, you will never understand them. Women won’t harm you physically but they can cause severe psychological and spiritual harm to men and their psyches. This country is full of men who have been more or less destroyed by women’s cruelty.

I don’t recommend that you get destroyed by this. I recommend instead to completely toughen up as far as women are concerned and recognize that millions of women in this country are straight up pure evil cunts from Hell. Accept that and be ok with it because you can’t change it. But most women are more or less decent human beings, and that applies even to young women, who excel in psychopathy.

Male Bullying of Other Males in Childhood, Adolescence and Adulthood

Jason: I can handle “guys being guys,” but that’s not how @Robert Lindsay and others probably see “guy behavior”. No, I don’t condone the behavior of the Karate Kid (the original movie) bullies!

Wait a minute! I don’t support grown men being out and out bullies! That behavior needs to stop by age 20 or so. As a grown man there are better ways of driving the point home than bullying – shunning, rejection, disapproval, etc.

I really dislike men who bully other men. I really don’t see the point, honestly. I’m not an asshole and I don’t get off on screaming and yelling at and threatening other men. I don’t like mean men very much. Sometimes I even cheer when they get murdered LOL.

I don’t know why you keep saying I support bullies. It’s true that in childhood some boys are such extreme outliers that they probably need some bullying to get them to act in a more prosocial direction. Furthermore, a lot of times it works. Anyway, boys will never accept boys who are serious outliers. They will torment them until the end of time. So you are tilting at windmills here and fighting a war you will never win.

The “bad boys” like SHI was are not always bad people, and most of them grow out of it as they get older. I don’t condone that behavior because they pick on a wide spectrum of boys beyond the designated victims. But I don’t know if you can stop that much either.

If you teach boys to toughen up and figure out why they are getting bullied, it helps. The bullies are picking on something about you. It might be healthy to identify what they are targeting in you and try to change it if you want to. That’s how you can make yourself a lot more bully-proof.

Quit being a nerd and turn into a cool guy LOL. I’m not mandating making these changes, but often if you figure out why they are attacking you and strive to change those things about you (provided you think they need changing) a lot of the bullies will fade away. Bullies don’t pick on popular people.

I’m not supporting bullying in high school, but extremely weird outliers like extreme, laughable nerds, well, they’re going to get it, sorry. Quit acting like such a damned freak, dammit! I mean assuming you can change that is.

Once you get past 20 or so, most men need to knock it off. Face it, bullying other males is childish behavior. That what little boys and teenage boys do. Grown men are not supposed to bully other men like shitty teenage delinquents. There’s not a lot of good you can say about adult men bullying other men.

I know society likes it – Forbes has an annual feature called “The 100 Meanest Bosses in Corporate America.” These are supposedly the best bosses in the country! So capitalism supports this pathology. I don’t see why it’s necessary for your boss to be a bullying, screaming, yelling, threatening psychopathic maniac.

Face It: Young Americans Have Zero Respect for Their Elders

SHI: Dude, you’re facing discrimination issues because of your age. It’s plain and simple.

Yeah. All this crap is due to age, possibly. You mean if I were younger and said that shit, they wouldn’t have freaked out about it? I must say, those kids they hire in those Fagbucks store have given me nothing but trouble for years now. They tried to throw me out of three different stores. I’ve never been thrown out of any establishment anywhere for any reason in my entire life, and I’ve done a lot of crazy shit in every place you could imagine, but no one ever gave a damn, honestly.

But these kids tried to get rid of me three times in 12 years. If I am really such a monstrous creep, how come only their shitty establishment, out of all of the establishments of every type I have been to in my life, have banned me? Do I act good everywhere else and then only act bad in Gaybucks? And if I am a creepy monster, why haven’t I been getting thrown out of all sorts of establishments my whole life?

Honestly it seems like they don’t like me very much due to my age. They are at that “I hate all old fogeys/old geezers” age. Also here in the US, young people have no respect for elders at all.

The traditional view in all societies has been that younger people must respect their elders. Failure to do so has will cause considerable social stigma. People will chew you out. Traditional societies still believe in respect for elders from what I can tell. Based on their behavior here, Arab, Indian, and Pakistani  societies still practice major respect for elders. I suspect the ones who are born here with gravitate towards American disrespect for elders grotesqueness.

Granted we don’t need to respect our elders anymore here in the US. The traditional reason for respecting elders was because elders were the source of all knowledge and wisdom for the group.  This was before books, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and the Internet. It’s true that we don’t need this anymore, but something seems terribly wrong with a society of bratty, shitty young people with no respect for their elders.

It’s like an essential part of the tapestry of human society has been torn apart. The whole society seems a bit broken as a result – like disrespect rules, and no one has to respect anyone. Respect is the glue that holds society together. Get rid of it and you end up with chaos just as you get under Female (Feminist) rule and other forms of “organized disorder.”

