Alt Left: Most Everyone in a Capitalist Society Is Basically Not Living in Reality

Capitalists are degenerates. They’re incapable of being honest. Sinclair Lewis said it’s hard for a man to be unbiased when he has a monetary interest or his job depends on how he answers the question. Capitalists have an interesting epistemology. How do we know if something is true or not? If it’s good the capitalist and it makes him money or more money, then it’s a fact. If it makes the capitalist look bad and makes him lose money, it’s not true, a falsehood.

So this is how capitalists do “science.” That’s why every time you get capitalists involved in science or anything that demands that we learn the facts and know what’s true or not true, the capitalists blow up the whole system and wreck everything, leaving only confusion, disaster, tatters and especially chaos.

The latter, chaos, is especially loved by capitalists because they use destruction as a building block to build stuff by destroying perfectly good stuff and rebuilding a bunch of stuff that didn’t need to be rebuilt. Even capitalist economics works on the principle of chaos, disorder, and entropy, and the economic system itself is constantly being blown up by its own internal contradictions or actually its “logic”. These explosions are beloved by capitalsts as this anarchy is part of some glorious “science of chaos” called the Business Cycle.

I am convinced that if aliens landed and we described capitalist economics to them, they would find it so insane and irrational that they would either fall down laughing, shake their heads and conclude that we were all insane, or simply shrug their shoulders, decide there was no intelligent life here, and pack it up and head back home.

Try describing capitalist economics sometime to a kid who’s just old enough to understand it. I bet even most 10 year olds would tell you that it’s irrational and most would say it’s completely insane and doesn’t even make sense.

And in a hyper-capitalist society like ours, that’s why living here is living in what I call Lie World, where one is barraged by out and out falsehoods and lies all day long. It’s literally worse here than it was in a lot of Communist countries. All day long people are yelling at you, insisting that a bunch of things that are obviously true are flat out lies, and a bunch of ridiculously false ideas are straight up true. So there ends up being two realities:

An Actual Reality, where true things are true, and false things are false, where things that happened happened the way they did, and the things that didn’t happen never occurred, or the World of Science, Truth, Honesty, Professionalism, Skepticism, Sane, Non-Partisanship, Pragmatism, Logic, or Atheism.

An Other, False, or Fictional Reality, where true things are false, and false things are true, where things that happened either didn’t happen the way they did or didn’t happen at all, and where the things that never happened actually did, or the World of Pseudo-Science, Falsehood, Lies, Charlatanhood, Magic, Mental Disorder, Politics, Ideology, Emotion, or Religion.

Bottom line is in a capitalist society, just about every single person is not even living in reality at all! They’re living in some fictional reality, like something out a story, a book, or a movie, or an alternate reality, like something out of the Matrix. They’re literally not even living in the real world and all. Instead they are living in a world or Pure Delusion where almost nothing is true or real, and in a sense, just about everyone you meet is flat-out psychotic in a sense.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: If They Can Get You Asking the Wrong Questions, They Don’t Have to Worry about the Answers

Ever notice all these corporations getting on board the Cultural Left stuff? There are several reasons for this.

  1. First is that they can use fake progressivism (the Cultural Left) to gain progressive credentials and woke points, both great for public relations.
  2. While they are at it, they get to divide the workers into squabbling factions who are too busy fighting each other to fight their class enemies.
  3. And of course it is a grand diversion. Look over there! Let’s talk about transsexual bathhouses for all ages. Let’s not talk about economics or foreign policy. This is known as changing the subject to avoid talking about unpleasant subjects.
  4. And last but not least, this is a form of “progressivism” that doesn’t cost them a nickel!

First there was greenwashing, fake environmentalism by corporations, now there is wokewashing, fake progressivism by corporations. Same animal, different subspecies. In this way, corporations can “launder” their “illegal” moral failings into “legal” woke points.

It’s also a classic diversion tactic: get people talking about something else. Shell says let’s not talk about Ben Saro-Wiwa, murdered under our watchful eyes. Let’s talk about our support for the woke 1619 Project instead!

The theme here is basic to power politics, and straight out of Parables for Paranoids (h.t. Tom P.): If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Great Replacement is No Conspiracy Theory

The Cultural Left says that the Great Replacement Theory, which states that Whites are being replaced in their own lands, is a “conspiracy theory.” This means it’s not so. It’s not happening. It’s all a big lie. The (((SPLC))) is particularly big on this.

But (((Mark Potok))), a particularly obnoxious SPLC attorney, actually has a calendar in his office counting down the years to when Whites will be a minority in the US. This is obviously something that this man is very much looking forward to. I assume he is also pushing  the notion that The Great Replacement is a fake conspiracy theory too. Yeah, a fake conspiracy theory that he himself believes in and participates in. I really hate people like Mark Potok. He’s so disgustingly dishonest. I’m sick and tired of liars. I get lied to all day long every single day and after a while, it really gets old.

Isn’t it obviously a fact that we Whites are being displaced in our lands? I’m not saying it’s good or bad. Maybe it’s good, maybe it’s bad depending on your perspective. I’m not even sure it’s been done on purpose or with malice. It may just be accidental or a side effect of some other goal.

But the fact that we are being replaced is utterly uncontroversial, right? I’m sure we could even prove scientifically that we’re being replaced.

How can saying that Whites are being  replaced in their lands possibly be hate speech? It’s true. It’s a fact. It’s even a scientific fact. How can facts be hate speech? How does that even make sense? According to the Cultural Left, the truth itself or better yet reality itself, is hate. Observation of reality and reporting what you see with your senses is hate speech.

Reality is hate. Observation of reality is hate speech. The world has gone completely bonkers.

We are being gaslighted in the worst possible way. We are being told that reality itself is a lie. We are being told that there are two realities. The real reality, which we can take in with our senses, is apparently all fake! And some fake or fictional reality that doesn’t even exist is actual reality! From an ontological point of view, that’s very disturbing. You keep getting told and after a while you are going to wonder which reality you are in, the real one that is fake or the fake one that is real.

I was driving in the mountains near the Creek Fire the other and thinking about this. I looked out at the expanse of forest rolling by my windows and I started thinking, “Are these trees even real? How do I know they’re even real? Am I really seeing them? Do they exist in actual reality or in some fictional reality. It was disturbing as Hell to think like this.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Repost: “Why Growing Up in India Makes You a Nasty, Cruel, Desensitzed Faux-nationalistic Gold-digger,” by Novusipsum

An older article that has aged quite well. It’s as true today and the day it was printed fully eight years ago. Not even one thing has changed even one bit. I hate to talk like this but I really think that India is hopeless. I hope I’m wrong but I gave up on this Dystopia of Damnation some time ago.

This is a great piece by an Indian blogger that he left on my blog as a comment. The original is here. It’s very good, and it’s actually quite well written. He takes on his country in a way that is not often seen in Indian writers.

I particularly enjoyed the bit about Kashmir because it rings so true. Almost every Indian I know goes nuts when I mention Kashmir. They raise their voice and start pounding on the table as their faces gets red. They tell me that the problem is 100% the fault of Pakistan, which imports terrorists into Kashmir to fight India. They also tell me that all of the Kashmiris love India, and none of them are fighting against India.

However, when I tell them that most Kashmiris hate India and that many Kashmiris have taken up arms against India, they insist that I am wrong. Most every Indian I met was exactly like this. They are like drones, utterly indoctrinated by some Borg. They are brainwashed on this subject as bad as a North Korean.

Most of these folks are what you might call middle class or upper middle class educated people. A number of them had university degrees and were quite intelligent. One man used to be a university professor.

Why Growing Up in India Makes You a Nasty, Cruel, Desensitized, Faux-nationalistic Gold-digger

1. School

While people remark on shortage of functional schools in India, I say the kids who don’t go to school have it good. The national curriculum is odious and objectionable, seeing as it is designed for kids who bow down before all authority and the various empty suits regardless of whether they make any sense at all. You cannot contest your teacher. At all. Ever. Such behavior is simply unacceptable. Put another way, the system is a hundred percent authoritarian.

School kills all your creativity. Creativity, especially of the extroverted kind, is not encouraged. There are tried and tested methods to break the will of those who are too free. The system is based on rote-memorization. You must bend your mind a certain way to do that: it means all the rules are already laid out and decided for you. You do not need to think. Your brain must function in a certain way. Any challenge to the established order will make you a pariah.

Kids learn how to secretly and openly hate each other over the grades they are given for breaking their own will and doing pointless mind-numbing work that will be of no use to them at any point in their later life. The focus is on merit – on who is better at following rules. No wonder India has not produced a single India-based world-class scientist, technician, engineer. Science, technology, and engineering after all,re fields where your ability to think is highly valuable.

Barack Obama does not need to worry about Indian kids out-smarting American kids. If they do, it will be by doing hours of grinding and rioting, and when they do, the rest of the world need to start worrying.

This system is evil!

2. Parents, Teachers, Peers

All these people are the product of evil Indian schools and other cramming establishments and will force you to succeed in a way that they deem appropriate. You must resist this but you can’t. They are everywhere.

Your peers will pressure you to bow down, submit, and ‘teach you the value of money’. In other words, how to be a vicious gold-digger. Money is nice but being a nasty, evil, little scummy gold-digger is a degeneration of your soul that even Indian’s ascetic scat-munchers do not attain.

Indian people are therefore nasty and selfish to the extreme. It is of no surprise, seeing their upbringing and their environment.

3. The environment

Your average Indian city, town, village is a primitive clusterfuck without running water or proper sewage disposal. Casteism is rampant; stupid people need little motivation to be proud of what is after all a genetic accident. They think their bloodline is ‘pure’ and grind the ‘lower’ caste people down into the dirt. Respect for human life and dignity in India has to be the lowest in human civilization.

The streets are narrow and dirty, usually overflowing with broken sewage and water lines (which frequently mix), and the garbage the average Indian household does not feel ashamed of throwing on the streets. Any kind of social grace is completely absent, people shove and push each other, vehicles honk incessantly and without reason, and the local temple’s loudspeakers blare out shitty religious hymns.

Living and growing up here, you will learn little by little to let go of your humanity. You will get desensitized to the beggars and lepers in the street: emancipated, poor and trodden down. You will see old men and women driven out of their homes by their sons, eyes pleading for mercy and trying to make sense of the plethora of people around them who ignore their plight and pass right by.

Your average Indian will not even notice the squalor on the street or the helpless human beings on the street. He will simply accept these things as a part of life, which is why things never improve. He is the selfish product of a callous, heartless, and evil system. He will never change, and western democracies should not allow such people into their homelands. Not even for a ‘visit’.

4. The Media

Catering to a large middle class that pretends to be educated, some people have taken the initiative to bring them these people latest news of the world. These people are funded by rich business interests with their own agenda as well as Hindu nationalists. They make the usual salutary noises about bad governance and bloated bureaucracy, things that are so odious that it even permeates the thick bourgeois skull. This is why the middle class types buy newspapers and watch news—they can relate to it.

But the most vicious thing the media does is to fill the average Indian with a sense of pride and nationalism, something that certainly goes against all basic logic and sanity. What people would be proud of a country like this? Only brain-washed, selfish jerks that the education system produces and the media maintains.

The average Indian is full to the brim with national pride that he has no logical reason to feel. His ideas on casteism and the workings of the society are reinforced by editors of the national dailies and the news channels.

His stance on Kashmir, a truly beautiful place inhabited by beautiful people, has been drilled into him incessantly. The parable of Pakistan exporting its terrorists (not that it doesn’t – and it turns out the Americans knew about it all along) to India and that the Kashmiris love India (Huh?) has been in print for thirty years now. Of course, India is always the poor, helpless victim.

5. College

Most people in India never even graduate from their high schools, let alone college. And I say good for them. Because the system feels the need to grind out all kind of potential competition it may get from any future thinkers.

If school doesn’t manage to turn you into a humanoid selfish fuck, your college certainly will. India’s unemployment problem is vast. Of the colleges that ‘guarantee’ any jobs such as professional degree mills like IIT, NIT, AIIM, etc., it is interesting to note that only Indians think these places are good. An independent peer review ranked the ‘best’ IIT at around 350th at world level. Yet the middle-class scramble for securing a seat there so intense it simply has to be seen to be believed.

Millions (you heard that right, millions) of middle-class Indians right now are rioting, grinding, and chewing equations, formulas, and facts for entrance exams that maybe a hundred of them really understand. These people aspire to be ‘engineers’ and ‘doctors’.

The workload is so immense that you can’t find time at age 16 and 17 to ogle girls (or boys), party, learn how to drink beer without making a face, or hang out with your friends. But what am I saying? Hell, most Indian people don’t find time to do that ever in their lives anyway.

College itself is a turdfest -professors with massive egos, an anal-retentive and callous administration, and overall awkward social interaction between the sexes. Girls hanging out with boys are labeled ‘hookers’ and ‘sluts’. Massive sexual repression is the hallmark of this point in your life, and given the pressure to rote more equations and secure a job, you’d be lucky escaping the place without a drug habit or a drinking problem.

Is there anything good about India at all? With fertile plains to the north, large iron ore deposits to the south, the biggest aluminum stores in the world and 30% of the world’s thorium, I think the White Man would have made the country really work.

The only thing wrong with India is Indians.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Birth of the Cultural Left Analysis: Did the Black Panthers Hate Whites?

I think the Panthers are still around, but they are not very active. I actually don’t mind them. They did a lot of really cool things like free breakfasts and lunches for school children. They have been superseded by the New Black Panther Party, an explicitly racist organization that actively promotes hatred of Whites. The real Panthers recently criticized the NBP for hating Whites, saying that the original Panthers were never about hating Whites; instead they just wanted equal rights for Blacks.

The rightwing recently has published some articles suggesting that the Panthers hated Whites. To my recollection, they did not. They helped the Weathermen break Tim Leary out of prison, and they visited him in Algeria, where some of them (Kwame Ture nee Eldridge Cleaver of Soul on Ice fame) had also taken refuge. A lot of radical Whites worked hand in hand with the Panthers.

The Panthers were Marxists (actually Maoists) of that particular er, which would coincide with the Cultural Revolution period in China. Think of how culturally conservatives the Chinese Communist Party was at this time. That’s what the Panthers were like.

They were strongly against degeneracy of any type as most Communist parties (CP’s) were at that time. Some Panthers were openly homophobic, saying homosexuality was a bourgeois vice, a popular view among CP’s of that time (See the Cuban leadership’s position on this subject in the 1960’s). They certainly didn’t promote Black crime, drug use, or even irresponsible behavior.

I will say that Farrakhan’s (whom I very much dislike) people are huge on social responsibility too, and I appreciate them for that. They are very much into clean living and non-degeneracy, and they despise Black crime.

I came out of the cultural revolutions of the 1960’s, which is why probably why some people are shocked at how leftwing I am. They’re blown away when they figure that out about me. “Wow, I didn’t realize he was so leftwing!” Well, I am. I’m race realist though and hate the Cultural Left. I’m a “conservative socialist.”

Hell, I was on the mailing list for the Weatherman at one point not even long ago! Well, their above ground organization that is (the Prairie Fire Organizing Committee), which frankly has strong links to this BLM movement right now. So, yes, the present Weathermen (now given up arms as a peaceful organization) are very much behind BLM.

My friends were drug dealers who hung out with Tim Leary and the Brotherhood of Eternal Love in Laguna Canyon in Laguna Beach where the BEL made and distributed millions of tabs of Orange Sunshine LSD.I remember my friends telling me about going to parties in the canyon and how they had lookouts high up in the eucalyptus trees to watch out for cops. I did go to a party in the Canyon once, a real hippie party with real hippie chicks and lots of pot smoking. Love was definitely in the air.

I have supported Latin American guerrilla groups. I actually gave to the “weapons fund” for the Salvadoran guerrillas for some time. So I’m actually a real dyed in the wool terrorist supporter or even financier if you will, although I stopped giving them money long ago.

If I did that now, I would be violating the Patriot Act by giving Material Support for Terrorism (Whatever the Hell that means!), and I could be looking at 10 years. But alas, those were different times. Even the 80’s were far more laid back, relaxed, and anti-authoritarian compared to now when we seem to be on some weird authoritarian trip due to fears over “terrorism” which is about nonexistent in the US.

Anyway, this was a time of peace, love, dope and all that. Everyone was very much into nonviolence to the point of near-passivity. Any aggressive behavior was “uncool.” Every hippie man was your brother, and every hippie woman was your sister. There was magic in the air. And Yoko brought her walrus, don’t forget that.

Plus there was lots of “free love.” I still have fond memories of hippie chicks. I will say it was a lot more loving and friendly than things are nowadays with all this weirdness, antisociality, fear of strangers and single men, “pedophile” hysteria, #metoo insanity, and general fear or even terror of men – and this at a time when major crimes like rape have crashed 63% since  1993.

Sometimes I think the lower the crime rate goes, the more paranoid people get about crime. Don’t ask me to figure it out. I have no idea why humans do whatever irrational thing du jour they happen to be doing.

Bottom line is that humans are basically irrational and illogical at their core and we tend to be driven around all through life by our emotional needs and beliefs, which often seem to be pulling us through life blindly on a leash like a dog ownder, not even why we do or feel certain things.

I can’t tell you how many of my female clients have asked me, “Why do I feel this way?”  The answer was not readily apparent. Obviously it’s happening for a reason, probably an  unconscious one. Then they ask me, “How do I stop feeling  this way (getting dragged through life with their emotions like a dog an a leash)?” It’s hard to answer questions like that. The solutions are there no doubt, but they are more tangled up in the forbidding jungle of the psyche than we want  to admit.

The only answer I would have to taht question would be to develop some “emotional literacy,” to try to develop and cultivate at least some  emotional control. My emotions don’t drag me through life blindly, baffled at why I am doing or feeling  this or that. I

t’s more the opposite. Whereas with many people, including  most women for sure, their emotions are dragging through them through their lives blindly, with me it’s the other way around. I have my emotions on a leash and I drag them around. I’d rather drag my emotions through life in my own leash than the other way around. Control gets a bad rap, but a lot of forms of it

Anyway, the Panthers were just Black hippies. They hung out with the White hippies. Black hippies were “brothers,” or “soul brothers,” if you will. There were some problems with them of course (they are Blacks after all), but most of them were quite well-behaved or at least much  better behaved than they are now. I suspect the demand for nonviolence in the hippie movement weeded out the bad ones. There may have been some self-selection going  on.

Bottom line is I really disagree that the Panthers were White-haters. It’s BS.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: How We Got Here: The Origins of Identity Politics and the Modern Cultural Left

There is a ready explanation for all this nonsense.

First is the tendency of Identity Politics to become more radicalized with time.

There has long been an argument on the Left against this BS. Sanders actually came out of that tradition.

The US White Left married with the radical Blacks. After they did that they started heading down this nutty race train track along with all the other IdPol madness.

Really the Left moved away from economics and foreign policy to go down this cultural road instead. Perhaps 1989 was a trigger. The Eastern Bloc collapsed and the US Left was in disarray and didn’t know what to think or even believe. The dictatorship of he proletariat, democratic centralism, it was all up in the air now. Further it seemed the Communist economics in the East Bloc had not kept pace with socialist social democracy economics on the rest of Europe. A lot of the US Left packed it in on economics and started to focus on this cultural BS instead.

The Left now is nothing but pure IdPol. Ever see BLM or these Antifa morons say one word about US foreign policy and US imperialism? Course not. Ever hear them say one word about neoliberal economics? Course not. That’s what drives me up the wall. Here is a movement ripe for radicalizing against the US ruling class program of neoliberalism at home and invite the world – invade the word neoconservatism abroad. Let’s call this combined package Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism.

That’s a rightwing project any way you slice it. But at the same time, the ruling class went full left on culture. Hence the Libertarian type fiscal conservative-social liberal of the upper middle class in the last 40 years. Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism plus the Cultural Left. What a project! It’s literally the worst of the Left combined with the worst of the Right! And the upper middle class is proud of this nightmare ideology. Which is one more reason that this class, which always sides with the ruling class against the workers, is no good.

Now that the Left bailed on anti-imperialism and left economics in favor of a pure Cultural Left, what are they doing with this new ideology? Why, they are rioting about nothing at all or at worst for an outright lie. Brilliant!

But if we get police reform out of these riots, it would be good. It’s an ill wind that blows no good.

Thing is the corporations, foundations, media, etc. and both political parties are down with this Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism project because they’re a bunch of businessmen and rich people, and Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism is good for them for reasons I won’t go into here but perhaps you can guess at.

This Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism project is how the rich, the corporations, and the U.S. ruling class make all their damned money. So they oppose Left efforts against Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism such as the 60’s revolutions with all out ferocity. If such a movement arises, they will sic their media attack dogs on it, smash it to bits, and brainwash the sheep with their media monopoly to go along with this destruction.

The thing is that this is a perfectly safe progressive project. It doesn’t cost them one nickel, and they get groovy hip woke points for jumping on the bandwagon.

How much of the US ruling class are going to lose out on an anti-White project? 0%.

How many of them will be replaced by an unqualified Black in affirmative action? 0%.

How many of them will be replaced by an illegal alien on their jobs? 0%. Illegals are great for them – cheap labor, more customers, a guy to mow the lawn, and a nanny to watch the kid. They don’t live with illegals so they don’t have to deal with the civilizational decline that they cause. Pro-immigration is risk-free progressivism for woke points, and what do you know? It stuffs their pocketbook too! Win-win!

Does the US ruling class have to live with the consequences of Black crime and civilizational collapse? Course not. They don’t have to deal with the downside of this crazy movement so they can support it all they want to. See?

Also the US ruling class has been socially liberal and Neoliberal-Neoconservative for a long time now.

The Left won the Culture War.

But so what?

We lost the war about economics and foreign policy (US imperialism). They even defeated the Vietnam War Syndrome, a bad thing because it posed a severe threat to US imperialism.

So shat did we win?

Our women have become insane, manhating harridans. Asking a woman for a date is now a firing offense. We overthrew Patriarchy but replaced it with something worse – Matriarchy or Female Rule (Feminist Rule) – with all the manhating, war on male sexuality, and horrific puritanism that always goes along with it every time it is ever done in time and space.

The latter is most painful to me as a 60’s child. One of the revolutions was the Sexual Revolution. Our attitude was “do it in the streets!” Now look. If I ask a woman for her #, I almost get the cops called on me. All sexuality has been sucked out of public space by #metoo so it feels like a sexual desert, which is apparently the way women want it! They actually like to live like this.

And at the same time as this crazy Victorianism, we also have a society drenched in porn. So my personal world is porn saturated, but if I look at a woman, she acts like she’s going to call the cops. How’s that for crazy cognitive dissonance. No wonder incels exist and go on killing sprees. Societies can’t handle grotesque cognitive dissonance. It literally drives people insane and often results in serious violence.

What else did we win? Modern anti-racism – a movement with great roots that has gone insane and is worse than useless.

What else? Depraved, disgusting, and lewd gay pride parades. Great! My favorite!

Mass movements towards bisexuality in both sexes. Gross!

“Pansexuals,” “queer” as a noun, “genderqueer,” “nonbinary” morons, and the insane and depraved transgender cult. It gets sicker and more perverted, weird, stupid, and insane every year. What’s next? Transsexual bathhouses for all ages? Probably. Back then, we fought for liberation, not weirdness, sickness, perversion, and deviancy.

Further, these Cultural Left boneheads have badly divided the working class. Check out this great plan they had!

Let’s have a revolution!

Cool! Yay!

But first lets get all the non-White workers to hate the White workers!

Cool! Yay! Oppressors and oppressed!

And while we’re at it, let’s get the woman workers to hate the man workers! Oppressors and oppressed!

Cool! Yay!

Now let’s have a revolution, boys and girls!

Whoops. Whoa! What happened?

No one showed up! That’s what happened.

Why? Because we got them all to hate each other!

Brilliant! You got to hand it to these guys with these genius ideas of theirs.

What I mean is this Cultural Left project is easy for the ruling class to swallow. Many are already decadent, depraved rich people, so this sicko stuff works for them. Rich men get all the sex they want. If a rich man asks a woman for her #, does she threaten to call the cops? Course not.

Homosexuality? The ruling class is always full of gay men and all manner of decadent bisexual libertines. Works for them.

Trannies? Cut into the bottom line? Course not. Support.

The ruling class has been left on social BS and right on economics (neoliberalism) and on foreign policy (US imperialism) for a long time now. It works for them and doesn’t cost them a nickel! Hell, it even makes them bank too!

And you see the outgrowth of this lousy ideology in this idiot, destructive BLM movement that makes the Black workers hate the White workers and vice versa.

Brilliant! Way to go, Lefties! Why didn’t I think of that?

The ruling class loves this because they benefit by dividing the workers and getting them all to hate each other so they won’t organize against the Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism bread and butter issues of the ruling class.

It also explains why BLM won’t dare touch economics or US imperialism.

See all those corporate and foundation millions flooding into BLM?

Kiss them all goodbye once BLM goes after neoliberal economics and neoconservative foreign policy, for this is what fills the bank vaults of the corporations and ruling class.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Repost: Down with Colin Flaherty

This is a nice old post about Colin Flaherty. I like it and I think it’s worth a repost.

The problem is that Colin Flaherty’s whole shtick is that he is not racist at all in any way whatsoever! No, really. That’s exactly what he says. And that’s how he comes across, endlessly, in article after article and video after video. And that is exactly why this man is so dangerous.

Mr. Flaherty is a journalist and a good one at that. But in his middle age, he has decided to branch out into the area of Black crime, except that his focus has a twist – it’s all about Black crime against Whites. The subtext of every Flaherty article or video is that Black people are deliberately singling out Whites to attack as hunters single out prey. Nothing could be more nonsensical. Blacks do not preferentially prey on Whites. It’s nonsense.

89% of Black homicides are of other Black people. Most Black crime is Black on Black crime. Much is made of Black men raping White women, but Black men rape Black women at 5X the rate that they rape White women. There are all sorts of nutty arguments that try to deal with these uncomfortable truths while keeping the lousy theory alive.

The principal one was symbolized by the noted theory of Le Griffe du Lion, a very racist White professor of…get this…sociology! He did some fancy mathematics showing that Black people mostly see other Black people all day long and don’t see many White people. So of course they prey mostly on their own kind. That’s who they are around all the time! If Blacks were around Whites just as much as they were around Blacks, their propensity to hunt Whites preferentially as a predator hunts its prey (Le Griffe’s exact words) would come out.

But the other side can play that game too. There are 6X more Whites than Blacks. If Blacks displayed no preference at all in victims, they would kill 6X more Whites than Blacks, right? This argument spouts the rejoinder of “But they are only around their own kind all day…” which is probably a tautology and is certainly not falsifiable, so it fails as theory on its face.

Flaherty wrote a book called White Girl Bleed a Lot. It’s all about Black crime against Whites. Yes, Blacks commit some very bad crimes against Whites. But they commit just as bad or worse crimes against their own kind. So only writing about Black crime against Whites is lying in a sense, and worse, you are selling a form of poison to the masses. Racist poison. A really nasty racist poison.