I know people at other stores around here who are immigrants from other lands. This includes Punjabis, Pakistanis, and Arabs. The young Pakistanis, Punjabis, and Arabs (all born in the old country) are extremely respectful of me. They call me sir and it almost seems like they are trying to get underneath me when they talk to me. Like they are deferring to someone with higher status.

The older Punjabis, Pakistanis, and Arabs are all extremely friendly, too. I’ve been going to those places forever now, and I’ve had zero problems. One place I have been going to for 11 years with zero complaints.

Also Hispanics, if they are born outside the US, don’t give me any problems at all. The men give zero fucks about anything, and the women defer to men and act like they don’t want to cause any problems with me because I am a man, and women are not supposed to start shit with men, especially male strangers and acquaintances.

The Natural Tendency of Women Is to Act Like Children or Adolescents

“The woman is always the most responsible teenager in the house.”

– Arthur Schopenhauer

First, a couple of definitions. Female Rule is effectively Feminism in Power, or Feminist Rule. You can have women in the high positions of society, even the highest, and as long as they do not  impose feminism, you don’t have Female Rule. Instead you just have women in high positions ruling on the basis of logic and reason. Women can think and rule on this basis if they are forced to (by men).

Women just don’t like objective thinking because they think it is cold and cruel. But they are capable of thinking that way as long as men say that this is the only thinking we will put up with from women.

My mother graduated second in her class at Hastings Law School in Berkeley. She is certainly capable of seeing the world through the keen, cold eye of pure objective reason. I think she just prefers not to think that way because she thinks it leads to unfairness, particularly for women.

Women are utopians. They are out to cure all the unfairness in the world. My Mom, as smart as she is (150 IQ), still believes that we can have a world where rape and woman beating will be completely eliminated. That’s not a position based on reason. That position is based purely on feels.

My Mom’s emotions tell her that this is the only just society, so she thinks it is possible. Women resent men’s notion that dream worlds and utopias are not possible. They think it is vicious, cold, and pessimistic.

Women are starry-eyed dreamers, and the utopias that women imagine are indeed often very nice places. It’s just that they’re not possible to achieve. Anyone with a logical mind can see that. That’s pretty depressing, but that’s just how life is. Life sucks. Life’s a bitch and then you die.

RL: What do you mean that women are not punished for being wusses? Explain.

Jason: Girls are not encouraged to outgrow childishness. Maybe they’re also put on a pedestal by their parents.

That’s feminism. Feminism promotes the idea that women should be terminal adolescents til the day they die. Feminism treats women like little children. The problem with that is that a lot of women like to act like children or adolescents. It’s sort of their natural tendency.

One of the tasks of society is to reign in this natural tendency of women. Patriarchy, while it was often cruel, told women that their childishness and adolescent behavior would not be tolerated while it threatened them if they disobeyed. Further, there was extreme pressure on women to act like grownups or else.

When you have societal strictures like this in place, women’s natural tendency towards childishness and adolescent behavior will be restrained as it was in my mother’s generation. Women in her generation were expected to be grownups, so they did just that.

I know that Alpha does not act like a child or an adolescent. She acts like a grownup. She has no patience will this feminist craziness. I figure Alpha acts this way because she got it drummed  into her head at an early age as a girl that women were expected to be grownups and not act like children their whole lives. Probably most of the women in her extended family got the same message. Black men don’t seem like they will put up with much foolishness from their women.

Take Your Pick: Patriarchy or Female Rule (Feminism in Power)

You have two choices. Either Feminism in power (Female Rule) or patriarchy. Keep in mind that patriarchy could be extremely benign and kind to women. We could even have women in power running this benign patriarchy.

I don’t object to women in power in society. You can have as many women in power in society as you wish – it’s fine with me. I just don’t want them imposing feminism is all.

You really can’t let women run loose and run wild. Feral women destroy logic and reason and the societies that are based on such. In its place is law and rule by emotion and unreason. Society becomes ruled by feelings and emotions instead of steady, cold, objective logic and reason.

I figure most societies probably tried Female Rule  that at some point and realized that it causes nothing but chaos. That’s why patriarchy is and was the norm all over the world.

My Mom says, “Why have men ruled almost all societies? Men are bigger, men are stronger, so they just lorded it over women.” That’s an interesting theory, but we men are also lazy as Hell. A lot of us would probably like to let the ladies take over so we can kick back, have a beer, watch the football game, and become part of the couch.

Letting women run the show was probably tried in the past in most societies, and the results were the same every time. Patriarchy for all its faults is at least a functional system. Female Rule doesn’t even work. You get something that almost looks like societal failure or societal collapse.