Because nothing drives Whites up the wall more than the idea that Blacks preferentially prey on them as victims. Some of these theorists even go as far as to say that Blacks are waging a low-level guerrilla war against Whites. Oh, what nonsense.

But if you study ethnic conflicts all over the world, one of the things that sets off massacres and ethnic cleansings is the notion that Group B, the outgroup or the other guys, is trying to kill us, Group A.

Hitler set off the genocide by saying the Jews were trying to exterminate Germans.

The Rwandan genocide was set off in the same way.

The Sunni-Shia wars start off in exactly the same way. ISIS propaganda goes to great lengths to show how the Shia are preferentially singling out and slaughtering the Sunni. “They’re trying to kill us all,” is the message.

This was the line that the Young Turks used to kill 1.7 million Armenians. “The Armenians were starting a war against the Turks, and they were trying to kill all the Turks.”

The genocide against Muslims in Bosnia was set off by Serbian lies that “The Muslims were trying to kill the Serbs.”

Even the anti-Communist slaughters of the last century which the US fully participated in, each and every one of them, were all predicated on the idea that the Communist killers were going to seize power and kill lots of people. Hitler justified his genocide against the Jews by saying that they were Communists and that the Communists were mass murderers who were “killing millions of Christians” in the Ukraine. Yes, the fake Holodomor, the terror famine that never even happened, was used as a pretext for the Holocaust.

Remember that the next time any of you wants to rant about “Stalin’s terror famine.” Every time you say that, you are repeating Nazi propaganda. Does it make you feel good to parrot Hitler?

Many of the massacres of Indians were predicated on the notion that the Indians “were coming to kill us all.” In the original wording of the Declaration of Independence, there is language about how savage the Indians fought, knowing none of the rules of decency in wartime. “They’re savages, so we need to kill them all.” See how that works?

In Indonesia in 1965, there was supposedly a Communist coup to take over the government. All the world’s media reported it exactly that way. Except that it never happened. There was a fake Communist coup to take over the government. “The Communists tried to take over, and they are going to kill millions of people” lie was then used as an excuse to kill 1 million Communists all over Indonesia in only a few months. Most were hacked to death with machetes. Islamic fundamentalists were used by the US and Indonesia in this slaughter. Remind you of anything? Afghanistan, anyone?

The CIA was on the scene immediately and they supplied the new government with lists of known Communists. These lists were then used to single out people for killing. The US media then lied about the whole affair, with the execrable New York Times leading the charge. Later there was an attempt to bury this mass slaughter as “unfortunate but necessary and a good idea in the long run.”

It was only years or even decades later that we learned the truth about the fake coup and the mass slaughter. The Left was devastated in Indonesia and has remained in a meager state to this day. Obviously people in Indonesia have gotten the message about what happens to Leftists, which is always the general message of anti-Communist slaughters.

Hence it follows that once White people get it in their heads that “the Blacks are trying to kill us,” we can set ourselves up for some serious persecutions of Blacks based on that narrative. I doubt if we will start massacring Blacks, but “the Blacks are trying to rape and kill Whites” was always the excuse for lynchings and Jim Crow.

It’s an ugly narrative, and it’s a lie.

I could write articles about this sort of thing too, you know. I see articles all the time about Black people acting terrible, killing each other, killing White people, you name it. 98% of the time, I choose not to write about it. Why write about it? Yes, yes, we know Black people commit tons of crime, including violent crime. Yes, we know Black men have a high homicide rate.

Yes, we know that Black men kill many White people – but they kill far more Black people, and by and large, they prey mostly on their own kind.

Looking at the larger picture, Black criminals simply prey on other humans. They rob, rape and kill Hispanics, Asians, Whites and Blacks. They attack everyone. They are not real particular.

And the evidence shows that if anything, they by far preferentially select their own kind for violence, and they preferentially select against White victims. So if anything, Blacks prefer to prey on their own kind and it looks like Blacks actively avoid preying on Whites. If that’s the reality, then it’s quite a poisonous stew to cook up to sell the lie that Blacks preferentially attack Whites. “They’re coming to kill us! The Blacks are trying to kill us White people!” It’s not only a lie, but it’s a very dangerous lie, a mental poison with grave effects.

Just to see what sort of vibes Flaherty is churning up, look at the commenters. Looks like Niggermania, Chimpout, American Renaissance and Stormfront. There are all sorts of very vicious and ugly remarks against Black people as a race on there. So even if Flaherty really is a non-racist as he insists, look at all the wild racism that his irresponsible (or worse) videos and articles sprout. He’s fertilizing the land with poison, watching the weeds he watered grow and take over the land and choke out all the good and  decent crops, all the while protesting that he had nothing to do with it, he was just some innocent farmer trying to grow crops. Yeah. Crops of weeds.

Whenever I see that language, I think, “This person is promoting hatred against Greg, Tulio, and Alpha.” I think that’s unacceptable. None of these Black people do much of anything wrong. They live like good, law abiding citizens, and in short, they are good people. Selling hate propaganda against good people just because they are Black is wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are promoting a very dangerous lie.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Lindsay Hatred Scale, Most to Least – SJWs > Ghetto Blacks > Cops

I live with a partisan Centrist Democrat who hates cops with a passion.

He’s also not fond of Blacks period and ghetto Blacks in particular, whom he refers to as niggers. I’m not kidding. That word is not as rare among Whites as you are thinking.

Hell, I might even use it myself in the privacy of my own home, right? But then if I did it (apologies to OJ), I’d be careful to only use to describe ghetto Blacks who in my opinion act horrible. I wouldn’t use it for any other Blacks, and I might get mad if someone did. I wouldn’t even call Jacob Blake’s father, a Black activist, that word. Nor Al Sharpton. Nor Shaun King. Hell, not even Minister Farrakhan. A race hustler is one thing, but even they have some dignity about them despite their unfortunate politics.

Anyway, I’ve been teasing him lately. “You hate cops worse than you hate ghetto Blacks! Ha ha!” He doesn’t say much to that except he keeps supporting the Blacks against the cops. But then he just did seven weeks in a particular circle of Hell called The Local Jail, where he was beaten badly for no good reason several times. I told you there’s a need for police reform, not to mention criminal justice reform period.

As for me, I’ve always thought I was the worst cop-hater around. Imagine how appalled I am to find myself supporting the police in every one of these recent incidents. And imagine how I fell out of my chair when I realized that 54% of the country now hates cops even more than I do! I’m now a goddamned cop sympathizer. I hang out on their subreddits. I read their forums. I watch their videos. Pathetic!

That’s because if there’s one thing I hate worse than cops, it’s SJW’s! I hate them a lot more than cops. It’s personal with me and them. Look how many sites they got me thrown off of. I lost 5,000 articles due to them. There are SJW’s out there who have stated that they are dedicated to destroying my reputation. Conservatives, on the other hand, while I don’t agree with them at all, are quite nice to me. That’s appalling too. The conservatives are now the nice polite guys with mostly lousy politics and the Left are the deranged, aggro, violent nutcases with the mostly good politics.

Now it’s between cops and ghetto Blacks. Well, I must say that I hate ghetto Blacks worse than I hate cops. And I hate cops pretty bad, so that’s saying something. Thing is, I’ve had a lot of dealings with these folks. I taught them in school for years. I’ve dated their women, much to my dismay. If you are taking notes, I’ll point out that every ghetto Black woman I have significantly dealt with has stolen money from me. Sometimes a bit, like $5-25. Other times more, like $70. As far as I am concerned, ghetto Black females are nothing but a race of thieves. Thieving whores, actually, except most of the time they just steal and don’t even fuck. Because the way they steal is time-tested.

Dangle the sex -> Get the money -> Disappear.

Alpha has told me that the women who do this have an extreme hatred of men and are frankly the worst specimens of the female gender. This is as low as a woman gets. I’ll also point out that every one of these Black women had elevated levels of psychopathy, in my opinion. Only one was a true psychopath, and boy was she a handful! The rest were not psychopaths but they had elevated psychopathy levels above White women.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin after Another Police Shooting of a Black Man

The latest police shooting of a Black man, Jacob Blake, age 29, occurred yesterday at 5 PM in Kenosha, Wisconsin. He is still alive, but he was shot seven times in the back. Of course, Blake was basically ghetto, a thug and career criminal.

Jacob Blake in happier times with his three sons. By three different women, right? He looks halfway decent in this picture.

The vast majority of these young Blacks getting shot, often fatally, by police are not good people at all to say the least. What sort of people have regular run-in’s with the police. Not fine  upstanding citizens. They’re ghetto thugs and thugettes. They’re shitty people. Now, I’m not saying shitty people should be shot. You may well be a few million young Black men who are pretty damn lousy people. But I don’t support killing any of them. Even the ones in prison for terrible crimes. I just don’t believe in executing people no matter how awful they are, sorry.

But don’t fool yourself that most any of these people are any good. Most are real lousy people, to say the least.

Blake, who looks horribly ghetto, has a criminal record. Two years ago, he pulled a gun on people in a bar. When police arrived, he refused to cooperate with officers and had to be taken down by a police dog. Seems like he had a death wish, conscious or unconscious. This almost looks like a suicide by cop.

He had warrants out for his arrest for domestic violence and sexual assault.

Click to enlarge. I don’t like the way he looks in this picture at all. He’s ghetto as all get out. An awful lot of young Black men who look like this are not ok. And I might add that almost all of them are gang-involved. That’s straight up gang attire. Whether he’s a member of an associate is not so important.

Police officers are sent to an address with a report of a domestic disturbance. There is a fight going on there  between several ghetto Black women. Blake indeed does break up the fight.

There is a video of the shooting available.

As the video opens, there is enough of a commotion for someone to start filming. Police already have their guns out as the video opens, which never happens unless something very serious is going on.

A struggle is going on on the other side of the car, probably because he’s resisting arrest like almost all these guys are, which is pretty much why they get shot in the first place. He’s down on the ground. One cop punches him in the ribs and another cop tazes him to get him under control. But a Tazer only knocks you out for five seconds. Blake gets up and all three cops jump backwards and pull out their weapons. He’s apparently armed himself with something, apparently a knife.

The video on this page shows that Blake was involved in a huge fight with police before he gets free of them, whips out a knife, and starts to walk away.

He gets up after being tazed and walks along the opposite side of the car.

An object appears in Blake’s left hand. Turns out it’s a knife, apparently a karambit knife with a curved blade. This is an Indonesian silat knife.

An Indonesian karambit knife. Jacob Blake had one of these weapons in his hand when he was shot.

He turns in front of the car, the police looking very alarmed and still yelling for him to drop the object. It sounds like they are yelling, “Drop the gun!” but they could be yelling, “Drop the knife!”You can still see the knife in his hand.

Photo shows Jacob Blake had a Karambit curved knife in his hand as he walked away from police. Click to enlarge.

He turns and starts moving down the near side of the car heading for the driver’s seat. The police are right behind him, yelling. He opens the car door and starts to get in. Police are pulling on his shirt to try to pull him out of the car. He seems to bend down into the car and appears to be reaching for something behind the driver’s seat under the seat. Suddenly the police start shooting. Seven shots are fired. Correct, into his back.

However, there is now a rumor that when Blake was fighting with police, he said he was going to get a gun out of his car. Then he walks over to the car, opens the door, and appears to reach down behind and under the front seat. Guess what? This is exactly where he keeps his gun. In that very car too. We know this because in a previous arrest, his car was searched and his gun was found in this precise place. That’s an excellent reason to shoot him right there, gun or no gun, it doesn’t matter.

Click to enlarge. Blake appears to be reaching down, possibly behind and under the front seat. This is where he kept his gun in this same car in a previous arrest.

This combined with the previous incident shows strong tendencies towards suicide by cop. Whether these young Black men are actually suicidal or are just so angry that they don’t care, I’m not sure. At a certain point, you’re so furious that you don’t care if you live or die. It’s not suicidality. It’s like being in a war. Instead of being suicidal, I think a lot of these young Black men are blinded by rage and consciously or not wish to go down fighting. Like a lot of soldiers in wartime.

A very ghetto Black woman shows up and starts screaming hysterically. The video ends. Blake’s three children are sitting in the car and witness their father getting shot. Not a very good experience for them.

From the looks of it, Blake was resisting arrest, like almost all of these idiots.

Quite honestly, if Blake has that knife in his hand, and he won’t drop it, police have a right to shoot him right there, sorry. I don’t see why police have to wait until the suspect actually tries to stab them with the knife before they start shooting. He could have easily stabbed that cop pulling on his shirt. And that cop could have died. Got a knife in your hand and won’t drop it, get shot. Furthermore, by his own admission, he appears to be reaching for a gun in his car.

Large protests follow. The crowds are mostly mixed people with BLM signs. Interestingly, the crowds are half-White and half-Black.

Riots follow in the night. The rioters seem to be more Black than the very mixed protestors, but there are some White rioters too. It’s hard to tell because it’s so dark. There is a video of people smashing up a storefront with bricks and all of these rioters were Black. People with guns are leading the mobs. A man with a gun shoots up a police car. Trash trucks are set on fire. An entire city block is in flames. A parking lot full of cars goes up in flames. A police officer is hit in the head with a brick, a potentially deadly weapon, and goes down.

In other words, much of the usual mayhem ensues. The governor of Wisconsin issues a provocative statement attacking police and sympathizing with the rioters. Very irresponsible.

It is now daylight. The riots went on through the night. It is now calm and there are calls to come clean up the damage.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: One Essential Rule in Relationships – You Have to Find a Woman Who Is Ok with Your Style of Masculinity

Jason: Well, my love loves her “other love” so much she smacked my head real hard while driving and called me a “punk ass bitch.”

@Jason has gotta leave this diabolical cunt. Any woman talks to me like that is likely to get knocked across the room. Or at the very least, I’ll threaten to do so.

@Jason: She’s cucking you. She’s breaking your balls and emasculating you. She doesn’t think you are masculine enough.

I’ve been through all this shit because even though I’m a Chad, I am a very passive, soft-voiced, even nice Chad. So I’ve had women beating up on me and kicking my ass exactly like this off and on all my life. I’ve also had 20 lifetimes worth of good times with them too, but I can’t deny the bad.

It wasn’t all bad. Some would emasculate me a bit, and then they’d never do it again and be pretty nice to me the rest of the time.

@Jason, you and I both, have to get women who are ok with our style of masculinity. I think you are a masculine guy on some level.

Most straight men are not truly effeminate. Even passive, quiet, soft men often have a “soft masculinity” about them that most people miss. Next time you see a man like that, study him and see if you can discern that “soft masculinity.” If you’re perceptive you can do it.

I thinking, well I’m hoping, that there are women out there who are ok with my and @Jason’s style of masculinity.

A recent girlfriend said, “You’re pretty masculine. Why do you think you’re not?” She had a dumbfounded look on her face. I  believe that’s the only time a woman has called me masculine before. They’ve said other things. I’d had a doc remove a cyst from my ear and I guess I handled it pretty stoically. The nurse looked at me and said, “He’s tough.”

And most women nowadays act completely baffled when I tell them people used to think I was gay. They shake their heads and say, “I just can’t see it.”

I think I’ve been trying to act more masculine for some years now. It’s hard to do and it would take another post to explain how to do it. The trick is you have to force it so much that it doesn’t feel weird anymore. Eventually it will just go on automatic most of the time, and you won’t have to force it at all, or you can force it and look even more masculine than normal.

Unfortunately, you really can’t get too masculine, unless you’ve gone so overboard that you are hurting your health. At that point I’d advise toning it down.

But I still have women dumping me for not being masculine enough. A 29 year old hottie had a date with me and told a friend of mine, “He’s not a tough guy.” Well, this was a Chicana deep into barrio culture. Don’t even try for women like that. You’ll never measure up to those Mexican guys.

A 20 year old gorgeous Chinese woman, a multimillionaire, was ready to start dating me when she dumped me for “not being dominant enough.” I think she wanted an BD/SM type relationship. She was always calling me “sir,” and I don’t really like that too much. She asked me once, “Could I ask you to do something. When I start talking in a group of people, come up to me and whisper in my ear and tell me what a fool I am acting like and to knock it off.” Ok, this chick literally wanted to get treated like shit, right?

Last thing she said was, “Let me know when you want to act like a man. Then come back and talk to me.” Apparently I acted quite dominant for several hours after I first met her. But then I couldn’t keep it up after that. It makes sense because that’s not really me. I can play that role but not for very long because it’s probably forced.

Women vary. They don’t all want hypermasculine men. I’d say most do, and women are way worse this way than they were in the 70’s and 80’s when it was perfectly acceptable to be soft or have a feminine side, hopefully if you balanced it out with a strong masculine side.

But women are retarded. A lot of them will see the feminine side and flip out. If women were sane and logical, they would see the feminine side but then they would also see the masculine side and how strong it was and decide that the man had both things going at the same time. But that’s too difficult for women’s tiny little pea brains. You’re asking them to think too much.

But nowadays things are very much worse. We’ve gone completely backwards. Why?!

If you’re not covered head to toe in tattoos, you’re not a man. Back then, everyone hated tattoos and only Marines, sailors, bikers and criminals had them. No decent man would get a tattoo and be a gross piece of shit lowlife criminal. And all women with tattoos were nothing but total whores, usually of the grossest, “biker chick” kind. At the very least they were complete sluts. That was like a repulsive, disgusting gutter slut. Like the women you see and say, “Ew!”

It seems to me that the requirements for masculinity have skyrocketed in the past decade or maybe 20 years. The stuff I got away with all the time back in the 70’s would immediately get me called faggot or gay nowadays. We hardly have any freedom or wiggle room at all anymore, and we had so much back then.

Things have shifted dramatically back to traditional, stupid masculinity at the same time as the lunatic SJW explosion when at least that part of society went wildly, blatantly faggy and lezzy, and that’s when they were not insisting that they actually were the damned opposite sex.

Isn’t that weird? While part of society is fagging out like maniacs, another part of society is manning up to the point of absurdity and throwing out all the progress we made in forming a broader view of masculinity so men could have some space to run free in it.

Someone needs to explain this to me.

Or is it because of the SJW explosion? The country is overrun with screaming SJW faggots, bull dykes and all sorts of other gender-bending freaks. Possibly the more gender-smashing deviants around, the more straight men have to crank up the masculine so as not to be called or considered gay.

Straight men really, really do not like people thinking they are gay, even if they are nice about it, and they often are. It’s especially painful coming from a woman. If I’m with a woman who thinks I’m really gay or even bi (that’s not 1% better), it would devastate me so much that I doubt if I could get it up. I can’t think of a worse way to be emasculated than to be called gay.

In that sense, I’ve always thought that masculinity was more of a negative identity than a positive one. When men act masculine, are they really yelling that they are something or instead are they yelling that they are not something? I think the latter, at least here in the US.

When men act masculine, are they really trying to out-masculine the other guys? A few dicks are, but most? Hell no. Stupid women think we are, but what the Hell do they know, anyway? In ManWorld, if you walk the walk and talk the talk, you’re masculine. The world of women demands so much more from us in terms of masculinity than our own gender does.

I’ve thought about it a long time, and I think when men act masculine, they are really screaming, “I’m not gay, dammit! I’m not a pussy! I’m not a wuss! I’m not a wimp!” The more masculine they act, the louder they are screaming that. Because if you act masculine enough, no sane person will call you any of those things. When I said sane people, obviously I didn’t include women because women aren’t sane. I have seen lunatic women “try to get murdered” by emasculating the most aggressive and dangerous men I’ve known.

Women break balls. They’ll break a sissy’s balls, sure. But they’ll also break the balls of the most masculine man on Earth, which I call “trying to get murdered.” Men know implicitly that attacking the masculine of most men, especially overtly masculine men, is insane, and if you do it, you’re either a huge badass or you have a death wish.

That’s one thing I never do. I never call guys gay either. I don’t want to get punched in the face because that’s what happens when you do that. Worse than that, plenty of men kill over insults like that. I’d prefer not to get murdered.

Apparently women, for some insane reason, don’t care whether they get murdered or not. I’m not sure how much sympathy I have for these women who doing the equivalent of jumping into tiger cages and pummeling the tiger. I’m supposed to feel sorry for her when she gets killed? Why? She tried to get murdered and guess what happened? She got murdered! I’d say she got what she wanted.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

The US and the West May Have Some of the Lowest Rates of Verbal, Psychological, Physical, and Sexual Abuse of Children

Fine, so why are we making such a big stink about it then?

The rest of the world does not care about child abuse.

You mean child sexual abuse or the rest of it, physical abuse, verbal abuse, psychological abuse?

I do have a feeling that child molestation may be quite common in the rest of the world.

I have heard Indian women say that on reservations, “All Indian girls get molested.” A friend told me the same thing about Indians in Canada.

He also implied that all French Canadian girls get molested.

The notion that pedophilia and child molestation is a White man thing is a big lie made up by White-hating Blacks and anti-White racist woke types. You simply don’t hear of molestation in the ghetto because it’s ubiquitous. Black and Hispanic girls are twice as likely to be molested as White girls are. So much for the “White male molester” meme. I read a few articles on this, and the women were quite honest.  A common refrain was “All girls get molested in the ghetto.”

So we see once again very high levels of child molestation in impoverished non-White communities in the West such as ghetto Blacks and reservation Indians.

53% of East Indian girls get molested. Few if any men are ever arrested for this.

We had an actual pedophile on here, and he had relocated to Mexico where he could get away with his behavior better. He posted on the comments about how he was molesting little girls. Probably some of the most shocking comments that ever showed up on this blog. The other commenters all jumped on him and beat him up badly, which was probably appropriate. I didn’t turn him in. He’s in Mexico. That’s not my country. Anyway, I’m not a cop. If police want to go investigate this guy, I’ll help them but I’m not into turning people in to the police. Fuck that.

Anyway this guy did have some interesting things to say. He is the first predatory child molester that I’ve ever conversed with, so his conversation was interesting because you never meet someone like that, and it’s hard to figure out what they are thinking.

In Mexico, he molested a 5 year old girl next door in the bathroom a couple of times. Her mother told her to quit hanging around with him and looked at him suspiciously.

Then he molested a six year old girl next door a couple of times. If you must know, he got these girls to jerk him off in the bathroom, which is probably fairly low on the damage scale. Same thing. Mother said quit hanging around with him and looked at him suspiciously.

He implied that it was basically normal for poor and lower middle class Mexican girls to get molested at some point. It’s just something that happens to girls there and women in those classes just figure it’s something all women go through as girls. Apparently most of them just get over it or accommodate it.

I don’t like the idea of this happening (I’d rather it did not happen at all), but where it’s rife, a lot of women probably just adjust. He said it is so common among these classes that if you go to the police, they just shrug their shoulders and say, “Keep the girl away from him.” Prosecutions are rare, apparently because it’s so common. So most women don’t even bother going to the cops if their girls get molested.

He went to another city where he met some runaway prostitutes who were living in a house together. He told them he was a pedophile, and they said, “No problem,” totally nonchalantly and brought an 8 year old girl out of the house for him. They acted like they did this as a special request pretty regularly. They went under a bridge. She got him off. I don’t want to go into details here but it was fairly similar to what happened to the girls in the bathroom.

The 8 year old girl appeared to be into it, perhaps because she’s come to enjoy it for some odd reason. Perhaps it was fun for her. Girls that age have no sex drive, but perhaps they can learn to enjoy sex like playing on a playground, chasing around with other kids, or swinging on a swing, on that level. I still don’t approve even if they enjoy it. I’m just trying to theorize why they enjoy these activities with no sex drive.

But this got me to thinking. How common is this in the 3rd World? Mexico is heading out of the 3rd world into the 1st. If it’s that bad there, think of how bad it might be in the real 3rd World?

I’m wondering how common this is elsewhere. I’m told that in poor Filipino households, molestation of girls is rampant, possibly even taking the form of rape. Nothing much happens because these slums are such hellholes of crime and despair anyway.

I assume that verbal and psychological abuse is simply normal and legal in most of the world. God knows physical abuse of children may well be too. A lot of tribal people beat their kids pretty bad for no good reason. The kids seem to grow up fine anyway. Thing is in those societies, it’s normal to get beaten as a kid. No one thinks anything of it. So if you say you got beaten as a kid and it fucked you up, everyone looks at you like you’re nuts.

The commenter may be correct that in the rest of the world, psychological and verbal abuse of kids is probably almost normal, and even physical abuse is probably quite common. Remember back to our parents generation? How many men in that generation told you that their Dad used to beat their ass up regularly? Lots of men in that generation got their asses beat by their fathers. I don’t approve of it, but the WW2 generation seemed to come out ok.

I’ve dealt with sexual abuse above. I have a feeling that in the 3rd World, this is perhaps way more common than we want to think.

I think what you are getting at here is that levels of psychological, verbal, certainly physical and definitely sexual abuse are more proscribed here than anywhere else on Earth. We’ve declared war on all of these things. Who else has? No one.

So the levels of such things in the US may well be very low by world standards. Still the scolds won’t shut up about it and go on and on about the “child abuse catastrophe” now somehow morphing normal late adolescent consensual sex into 18 year old “grown men” “molesting” and “raping” 17 year old “little girls” (equivalent to toddlers I guess) who “cannot consent and are therefore always raped every time they have sex (!!),” all teenage girls who get fucked by adult men (the # must be very high) have been “molested” like little girls, and all of them are now somehow damaged for the rest of their lives!!

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Women Have Decided That Men Touching Other Humans Is Evil

This insane New Prudery has gotten so awful that the very fact that a man has a sex drive is seen as de facto evidence of being creepy (in other words, evil). We have become deeply phobic of touch with this #metoo idiocy. Much of male touching of women is now de facto evidence of the worst creepiness or sexual harassment. Many women are screaming assault any time a man touches a woman without any good reason.

This is truly sick and evil, but it’s women who came up with this, and Prudery, a truly vicious and malign prudery, is an essential part of the Feminine Character.

This is what happens when you let women run your society. You end up with extremely antisocial, touch-phobic, and interpersonally hostile societies with mass loneliness, fear, suspicion and hatred of the sexes, extreme sex hatred at a Victorian level, and all sorts of idiocy.

Touch is good. Humans need to be touched. This has actually been proven in endless experiments in the lab. It even works with monkeys. Monkeys that don’t get touched as babies end up profoundly disturbed as adults, which I guess is what women want all us men to end up like.

I really don’t care what all these stupid cunts think about that statement. I’m wondering why we men worry so much about what these silly creatures  called women think about much of anything. Women  have now decided that human touch is evil, at least when men do it. Men touch kids and it’s pedophilia and  child molesting because all men are pedophiles and molesters.

Men touch women and it’s creepy, evil, rape, violence (!!), assault, sexual harassment, dangerous, frightening and all manner of pearl clutching stupidity. Why? Because men are creeps, molesters, killers, beaters, rapists, assaulters, sexual harassers, violent creatures, evil, dangerous, and scary, so when men touch women, it’s automatically all of those things.