All around the world almost all societies were ruled by the laws, rules, mores, values, and thinking styles of men. Logic and reason were valued over unreason and emotionalism. There’s got to be a reason for that instead of just “Evil men were mean to women!” I’m not really buying that.

Modern society makes it clear that Female Rule always fails, and only rule by male values and rules, logic and reason allows for a functional society. We think we are so much smarter than our ancestors, but that’s a conceit. They were about as smart as we were, especially about basic things like that.

At some point in most of our ancestors’ history, Female Rule may have been tried. The guaranteed result every time is going to be failure and chaos. So Female Rule was revoked and patriarchy was imposed.

Human Abnormality and Normality: Two Contrasting Definitions

The two definitions would be:

First definition, Common versus uncommon.

1a. Abnormal as in uncommon: Everything only existing a small percentage of humans is abnormal like this. This usually but not always implies that it would not be workable if the majority were like this.

In this sense, sorry, but blue eyes and blond hair are abnormal unless you’re an Estonian. And of course left-handedness is abnormal. But one could argue that those three things are also harmless. Abnormal things could be either harmless or even positive (blond and blue above).

1b. Normal as in an always-present part of the human tapestry. In this sense, child molesting, rape, wife-beating, murder and all sorts of nasty things are “normal” in the sense that they are simply part and parcel on the human experience. On the other hand, we want to keep this sort of thing at as low a level as possible due to the moral aspect of it (it harms innocents) and the social chaos dimension (high levels of any of this cause a lot of chaos).

Second definition: Workable versus unworkable.

2a. Abnormal as in unworkable for the majority. In this case, the human behavior works on when only a few humans do it, but it might not work well at all if a majority of people were like this. I will give examples like this below.

2b. Normal as in workable for the majority. In this sense, left-handedness and blond hair and blue eyes would be both normal and abnormal at the same time: they are all rare so they are abnormal per se, but if the majority were left-handed or blond and blue, this would not only be workable for society but it might even make the world a better place. A world full of Swedish women sounds like an upgrade, at least to me.

Let us point out that geniuses, retards, murderers and saints are abnormal in the 1a sense for better or for worse.

Abnormal and bad (1a-2b type): On the other hand, neither killers nor retards are normal in the other sense.  You can’t really have a human species where most humans are murderers. Granted tribal societies like this exist (the Yanonamo), but it wouldn’t be healthy in larger groups.

In the US 110 million men would have murdered a man by age 40. You really think that’s sustainable. Killers get locked away forever in prison. You’d have millions or tens of millions of men locked away for decades. Not to mention the total societal chaos that would ensue.

Could you have a human species where most people are retards? Not going to work either.

Abnormal but good (1a-2a types). The good but abnormal things are different. Geniuses and saints are both normal and abnormal. They’re a normal part of the human experience, but only a tiny percentage of humans are either, so it’s abnormal de facto – anything practiced by only a tiny percentage of humans is obviously abnormal.

This also shows that there’s not necessarily wrong in the abnormality of tiny behavioral minorities. It takes all kinds to fill the freeways. And geniuses and saints both have contributed immensely to our species and our accomplishments.

But could you have a society of geniuses? I’m not sure. Probably no one would ever get laid for one thing because genius men at least are the worst at getting laid because they’ve left their bodies and swim in their heads all the time. Most Normies notice that and think it’s weird if not nuts.

That’s part of why genius men often find it hard to get laid. As IQ rises, men have less and less sex, girlfriends, wives, etc. and their likelihood of being virgins in their early years rises. So does their poor performance at sports. The awkward, dorky nerd genius who can’t get laid is more than a stereotype: there’s something to it.

And geniuses don’t hook up with each other very well  either, but maybe the female geniuses could seduce the male geniuses. A lot of female geniuses really like to fuck and have great success at dating and relationships. Genius doesn’t seem nearly so tied in with painful introversion in women. Female geniuses are often strikingly extroverted.

A society of saints? I’m going to go out on a limb here and say it won’t work. We’re not meant to be pure good and especially purely self-sacrificing. We’d all die trying to be heroes and protect other people. A lot of us would probably deny ourselves to death as saints are wont to do so – check out how many saints and saintly types died of sheer starvation. Not to mention they like to starve themselves in other ways, as in sexually.

Saints seem prone to masochism and no-fun ethics – if it’s fun, it’s bad; if it makes you suffer,  it’s good. So there would again be a lot of celibates – volcels this time – whereas the genius males would be incels.

I would also argue that it’s not healthy for us to be pure good. A little bit of rough makes the world go round. I don’t like bad people, but I’m not against being a little bit bad. Hell, I’m not against being a little bit evil for that matter. I like to stir just a tiny sprinkle of evil into my coffee every morning. Gives me that nice bad boy edge to go out and conquer in a hostile world.