Thanks a lot, bitches. Thanks for destroying society, you fools.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Was the Beirut Nuclear Attack a MOAB Bomb?

Claudius: It may have been a MOAB or FOAB. This U.S. MOAB dropped in Afghanistan has the burgundy red smoke plume.

This may have been a MOAB type device then. Except that it seems to have been a missile, and Israel doesn’t have MOABs. But see below that a MOAB just seems to be another tactical nuke.

My latest info is that all of these bombs – MOABs, FOABs (what’s that?) and especially the “bunker busters” that the US and Israel love to talk about so much are all more or less tactical nukes.

That MOAB dropped in Kunar, Afghanistan did not operate like a normal weapon. Everyone within 1/2 mile is rendered permanently deaf by that weapon. All of the crops in that region failed after the attack, and it has been hard to regrow them. The civilians in the area suffered all sorts of strange ailments after the attack that continue to this day, a year later.

The tactical nuke that was dropped on Beirut has also been referred to by the US and Israel as a “bunker-buster.” What no one is telling you about these weapons is that it appears that they are all some sort of tactical nukes. Most normal explosives do not have ground penetrating capabilities. If they did, miners would not have to drill holes in the ground to set off explosions. They would just lay them on the ground.

As discussed earlier, conventional explosives run up against laws of physics. I suppose you can get bigger detonations, but soon you need a bomb as big as a two story house or a multi story building. Who would ever make a bomb like that? Even that may not be enough. Witness the tractor trailer bombs used in Oklahoma City and Saudi Arabia. How do those compare to a small house in square feet?

So you run in to a ceiling effect. Yes, you can go incendiary, but that’s been done. The only way up is biological, chemical, or nuclear, mostly the latter. Which is why these new super-bombs like bunker busters and MOABs all seem to be some form of tactical nuclear devices.

Claudius: What annoys me, is how the sheeple just buy the official story.

That’s what pisses me off more than anything else. And it’s one reason I’m starting to hate people more and more every day. No one thinks for themselves, like no one. If there is one thing I am trying to get you guys to do here, it is to think for yourselves. That has been the purpose of this site since Day One.

No one thinks for themselves because it is dangerous. You can lose all your friends, your job, your career, your finances, your home, etc. You can be driven literally homeless and possibly dead just by thinking for yourself instead of going along with the rest of the idiots like everyone else does. So it’s a very dangerous way to live. But I do it and I do encourage my readers to do it as much as you can.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Regret Rape, Second Thoughts Abuse, Etc.

When kids are molested, most of the time they are not traumatized. This is another giant myth. A woman psychologist wrote a book called The Trauma Myth about this very fact. She found that only 8% of molested kids were traumatized by the experience.

The thing about child molestation is the kid generally just goes along with it.

If they don’t, it’s child rape, and that is not common in typical molestation cases. This creates quite a scene and sooner or later others in the house will find out. In Satanic Abuse Rings, yes, the children are absolutely raped. Child rape is more of a stranger crime by a misophile and often involves kidnapping and the use of a weapon. It can be extremely harmful for the child, much more harmful than run of the mill molestation, and the damage can definitely extend into adulthood.

The general emotion that molested kids feel is confusion. This is because, yep, it feels good. Little girls are capable of orgasm from an early age even if they have no sex drive, so sexual stimulation can be very pleasurable to them. I knew a woman who got molested at age 8 by a church youth leader. She told me,

It’s confusing because it feels good, but then it’s wrong.

The girls often enjoy the physical aspects of the molestation, and the fact that they enjoyed it is the cause of a lot of guilt later on.  Forums for adults molested as children are full of women feeling guilty over this, and this is one of the main problems to be dealt with in therapy later on.

People who were molested do tend to feel guilt. They often feel that the molestation was their fault and that they were somehow to blame for it.

Adults molested as children also feel a lot of shame over the experience.

These are the three dominant emotions that these kids feel: confusion, guilt, and shame.

Often the full effects of the molestation are not felt until adulthood when the adult begins to think over the child abuse and have second thoughts about it. Whereas younger people up to university age are often apathetic or noncommittal about being molested, as they get older, it often starts to bother them. They start thinking that the molestation was not ok after all, that a very  bad thing was done to them, etc. And then, yes, the psychological harm occurs.

Actually this happens all the time, especially with teenage girls.

In days of old, teenage girls had sex with men, mostly young men but sometimes older men, and not a thing ever came of any of it. I lived all through the 1970’s and never heard of one teenage girl being specifically harmed by having sex with an adult man. I suppose if there was coercion involved, she might not like it, but even in the Roman Polanski case where he actually raped her, she got over it right away, doesn’t care about it now, and doesn’t even want him prosecuted.

Teenage girls back then were no more likely to be harmed by sex with a man than with sex with a teenage boy. There was this cultural idea that teenage girls having sex with men was not specifically harmful in and of itself, so most teenage girls simply consumed that message and decided that they were not harmed.

In cultures all over the world before 1900 and even in the last century to today, teenage girls often married men. In fact that’s been the way of mankind for almost all of our existence. No specific harm was ever reported to the teenage girls from any of this, and I have been over all the old records.

Before 1900, there was no notion that teenage girls were harmed by these relationships. In societies that allowed this sort of thing, no specific harm was ever recorded from teenage girls having sex with men. I have also studied anthropology extensively, and I have never found a single society anywhere on Earth that used to allow this sort of thing but gave it up because it harmed the teenage girls.

And even in the US through the 1970’s, this was the case.

Now, where the teenage girls were manipulated, abused, or there was a lot of sleazy lying and coercion involved by the men, sure, the teenage girls will get harmed by these relationships, but teenage boys do this to teenage girls too, and men to all of this to adult women. Females who are manipulated, abused, lied to, cheated on, etc. with the use of sleazy and coercive techniques in relationships with males seem to get damaged. Age has nothing to do with it. It doesn’t matter if it’s a teenage girl or a woman or a teenage boy or a man.

Anyway, nowadays there is this attitude that every time a man has sex with a teenage girl, a “child rape” or “child molestation” of all things, has occurred. The teenage girl never had sex with the man – she’s always just abused no matter how much she was fond of or loved the man. It’s always harmful to the teenage girl, even if the man was 18 and the girl was 17. The vast majority of American idiots actually believe this nonsense.

This is backed up by all sorts of non-facts such as:

“Teenage girls are ‘children’ and hence are not able to consent to sex.”

Prove it. Why can’t boys consent either or can they? If they can’t consent, how about arresting the teenage girls who “take advantage of”, “rape”, “abuse”, and “molest” these poor horny as Hell teenage boys? How can teenage girls consent with teenage boys but not with men?

“Teenage girls’ brains are not fully developed yet.”

Neither are teenage boys’ brains. Brains don’t finish developing until age 27, so let’s ban sex til then, right?

“It is an inherent imbalance of power, and all imbalances of power are abusive and harmful.”

Prove it. Life is all about power imbalances. Many unbalanced relationships have been recorded all through the history of man, and they were not harmful at all.

“It is inherently abusive and harmful for the teenage girl.”

Prove it again. Why would it be? And wouldn’t people have gotten rid of it a long time ago or at least talked about how bad it was if this were true?

“It robs the teenage girls/young women of their childhood/teen years/youth.”

This BS gets extended all the way into adulthood to where a woman who spends her twenties with older men supposedly “destroys her youth” – how this occurs is never explained. It’s not much true for teenage girls either. Why the teen and young adult years must be spent amongst one’s idiotic peers is never brought up.

Obviously the girl or even young woman is going to mature much faster with a man than with those her age. He is giving her a jump-start on life by teaching her all about life, wisdom, mental health, personal growth, social skills, and maturity/immaturity, not to mention the wealth of knowledge he will impart to her.

It is beyond me how her peer friends who have to blindly tumble through these tunnels on their own with their clumsy peers and take much longer to figure these things out (assuming they learn them at all) are somehow better off than this girl or young woman who is getting a massive jump start on life with an older man.

The upshot is that teenage girls weren’t harmed by this sex in the past, and they’re not harmed by it now. There’s nothing specifically harmful about this type of sex for humans. Any harm that occurs is socially constructed.

So you tell teenage girls that this sex harms them. They go ahead and have it, find it’s a lot of fun, and they’re confused. Then they become adults, and they think back and get regret-raped and “realize that it was really abuse all along.” Then they get some truly insipid time-bombed trauma from this new realization that it really wasn’t fun after all and really it was abuse and rape all along. A lot of completely unnecessary and uncalled for damage then results. I’m sure all of this manufactured pathology is great for therapists though. More crazy people means more business.

If you get involved with any legal teenage girl as an older man, you really have to be careful of this nowadays. If you get with any legal girl under 18, there’s a very high chance of this bullshit happening, so be forewarned.

I am a bit worried myself that some of these legal teenage girls (18 and 19) I dated recently are going to get regret-raped later on from the brief affairs they had with me and will come back to me later railing about how I destroyed their life no matter how much fun and pleasure we had when we were together.

The point is simple. If something is not inherently harmful (as most things are):

If you tell people it’s not harmful, no one gets harmed because they consume the cultural message that it’s not harmful and feel like idiots if they tell people they got harmed by something that’s not harmful.

If you tell people it is harmful, many people who would have been unharmed in the past now get automagically harmed simply because they were told it was harmful, so they essentially create harm and damage out of the experience and impose it upon their psyche.

Bottom line is that a lot of “interpersonal harm” is simply socially constructed, or in many cases, simply “made up” altogether. Not a whole lot of things are scientifically proven to be inherently damaging to the psyche.

It sounds cruel, but in many cases if you got harmed by some experiences, frankly it is because you chose to experience it as harmful because you wanted to see it that way. Because you needed this to be harmful, you deliberately created a lot of harm from the incident (basically simply “made it up”) and then imposed it on your psyche because you needed to feel hurt by this for whatever reason.

In that sense most of us humans probably have a masochistic element to our psyches which is much more pronounced in females than in males, as if that weren’t obvious to anyone.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: I Got Sexually Abused!

Actually I didn’t but what happened to me counts as sexual abuse in the Victim Marathon everyone is running these days, so I might as well discuss it. I’m mainly doing this to show you how retarded a lot of this “I got abused hurr durr!” crap you hear from every other woman nowadays is. Next time a woman tells you that, sit her down and ask her exactly what happened. Half the time it will be nothing. But she will insist that she’s just all fucked up from this completely unimportant event or events.

Ok, here’s what happened.

One day when I was around 10-12, some weird old asshole leered at me in the bathroom on the fishing barge and asked,

“Hey kid, how big is your goober.”

He could have stepped out of a movie. He had the classic sicko pedo deranged grin. Aqualung.

This was back before everyone decided to become complete faggots and turn into professional victims for the rest of our lives. We kids didn’t go around thinking, “Oh noes! I just got harmed! I just got molested! I just got abused! Now I’m fucked up for eternity!”

That’s all a modern innovation and I think it shows how the notion that civilization always moves forwards is a lie. Because we were way more adaptive back then.

So, sure, I was a bit frightened, but I’m good at ignoring people. I just figured he was some weird asshole, maybe a pedo, but who the Hell knows, and who cares anyway? Some weird asshole freak made a weird comment to me. Ok, that’s funny and a bit disturbing, but back then, that wouldn’t lead to retreat to safe spaces, triggering, therapy for decades, “trauma”, and all the rest of the modern idiocy and indulgence.

We would just laugh at him and say what a freak he was. The world is full of freaks and disturbing weirdos, right? You might meet one one day, right? So, if this happens? It’s a normal thing, right? There’s no need to panic and turn into Perpetual Victim over it.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Stupid Reason Why I Was Multiply Banned from Reddit, Probably Soon to Be a Permanent Ban

I said it’s not a disorder for men to have sex with teenage girls. It’s not DSM-5 Pedophilia. Not only that but it is not any disorder at all in the DSM. There’s no disorder in the DSM called Adult Sex with Teenagers yet. Not yet.

If someone comes to me and says they had sex with a teenage girl, if I dx them with DSM-5 Pedophilia, I am committing malpractice.

That’s how anti-scientific this conflation of normal male sexuality with child molesting and pedophilia is.

I also said, not only is it not disordered behavior, it’s not even abnormal! This is true and you will find little argument about this among clinicians.

The argument against adult-teen sex is a moral and legal one, not a psychological one.

Adult-teen sex boils down to a moral matter. Perhaps it is immoral. Perhaps it is not. Society has decided it is immoral. That is their right. As for whether it is or not, clinicians leave that up to the moral philosophers, sociologists, and society as a whole.

We don’t get involved in things that are only right or wrong or even crazy or nuts because society says they are. In fact, in many cases, presented with what looks like psychosis, if it is normal within their culture to present this way during stress, we say they’re not psychotic. In fact, they are normal. Perhaps an Adjustment Disorder. If someone from our culture displayed the same symptoms, we would absolutely dx some form of DSM-5 Psychosis.

This is where, in a small sense, the anti-psychiatry people are right that the whole thing is a crock. It’s not a crock, but it is definitely true that what is normal and what is abnormal is in many cases constructed by society.

In fact there are complete psychological syndromes unknown in the rest of the world that have long histories, and even special names in certain countries or regions. There is a particular type of psychosis peculiar to Norway and the Scandinavian countries. It’s not seen outside of there. It has its own name, history, studies, on and on. This is simply one of the “appropriate Norwegian ways to go crazy.” Yes, even when people go nuts they don’t to do so in societally constructed ways!

Furthermore, clinicians don’t get involved in crime or moral questions of right and wrong. As I said, we leave that stuff up to the moral philosophers. You guys do it. We’re out. Stealing, rape, mugging, burglary, wife-beating, Hell, even murder or serial murder is not diagnosable under the current system. Most of these people are not the slightest bit nuts anyway.  They’re completely sane.  They’re just bad people. It’s a question of right and wrong, good and bad, not sane or crazy.

We might not even say that those crimes are abnormal behavior. I can think of circumstances where it would be just fine to commit any of those crimes. We probably wouldn’t say whether it’s normal or abnormal. Obviously it’s not adaptive and any society that allows that to go on willy-nilly is not a healthy one. But it might persist anyway. Last time I checked, Nigeria is still on the map. Instead we would just say that these are moral and legal matters, not psychological ones, and clinicians don’t deal with that sort of thing; instead, they deal with crazy and sane.

Furthermore, these matters, like teen-adult sex are legal matters. Society has decided that they hate it and that they wish to punish men who commit what they see as an immoral act. As far as whether these things should be illegal or not, clinicians throw that over to the lawyers, legislators, politicians, legal theorists and Hell, even public intellectuals because these are the people who, with input from the public, decide what is a crime and what is not. Whether something should be illegal or not is not a psychological question, nor should it be.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Fatal Flaws of Libertarianism

Rightwing Economics Can Only Go So Far before There’s a Left Reaction of Some Sort

We have Left revolutions constantly all over the world. Look at all the Left revolutions in Latin America recently. There were also quite a few in the Caribbean. There was recently one in Mexico.

All of these revolutions were precipitated by the Right being in power and pushing rightwing economics too far (the breaking point) which is what rightwingers always do. Sane people can only take so much rightwing economics, and as it gets more and more extreme, a typical Left reaction arises, getting more aggressive and even violent as the rightwing economics deepens. Marx laid this out exactly. It really is a law.

Libertarianism or Neoliberalism Always Only Benefits a Small Wealthy Minority, While the Poorer Majority Always Loses Money

People will just not tolerate rightwing economics very much. At some point it becomes so unfair and unequal that almost no one will put up with it. So Libertarians are pining for something that will never happen because frankly nobody wants it. Or better yet, no majority of any country will ever support. Libertarianism and any rightwing economics pushed too far automatically ends up benefiting only 20-33% of the population, while everyone else loses money.

The 1% Are Even Prepared to Screw the Upper Middle Class, Their Pets

In a lot of places, like in the US, everyone but the top 1% is losing money. I think all of the gains since 2008 have all gone to 1% of the population, and everyone else lost money. I remember Libertarian Dick Armey had a flat tax proposal. I assumed that the top 20% would benefit as is typical for Libertarianism, but I was stunned that only the top 1% would benefit according to his tax plan. So the rich will even sacrifice the upper middle class when it comes down to it. And why wouldn’t they? You think they have any more love for the upper middle class than for the rest of the lower classes?

Libertarianism Can Only Be Imposed and Sustained By Force, Hence a “Democratic Libertarianism” Cannot Exist and the Non-Aggression Principle is a Pipe-dream and a Lie

I can’t believe Libertarians even think this is sustainable. Obviously they see themselves as the 20-33% winners, but are they so dumb that they think they can pull the wool over the majority’s eyes and screw them economically and get away with it? Are they high? Can’t they see that this will never work? Can’t they figure out that, as Friedman said, neoliberalism (Libertarianism) can only be imposed by force and kept in power by a dictatorship, and therefore democratic Libertarianism based on the non-aggression principle is dead out the starting gate?

Libertarianism Is a Luxury That Can Only Be Afforded by the Rich

I guess greed blinds people. Libertarianism and neoliberalism are luxuries of the rich. Of course the rich, the upper middle classes, and the business classes support it.

The Business Class Is Always the Same, 550 Years Ago as Today

You can read texts from the Italian Renaissance by early capitalists in Italy in the 1500’s arguing the government is basically useless from the point of view of a businessman, and frankly the less government, the better. Here we are, 500-600 years later, and the business classes are saying the same thing. Plus ca change…

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Behaviorally Alpha Societies Tend to Be Socialist and Good for Workers, the Poor and Men in General

Transformer: Do you think Southern Euro behavior Alphas are not such great societies for working poor people like in Latin America, do you agree? I think that Paternalism and Authoritarianism is a big reason why there is such political instability and economic inequality in Latin America.

https://www.aei.org/articles/from-popular-sovereignty-to-the-reality-of-state-paternalism/

https://www.amazon.com/Authoritarian-Regimes-Latin-America-Dictators/dp/0742537390

https://items.ssrc.org/from-our-archives/industrialization-and-authoritarianism-in-latin-america/

In Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, Russia, the Middle East, and North Africa, and even traditional Southeast Asian and Asian cultures, there are not a lot of problems for working poor people. Al of these societies are very much pro-worker, pro-poor,

Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, Russia, the Middle East, and North Africa: All of these societies are collectivist, not individualist, and they are very pro-worker, pro-poor, pro-common man populist. In addition, almost all societies over there are socialist in name or in deed.

Feudalism was always an uncomfortable fit in the Arab World and it took a lot of mangling of Islam to try to justify it. As soon as the Arab World went free, it all went socialist right away. Despite tremendous efforts by Western neoliberal dipshits to try to shove neoliberalism down Arab throats, it refuses to take hold. Almost no one wants it. The fact that neoliberalism is grotesquely anti-Islamic is probably the main reason. Furthermore, neoliberalism is very hard to impose on a collectivist culture, though it is possible as in Latin America and the Philippines.

Men in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Thailand are traditionally very Alpha. Most of Southeast Asia has been socialist for 50 years now. Radical capitalism was an aberration for SE Asia because all of SE Asia has always been a very collectivist culture. Check out Fire in the Lake by Frances Fitzgerald about how the collectivist nature of Vietnamese society made the Viet Cong almost impossible to defeat.

Very unequal Thailand is a recent aberration but it’s been run by military rule and juntas for most of recent history. Communist guerrillas were extremely succesful in Thailand during the Vietnam War. The Pentagon said there were just a few guerrillas but people who went over there to study them found that they were everywhere, especially in the North.

For some reason they faded away but recently class war has returned to Thailand with a vengeance with the wars between Yellow Shirts (rightwing middle class) and red shirts (workers). Of course the Yellow Shirts are winning because the army supports them, but still, rightwing individualist economics is an aberration in collectivist Thailand.

In China, Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Indonesia the men seem to be quite Alpha. The Philippines and Indonesia have retained Latin America-style systems with extreme inequality and authoritarianism

Japan and Korea were probably barely feudal. Obviously they were never individualist and even their capitalism is very collectivist and uses a lot of state involvement in the economy all the way down to actual planning of the economy.

China was under rightwing economics (feudalism) for much of its history. Communism was an easy sell in China because it was always an extremely collectivist culture.

In addition, capitalism never took hold, as feudalism was the only form of rightwing economics the Chinese knew. The feudalism was so bad that many to most Chinese peasants were effectively slaves and quite a few actually were slaves. 88% of Chinese young people say they are Marxists. 87% of Chinese support the Communist Party. That’s because the CPP is a natural fit for Chinese collectivism.

The Philippines was a colony forever, and after independence, somehow feudalism developed. The Philippines is a collectivist culture that has developed a very Latin American-style economic system probably due to being colonized by Spaniards. Everywhere the Spanish colonized, they wrecked. However, they have also had armed Communist rebellions almost non-stop from 1945-on. The most recent president, Duterte, says he is a socialist.

Indonesia was another country that went hard rightwing, in this case classical fascist, after independence, however not before murdering 1 million Communists as the Communists were the most popular movement in the country. Obviously Communism hasn’t been popular since and in fact it is illegal to have that political opinion. However, the last couple of presidents did refer to themselves as social democrats.

Both the Philippines and Indonesia are horribly class-cucked. In addition, both are subject to a reactionary merchant ruling class in the form of overseas Chinese, a feudal-type people who retained the pre-Communist feudal culture of China when they left long ago. Not having been subject to a revolution, they are a feudal type ruling class that mirrors the Latin American ruling class in many ways.

Feudalism can absolutely arise in a collectivist culture whereas US style rightwing individualist neoliberal economics has a difficult time getting a foothold.

So societies where all the man are Alphas are often very good for poor and working class men and I would argue that they are good for men period for obvious reasons.

I think that Paternalism and Authoritarianism is a big reason why there is such political instability and economic inequality in Latin America.

Why would societies where all men are Alphas end up paternalistic? Why would authoritarian societies be bad for poor and working class people and for men? Southern and Eastern Europe have traditions of authoritarianism and very pro-worker populist governments.

North Africa and the Middle East is still very authoritarian, and it is very good for poor and working class people and for men. Russia is somewhat authoritarian and has been authoritarian for much of its history. For the last hundred years, Russian society has been very good for poor and working class people and for men. All of these places have traditions of relatively equal societies and strong redistributionist economics.

Paternalistic governments help their people. Rightwing governments in Latin America tend to be anything but paternalistic.

It is true that some societies where most men are Alphas have evolved a rightwing authoritarian, often semi-feudal system, however, many other such societies have not done so. Societies where most men are behaviorally Alpha oddly enough seem to be collectivist societies (someone explain this to me). But the rightwing authoritarian societies where most men are behaviorally Alpha actually look more feudal than US-style neoliberal, although they sometimes preach the latter.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Psychologically Harmful Behaviors Are Often Societally Reproduced, Manufactured, or Better Yet Constructed

Think of it this way. Suppose there was some society that thought something completely normal like walking a lot or talking a lot was extremely weird and caused horrible problems among the people who did it.

I absolutely assure you that all sorts of fucktards, mostly women (duh) and teenage girls in particular (because they are far more fucktarded than even most women), would get horribly damaged psychologically from doing things like walking a lot or talking too much.

If your culture tells you something is damaging, it will harm lots of people due simply and only to suggestion.

Person engages in X harmless behavior -> Society says engaging in X behavior causes psychological damage -> Suggestible, foolish person, usually female, imbibes this cultural message -> Person starts thinking, “Oh no, I engaged in this behavior, now I am damaged!” -> Person gets damaged!

Or

Person engages in X harmless behavior -> Society says engaging in X behavior causes psychological damage -> Suggestible, foolish person, usually female, imbibes this cultural message ->  Person develops all sorts of the inevitable, completely normal personal problems that any person develops in the course of life -> Person seeks to blame external forces (in this case, X behavior) for their everyday problems as most people do ->  Person looks around, remembers that they engaged in X behavior earlier and immediately assumes and labels this as the source of their problems -> Person is temporarily comforted in finding a source for their problems -> Comfort is only temporary as person thinks, “Oh no! I engaged in X behavior! Now I must be damaged! -> Person gets damaged on top of whatever other problems they had

In both cases, the stupid idea that the harmless behavior causes psychological damage is endlessly reinforced by the constant production of all these fake victims, mostly female.

Any rational skeptics who try to use reason or logic are quickly canceled:

Skeptic: LOL who says walking too much or talking too much causes psychological damage? What a bunch of snowflakes! Need to go to your safe space? Need another two years of therapy? Ever noticed that only women get damaged from flapping their gums or peregrinating too much? Gee, why is that? Can anyone say manufactured crisis LOL?

Society: Of course talking or walking too much causes horrible damage, especially to vulnerable women and teenage girls! For the evidence, look at all of the women and girls who walked and talked too much and look at how fucked up they are! Studies have conclusively proven that women who talk and walk too much have many more psychological problems than women who who shut it and stayed put. You’re opposed to science?

Skeptic is viciously attacked, accused of being a criminal, predator, misogynist, bigot and especially Harming Poor Female Snowflakes, now a federal crime. Skeptic is canceled, may be fired, sued, or even arrested.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: Statistical Alphas, Behavioral Alphas, Chads, and Behavioral Alpha and Behavioral Beta Societies

First of all, some basic definitions:

Statistical Alpha: 15-20% of males, attractive to most women most of the time for whatever reason.Probably no more than 15-20% in any society, existing or conceivable.

Behavioral Alpha: Displays “Alpha behavior.” This may vary. In some societies like the Middle East, a majority of the men probably display Alpha behavior. Not limited to 15-20% the population.

Chad: An 8-10 on the 1-10 looks scale. Often does well with women but not necessarily, as certain other variables can mess him up. Mental Chads, Shy Chads, Odd Chads, Introverted Chads, etc. can definitely have problems with women. Sure some woman usually grabs them and rapes them sooner or later, but they can have long incel periods. A Chad could very well be a virgin or an incel. In fact, on incel forums, they discuss the phenomenon of the Chadcel.

Alpha behavior is probably learned, and Alpha behaviors are best acquired early in life, hopefully by high school or at least college age.

Chads are basically genetic. There’s no reason to brag about your Looks. They’re a gift from God. You didn’t do one thing to deserve them. You just lucked out in the genetic lottery is all.

However, I do think that men do better in societies where more men are Behavioral Alphas. They do better with women and male-female relationships are a lot better. There’s not much hypergamy, there aren’t many incels, and women don’t cuck men, monopolize Chads, or marry Beta Buxxers and then shut down the pussy, etc. The men are naturally masculine and the women are naturally feminine and both sexes seem to like each just fine that way. In addition, the men seem to love women (at least they are very sexually attracted to them), and the women seem to love men.