I’ve had girlfriends remark that I’m a little bit evil. That’s just fine. As far as I can tell, it’s helped me get laid. I have had girlfriends even flat out admit that to me – they have told me that I am dangerous and scary, but that that turns them on like crazy. For that reason one was rejecting a “boring old man” in favor of me, about whom she remarked:

You’re scary. But scary’s hot.

Danger in men revs up the female sex drive. Take note, boyos. Score one for Bad Boy Game.

If they said I was real evil, I might get worried.

Perhaps being a little bit bad or evil is an essential part of the human experience for most of us.

After all, what humans say is evil is simply normal survival type behaviors for most mammals. In other words, if most mammals aren’t at least a bit “evil” they’re probably going to die or go extinct.

Want to feel good about yourself? Fine, be a saint. On the other hand, want to survive? Maybe you’ll need to be just a bit bad.

Treatment of Official Minority Groups in China

SHI: They are forcing the Uyghurs, what remains of the Tibetans and the Mongols in Inner Mongolia to intermarry with the Han population so that the country’s Sinicization is complete. They’re already 95% Han Chinese in that country. It’s not good enough for them, so now they want to push it to 100%.

I haven’t heard about that. Perhaps that is because those ethnicities are in rebellion.

There are ~80 officially recognized ethnic groups in China. They represent millions of people. They have full cultural rights. They all also have a right to native tongue education in school – that’s right, most Chinese minorities get to take their education in their native language.

For the larger ethnicities like the Uyghurs and Tibetans, I believe they even have universities in their languages. They are allowed to have TV, radio, newspapers, and magazines in their native languages. I’m not aware of any efforts to wipe out any other ethnicities by marrying them into the Han. Mostly they just live in their ethnic areas (which are often autonomous zones), and everyone just leaves them alone to do what they want.

All of those ethnicities were in terrible shape before the Communists took over. The CCP improved things dramatically for all of those groups. A lot of them were living in feudalism or near-slavery. Also the CCP dramatically improved all of these groups in terms of economics. There was a webpage up for a while from the Chinese government that over in great deal how the  Chinese government had improved matters for each ethnic group. It was very convincing.

China has long been at the forefront of good treatment for its minorities. The USSR was too.

The thing is that a Kashmir-type episode probably would never happen in China. Kashmiris would have been given full cultural rights and right to education in their native tongue in China. Also they would have given them an autonomous zone. It doesn’t sound like India has done anything like this to Kashmir, right?

Are you aware the current fascist leadership of India is planning to send 2 million people in Assam to detention camps?

2 million Assamese to camps? Wow.

SHI: I just feel a large nation state like PRC is too powerful for its own good.

The problem is that the enemies of China are the ones who want to break it up. They want to do this in order to weaken it. See how that works? Why break up your country to make it weaker when that’s nothing but a plot via your enemies?

India and China: A Comparison

SHI: The Rapeublic of India is taking a leaf out of the PRC book when it detains Kashmiri politicians and opposition leaders. So every time I read about the Uyghurs in China, it rings close because the Indian fascist regime is engaged in closely similar tactics.

They’re different countries. China is a Communist dictatorship. Commies don’t mess around. They kill people, put lots of people in prisons, etc. It’s just what they do.

India is theoretically a democracy. They should not be acting like a totalitarian state. That’s way out of line.

To me, China runs on the Maoist principle of serve the people. They are also one of the countries on Earth (unlike us) who believe in the greatest good for the greatest number. They really are out to help everyone, with a special emphasis on the poor. Does India (or the US for that matter) work on the principle of the greatest good for the greatest number? Of course not.

India has utterly failed its poor. India and China were approximately equal on most social figures in 1949. Since then, China has leaped far ahead of India.

And the Indian capitalist system has resulted in 200 million excess deaths compared to China since 1949. That is, if they had followed the Chinese model, 200 million lives would have been saved. There are still 4 million excess deaths in India every year compared to China. Check out Amartya Sen’s work. That’s where I got most of these figures.

Further, at least 30 years ago, 14 million people died of malnutrition and hunger-related illnesses every year in the world. Most of those deaths were in South Asia. In my opinion, most of those deaths are tied into the private ownership of land (I am talking farmland here).

Neither India nor Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Nepal ever did a proper land reform. The issue comes up from time to time in India, but the Indian state is ruled by large landowners (instead of  corporations), so it never gets implemented. India’s going to have terrible problems until they do a proper land reform.

for Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh. Pakistan still has semi-feudal land relations with debt bondage and sharecropping, and it also has always been ruled by large semi-feudal landowners.