Societies Where Most Men are Behavioral Alphas (Male Rule Outside Northern and Western Europe and the Anglosphere)

On the other hand, these are typically patriarchies, and societies with many Behavioral Alphas are not great for women, face it. Some societies where most men are behavioral Alphas include Spain (though suffering from a wild feminist insurrection and the beginnings of a soyciety, though heavily resisted by the men), Portugal, Italy (feminism failed there, though that may be changing as new reports indicate the possibility of a soyciety arising there of all places), Greece, the Balkans, and frankly Eastern Europe and the Baltics.

Russia, the Caucasus, Turkey, Arabia, Mesopotamia, the Gulf, and the Levant. North Africa too. Of course we must include all of Black Africa. All of Latin America obviously. Micronesia, Melanesia, Polynesia. Central Asia and South Asia – Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, and even India and Nepal. The Stans. I actually think SE Asian men are behaviorally Alpha. And traditional Korean, Japanese and Chinese societies were very behaviorally Alpha, and the older men still are.

Cucked Soycieties Where Most Men Are No Longer Behavioral Alphas (Behavioral Beta Soycieties under Female Rule in the West)

The soycieties where the men are no longer mostly behaviorally Alpha and have become behaviorally Beta are obviously most of the West as in Western Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Asians in the West, especially in the US. These are really the only places where Female Rule (Feminist Rule) has been implemented, though the infection is spreading, not diminishing, and the target is the whole world, as it is with all totalizing ideologies.

The result of Female Rule is an extreme reduction in:

  • Behavioral Alphas.
  • Sex for young single men.
  • Patriarchy.

Obviously all three of these are related.

The latter is often replaced by the rise of an oppressive matriarchy in its place. Why? Because in society just as in the home, someone has to wear the pants. If the women take the pants off the men, they won’t throw them in the corner or burn them as they probably should. They put them on themselves, turn into men, and turn the men into women.

Basic heterosexual behavior always exists. If the norm is toppled, the inverse simply takes its place. Someone’s got to rule and someone’s got to be ruled. Pure equality among the sexes is obviously not possible. Even Gloria Steinem admitted that!

What’s true among the sexes is probably true for society too, as basic sexual behavior is probably mirrored in some odd way in our sociopolitical world. There’s no escaping sex. It never ends, even in your 80’s.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Even Ghetto Blacks Are Not Doomed to Uniformly Bad Behavior

Polar Bear: Blacks on the other hand will steal your cheap plastic lawn chair. Blacks are always up to no good on my block.

I have a feeling this is more universal than we think. I was talking to a Brazilian woman I knew well. I told her,

“You don’t want to be racist against Blacks, but it’s hard.”

Meaning it’s hard for obvious reasons. She immediately commiserated and said,

Yes, it’s hard. Here in Brazil, we have a saying about Blacks. “If they don’t steal from you when they’re coming, they steal from you when they’re going.” (obviously in Portuguese).

In other words, “If they don’t steal from you when they come in, they steal from you when they leave.”

They don’t really act all that bad around here in my city except that they are ghetto as Hell. I made friends with one older Black man though. He hated Whites but I was able to get through to him. Later he saw me with a hot 23 year old part-Black woman, so now he probably likes me even more.

We just don’t have many Blacks in this town, period. Hence they cause few problems, and they tend to keep their heads down because they don’t have any numbers, which is what they ought to do anyway. When you only have a small % of Blacks in a city, they tend to act pretty good, mostly because they simply don’t have any numbers. They still cause problems. Blacks like that always cause problems. But they don’t cause mayhem like they do when they have larger numbers, and the difference between problems and mayhem is all the difference in the world.

Further, they are surrounded by Whites and Hispanics who almost always act better than they do. To their credit, these typically ghetto Blacks imitate the Whites and Hispanics around them and act a lot better.

A lot of them still act like shit but still act a lot less shitty than they ordinarily would. They’re still antisocial but they are antisocial in petty, neighborly ways and not in serious criminal ways. Like always asking to borrow money and then you never see the money again. They see you with an expensive object and they “request” that you give it to them. Just typical ghetto nig shit, but they won’t menace you if you don’t fork over your property, and you can always quit loaning them money.

All the young women in their 20’s have at least one kid, obviously with no man in sight. However, these basically ghetto women are quite well behaved.

Also around here the better behaved Blacks dislike the more ghetto ones like I just described. So there are varying degrees of morality even among a hardcore Black population.

In addition, the Whites and Hispanics simply will not put up with any shit at all from these ghetto Blacks. They call these Blacks on their tiniest antisocial bullshit, so that tends to nip the usually mandatory escalation in the bud. I have often thought that if these ghetto Blacks around here were living in a Black ghetto, they would act a lot worse.

It’s so obvious to me that even ghetto Blacks are not doomed to any particular behavior level. It’s also painfully clear to me that their own kind not only serve as horrific role models but also don’t call these Blacks on much of any of their antisocial bullshit. They don’t call them on the little stuff, and they probably don’t call them on the bigger stuff.

Humans aren’t stupid. They’ll get away with just about whatever the Hell you let them get away with. White people act quite good, but we aren’t angels, and every White community has its scumfucks. We are only human after all. Living in White communities my whole life, I was told and learned the hard way that (White) people will get away with just about whatever you let them get away with. So this isn’t a ghetto Black thing. It’s a human thing.

The behavior of even ghetto Blacks can be markedly improved.

First of all, they need to be a minority, preferably under 25%. 25% Black seems to be a tipping point in many cities, after which things start to go seriously to Hell in a handbasket. Below 25% Black, you can look at the statistics of various pathologies, and they don’t rise that much from 5 – 10 – 15 – 20% Black. The city remains more or less livable.

But somewhere between 20-30%, most cities tip over. What follows is probably White flight, usually slow rather than fast, and worse than that is that the decently behaved Blacks (of which there are many – many millions!) start taking off too. Well-behaved Blacks aren’t stupid. They’re not going to sit around in some ghettoizing shithole due to racial solidarity. Sanity and safety trumps racial consciousness any day of the week.

This does not apply to wealthy Black areas like Ladera Heights in Los Angeles, and it probably doesn’t apply to small Black towns in the South where a remarkably decent authentic Black culture is often present.

Second of all, the small population of Blacks needs to be a part of a better behaved larger population, preferably White, Hispanic, or Asian. Ghetto Blacks act remarkably better even in majority-Hispanic cities because Hispanic pathologies are much exaggerated and they act better than most people think.

Third, the larger population needs to call these ghetto Blacks on their antisocial shit, starting with the most petty neighborly BS. Just shut it down before it even starts. Either due to this or due to the general environment, the better behaved Blacks start shutting down the bad actors too. People, even supposedly irredeemable ghetto Blacks, do respond to harsh correction at the societal level.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Undefined and Undefinable Feminist Definition of Rape

As I noted in another post, my Mom brought me up right. She taught me that under no circumstances was I to rape girls or women. She drilled into my head over and over that rape was force or the threat of force. Her message was, “Don’t do it, dammit!” She pretty much said everything other than that was fair game, which is the only sane view of rape.

My Mom’s a feminist, and a pretty bad one at that, getting worse as she ages. But nowadays feminists (most women) would call my Mom a rape apologist and a handmaiden because of the way the feminists have blown up the definition of rape and the fact that feminism gets increasingly insane every year, as is the case with all Identity Politics.

Of course the feminists and their fag “male” allies have no expanded the definition of rape to about the size of the Indian Ocean. Not only that but apparently no one can even properly define it as it’s as vague and  undecipherable as the Linear B inscriptions.

As it is, if a woman thinks she got raped, she got raped. That’s now the definition of rape!

Women actually believe that crap. When you put women in power, the first thing they do is  make vague, unenforceable laws to bring about their desired utopia.

Of course this never works, therefore all through space and time, whenever women are put into power over men, the result is simply complete chaos. People tire of it after a bit, and pretty soon, the sane people say, “Let’s have some sense here. Let the men take over!

And then some sort of patriarchy, benevolent or otherwise (typically otherwise), is reimposed. Society’s not fair after that, but it wasn’t fair under Female Rule either. Pick your poison. You will either be ruled by women or men.

Look around you at the Anglosphere, the UK, and Scandinavia to see the dystopian chaos of idiocy that ensues under Female Rule.

I’ll pick men any day. Women are incapable of ruling societies.  Women can do a lot of things,  but that’s not one of them. It’s fine really. Hey, women can’t do everything. Sometimes the ladies just need to step aside and let the boys take over.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: A Vignette of the Reasons for the Colombian Civil War

Claudius: How do you define working well? What distinguishes the top category from the bottom? Is present-day Colombia really worse off than Mexico?

Yes. Colombia is much worse than Mexico in our view. Colombia is so fucked up that they murder one civilian every other day or so. It’s deadly to be on the Left in Colombia. Colombia exists for the rich and only for the rich. Why do you think the Left took up arms?

The state has failed in Colombia. Genocidal fascists took over or maybe were running things all along. They never even did a land reform! There is no state in Colombia. Just an army and police structure that exists to support the rich and their dictatorship over the people.

Let me give you an example.

I read about a rural area in Colombia recently. The rightwing death squads (the government) rampaged through the area and confiscated all of the farmers of the small farmers. Just stole them at gunpoint. This goes on all over Colombia all the time. The rich own a lot of the land, but they never own enough, so they are always trying to steal more. A very similar situation was going on in Guatemala and especially El Salvador and was the direct cause of the revolutions there. The Colombian rich already steal every nickel in the country, but that’s not enough.  They have to steal even more. At gunpoint.

Any farmers who resisted would be beaten, tortured, arrested, imprisoned, or simply murdered. The state worked hand in hand with the death squads which are just the private armies of the rich. Really the police and the military are just the private armies of the rich too. Leaders and members of farmers’ and peasants’ associations got the same treatment above, usually worse. Many were simply murdered, especially the former. This was a slow process (it always is) but over 10-15 years,  the rich had taken over all the land and added it to their latifundias.

More than anything else, Colombia needs a land reform (one could argue that this is the basic underlying cause of the armed Left revolution in Colombia) but the Colombian rich will do anything to stop it, even kill hundreds of thousands of people as D’Aubussion suggested in El Salvador (200,000 in his case to prevent land reform or “socialism” as he called it).

All of the peasants shoved off the countryside moved into nearby large cities. All of these cities quickly developed large slums if they didn’t have them already. The slums were made up on displaced peasants, now relegated to proletarianism in the city. If you study Marx this is a classic method for the development of capitalism, and it is in fact how capitalism developed in England.

Back to Colombia. The seething slums lack water (water must be purchased on large containers in the city below and then carted back to the house), power, sewage systems (the sewage runs downhill in the gutters) or much of anything. The Colombian state of course does absolutely nothing for these people as they don’t want to part with any of the money of the rich to do so. A mysterious crime wave develops in the new slums and the US media is puzzled by what could possibly have caused this strange new crime wave.

In the slums, urban Communist guerrilla cells begin to form. One day you are shocked to see a 12 year old boy walking down a steep street in the slum.

“That’s it,” you think, “The revolution has finally come. I’m outa here!”

You had always known it was building because in a situation like this, how can a Communist revolution not develop? A Communist revolution is almost guaranteed in a situation like this.

There are still plots in the countryside owned by farmers. Guerrillas now invade the abandoned areas and take over a lot of the towns.

“We are the army of the poor,” say the guerrillas. “We are here to protect you from the rich, the death squads, the army, the police, and the state.”

The townspeople are happy to see them. Guerrillas in full uniform walk down the streets of these towns like it’s nothing. There are guerrilla checkpoints all over the countryside at the entrance to every town. The guerrillas recruit in the towns and many of the young people who saw their parents, siblings and relatives brutally thrown off the land or better yet murdered join the guerrilla, mostly out of sense of vengeance.

At night, armed guerrillas show up in  large forces at the haciendas of the rich, living on land stolen from the peasants.

“Hello,” the guerrillas say. “We are here to collect war taxes for the revolution.”

“But I don’t support the revolution, the landowner says.

“No matter,” say the guerrillas, “The country needs a  revolution, it is having one, it needs to be funded, and as a wealthy man, you are obligated to support the revolution. And if you don’t, we will arrest and incarcerate you for tax evasion or if you prefer kidnap you and hold you for ransom.

The rich landowner agrees. Once a year he and his rich neighbors drive to spots in the countryside where they meet bands of guerrillas. All of this is done in secretly. There they hand over war taxes for the year. Those that do not pay are kidnapped for ransom, but the guerrillas say they are just being arrested and imprisoned for tax evasion and will be released on payment of taxes.

Most just pay their taxes to keep the guerrilla off the land so they can live in peace. A few hold out, refuse to pay taxes, and are kidnapped for ransom. The rich usually pay to free their people, but the offspring of these rich men are furious at these taxes and kidnappings. They move to the city and become part of the fascist Right. Some even join the death squads to “kill the Communists.” If you ask them why they joined the fascist Right, they will say, “Well, it all started when the guerrillas kidnapped my father for  ransom. At that point, I had finally had enough of them. We need to exterminate these delinquents with a heavy hand!

Outside the city there is a military checkpoint. This is symbolic. It is there to keep the landless peasants in the slums holed up in the slums so they don’t try to take their property back. There are army checkpoints at the entrances of every city in the area. The military checkpoints start to be attacked by mysterious guerrillas who seem to appear out of nowhere, and the army takes casualties.

Interactions between the local urban poor and countryside peasants become at these checkpoints become increasingly hostile, as the soldiers suspect with good reason that these people are supporting and harboring guerrillas in the areas where they live. New death squads form in the cities, slowly murdering and torturing to death random poor people and especially leaders of community organizations which they army had now labeled as organizations of the guerrillas. In fact, a lot of them are the unarmed aboveground formation of the guerrillas.

Death squads return to the countryside, now picking off random peasants and leaders of community organizations on the basis of support for the guerrillas. In most cases it’s true. The people killed do in fact support the guerrillas. Hell, just about everyone out here does. The few that don’t are suspected to be army and police spies and are closely watched. Occasionally the guerrillas execute one of these people for the crime of spying for the enemy. In fact, they were usually doing just that, spying on the guerrillas for the army.

Intelligence shows that the guerrillas are coming from the urban slums and countryside towns, which are now full of guerrillas.

Back at intelligence headquarters, urban guerrillas have infiltrated this military structure and are busy giving fake intelligence to the army and especially telling the guerrillas what  the intelligence knows and about any upcoming operations.

The army launches operations only to find nothing but peasants and small towns full of civilians without a guerrilla in sight when in fact the guerrillas were seen everywhere there a few days ago. It is as if the guerrillas had vanished into thin air.

The army begins to suspect that the guerrillas always seem to be one step above them and seem to have precognition about the army’s behavior. The army suspects spies in its midst and conducts internal sweeps but finds nothing. Commanders grow increasingly frustrated and angry and begin to take it out on the locals in the guerrilla zones.

The officers look up and the cloud-covered jungle mountains surrounding the area of their operation and begin to wonder if the guerrillas are up there somewhere, hiding in the misty rainforest.

They are correct. That is exactly where the guerrillas are. Difficult operations are launched in these jungle mountains of Colombia but nothing is found. Soldiers get injured, bitten by insects, and come down with strange diseases during these jungle operations.

The operations end and the army retreats back to the valley. Now not just officers but rank and file soldiers are getting even more angry, and they take it out even more on the locals. Down in the valleys, mysterious new guerrilla formations with names no one has heard of seem to show up out of nowhere in response to the army’s abuse of the civilians. These formations start attacking the army, and the army takes casualties. The soldiers get even more furious and take it out on the people even more.

After every crackdown on civilians, more and even more young people join the  guerrillas. When asked why they join, they say,

Well it all started when the army invaded our home and killed my father at his dinner meal. He was a simple peasant. He wasn’t part of any armed guerrilla. I am here to get my revenge.

In some areas, deals are cut with the rebels. The army gets to control the city below but the guerrillas get to the control the towns above eight miles up the road. This is exactly where the guerrilla checkpoints start. In the other direction as you head towards the valley, army checkpoints start. The army and the guerrilla have cut a deal to let each control a bit of territory on the basis that they sign a ceasefire and stop killing each other. After a while of this, the army starts running short of weapons. It turns out a number of officers have been selling the army’s weapons to the guerrillas.

The revolution in Colombia has many causes but this is a good overview of some the main issues that are driving this civil war more than anything else. At the end of the day, it’s just another fight over land and bread. Ever heard that one before?

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Fencing of the Commons: Why Displacement of Small Farmers and Theft of Their Land Is Necessary for the Development of Capitalism

In England, the poor and peasants lived off what was called The Commons. This was royal land but they didn’t have much use for it other than foxhunting, so they didn’t care. People had enough to eat and often made a lot of their stuff or bought it from nearby tradesmen. There was a small capitalist economy made up of selling agricultural produce, meat, and mostly the small tradesmen, most of whom didn’t even hire labor. There were hardly any hired laborers because everyone had all they needed.

The capitalists decided that they needed to develop a capitalist economy. They had a  problem. No workers. All of the workers were living off the land doing fine on their own. The capitalists would have to  drive them off the land, proletarianize and impoverish them in large cities, where they would make up the reserve army of labor Marx’s discusses.

So the Commons was fenced off. The people lost all their livelihood because they no longer had any land to live off. They moved to the cities as an impoverished, downtrodden, often starving proletariat, where they formed large miserable slums. Crime rose. The capitalists starated building factories in the cities. With this newfound reserve army of labor, the capitalists now had captured workers who had their livelihood tied to their job at the factory. The capitalists waved the threat of impoverishment and starvation over anyone who complained.

A similar thing actually happened in the American West and in fact this was how capitalism in the American West actually developed, believe it or not. Herders versus farmers wars, common in the West and still in many parts of the world (Sudan, Northern Nigeria) are similar in that they also involve driving farmers off the land but also quite different as the land is taken over to grazing by herders.  But now this new landless class or former landholders was proletarianized and stuck as a reserve army of labor for the development of capitalism in the West.

A similar thing was done with the railroads. The government was getting very worried about all of the people who were just living off the land on their own. At first, the state gave people small plots because this helped in the theft of land from the Indians which was essential for the development of the nation.

But by the late 1800’s this had become a liability. So vast tracts of land were given to the railroads before homesteaders could snap them up. In this way, the development of rural self-sufficiency in the countryside could be slowed and the creation of a large impoverished, hungry class of workers could form in the city slums to serve as the reserve army of labor for the development of capitalism in the West. Until recently, Southern Pacific had large landholdings in the West.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Face It: The Latest Riots are Multiracial Leftwing Antiracist Riots

Alpha Unit: I am responding to this narrative that all this destruction and violence is a “Black” thing. That’s not the whole story.

I would agree with you that the riots are not all a Black thing. Head on over to American Renaissance and see how these are being portrayed as Black riots. Well, there are Black riots in this country, but these don’t really qualify. In some cities, in these riots it is mostly Blacks rioting. Those are cities in the South like Atlanta, Louisville, Birmingham, and some other places that elude me at the moment. I believe there were Whites in the crowd in Atlanta though.

In general, the rioters were a mix of young Black, Hispanic, and White men, mostly antisocial and living on the edge of society, most without decent or any jobs or much to lose. I saw many young men rioting right alongside the Blacks. The Whites looked like skate punk and Antifa types. A lot of Whites were holding up BLM signs and chanting BLM slogans.

In LA, most of the rioters tended to be Hispanics.

In Las Vegas, the crowd was very mixed, mostly Hispanics with some Whites, even including White women, with a few Blacks in the mix too. The white rioters seemed to have more of the fancier materials you need to start a riot.

In Minneapolis, many of those smashing and setting things on fire were young White men, often skate punk types. In some cases, they worked right alongside inner city type Blacks. However, I did see an interview with a Minneapolis Black gang member who said that all of the gangs in the city (mostly Black) were working together in these riots to cause mayhem even though a lot of them were enemies normally.  So there is also a criminal gang element, but that shouldn’t be surprising.

The riots seem quite multiracial in New York, but it was hard to get a breakdown. There were a lot of Blacks but also some Whites.

There were many Whites in the Washington DC riots but also a lot of Blacks of course.

Rioters in Seattle and Portland tended to be young antifa type Whites.

Chicago seemed to have a lot of Blacks, but there were also Whites mixed in.

The truth is that these for the most part are multiracial riots. Yes, many rioters are Black, but there are quite a few young White and Hispanic men in the mix.

I will say one thing. It seems like most of the looting is being done by Blacks. I did see a few Whites looting in Minneapolis and New York. Hispanics are known to loot but I’m not aware of how many of them did. In the Rodney King riots, the looters were heavily Black and Hispanics. However, when they moved up to Hollywood, a lot of more or less regular young White men got in on, targeting high end items.

I was happy to see the stores of the rich looted and smashed up though. That’s who they should be targeting.

Looting does tend to be a Black thing. Hispanics don’t seem to loot as much, and it seems like a lot of Whites, even White rioters, are averse to looting. A White rioter will smash stuff up, set a building on fire but then refuse to loot other buildings. Not sure why that is, but I think Antifa doesn’t like looting. Plus a lot of Whites are afraid to steal or perhaps they even consider it morally wrong.

Alpha Unit: And leftwing people are not delusional for thinking there are rightwing people out there seeking to capitalize on these protests.

Correct, but I am seeing little evidence of this.

Three Bugaloo Boys went to a demonstration and tried to turn it violent, but the crowd did not buy it. Further, the Bugaloos are a mixed bag. Yes most are rightwingers, often racist ones. However, there are other Bugaloos who are on the left and a number of them are antiracists. So the Bugaloos are just a group of “tear it down” folks who are insurrectionists against the government for a variety of reasons – right, left, racist and antiracist. The only thing that unites them is the desire to smash it up and take down the state.

I am watching leftwing subs on Reddit, and all they ever say about these riots is that it’s White Nationalist racists and undercover police instigators who are setting off the  riots or even doing most of the damage. I went to the page of one liberal, and he said all the destruction was being done by White nationalists and undercover police instigators. He also said Russia was behind the riots.

Black people don’t want to think it’s their people rioting. That’s a typical human Dindu reaction. They are correct, the Black rioters are having a significant  amount of White and Hispanic help. That’s the better response. Pawning it off on cops and rightwing racists ain’t gonna cut it.

Leftwingers and antiracists object to the notion that these are leftwing antiracist riots. Once again this is the typical human Dindu reaction. Dindu reactions tend to be more of a human response than a Black cope. People don’t like to take responsibility when their group does bad things, so they blame it all on outsiders or better yet, their enemies.

Rightwingers are notorious for this but as we can see, leftwingers and antiracists are not immune to it either. The defenses are Denial and Projection. “Blaming other people” isn’t just something pathological people do. Most people go through life blaming other people in some way or other. I don’t object to blaming other people, but I think the less you do it, the better.

But that’s exactly what they are – these are indeed leftwing antiracist riots. And antifa-type and BLM (neither of which are organizations) elements do appear significant. The young Whites may be apolitical, or if they vote at all, they vote Bernie. The Blacks and Hispanics just vote straight Democratic if they even vote at all. I think a lot of these rioters are apolitical in the sense that they are outside of organized politics and might not even vote.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Leftwing Dindus: Who’s Behind the Riots?

Alpha Unit: LAS VEGAS (AP) — Three Nevada men with ties to a loose movement of right-wing extremists advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government have been arrested on terrorism-related charges in what authorities say was a conspiracy to spark violence during recent protests in Las Vegas.

Federal prosecutors say the three white men with U.S. military experience are accused of conspiring to carry out a plan that began in April in conjunction with protests to reopen businesses closed because of the coronavirus.

More recently, they sought to capitalize on protests over the death of George Floyd, a black man who died in Minneapolis after a white officer pressed his knee into his neck for several minutes even after he stopped moving and pleading for air, prosecutors said.

The three men were arrested Saturday on the way to a protest in downtown Las Vegas after filling gas cans at a parking lot and making Molotov cocktails in glass bottles, according to a copy of the criminal complaint obtained by The Associated Press.

Make of this what you will.

So, did they spark any violence? No. What is the name of this group? Boogaloo Boys?

The vast majority of the people I see smashing stuff up, setting things on fire, and looting are young people. Many of them are young Black men who don’t exactly look like fine upstanding citizens. In the West many of the rioters are young Hispanic man who don’t exactly look like model citizens either. In all of these riots, and most particularly in Minneapolis, the smashers and burners were young White men who look something like antifa types or skate punks. Antifa has indeed had presence in these riots. Look at all the antifa graffiti.

The vast majority or rioters are young lumpen Black, Hispanic and White men. They live on the fringes of society and are estranged from mainstream culture. Many are anti-society. Most don’t seem to have much if any money. Many do not appear to be married or have children.

If these rioters vote at all, they may vote Bernie. The Blacks and Hispanics will either vote Bernie or simply Democratic if they even vote at all. These are leftwing riots all the way. Not even liberal riots. Leftwing riots, as in to the left of liberal Democrats. No party is behind this. Almost all Democratic Party politicians are condemning the violence. There are no organizations called antifa and Black Lives Matter.

Of course people on the left do not wish to believe that these are leftwing riots. Left-wingers, like everyone else, are Dindus. I suppose Blacks also wish to deflect the blame, and Blacks are the original Dindus. Leftwing Dindus are saying that all the rioting is being caused by far right racist White nationalists and undercover police instigators. This is simply the natural human tendency to deny and deflect blame whenever members of your group do something unsavory.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Welcome to Karen World: The Carceral Society

Half of society are Karens or the male equivalent.  It’s Karen World. America is Karen World. Say hello to Karen everyone, our new Dear Leader.

Everyone’s got the cops on fast dial and the Meatspace ban hammer ready.

Do you really  have to call the cops on everyone for every pissant little chickenshit law violation you can think of?

Do you really have to ban people from establishments for basic human behavior like trying to talk to other humans?

Don’t you think you can sort out these disagreements among yourselves with being androgynous Karens and cucks and calling Mommy Cop every time the sun doesn’t shine your way?

Ever heard of people “working out the problems amongst themselves” without getting ban-happy, fire-happy, sanction-happy, or calling  the cops?

Must you ban, fire, and sanction everyone for every petty chickenshit transgression? What’s the point? Are you some authoritarian freak out to fire every employee or ban every customer or call the cops an any citizen who looks at you wrong?

Before you go psycho-boss and fire that employee for some chickenshit violation (90% of firings), maybe you could go talk to the guy? Talk it out? So maybe you don’t have to fire him?

Before you go ban-happy and ban your best customers because of silly airheads or Baby Karens, think maybe you could talk to the guy? You know, some Baby Karen woman-children are wetting their panties over your innocuous behavior, so maybe just be cool and try to watch it?

Oh, you got a bit of a problem with your neighbor! Maybe go talk to the guy before you call the pigs over your chickenshit beef like an overgrown baby?

People talk about the Carceral State. That’s not the half of it. We have a Carceral Society. We’re a society of narcs. And I hate narcs. We bitched about the Stasi, but now here we are. We are all Stasi now. SJW Stasi, sure, but Stasi nonetheless.

Doesn’t it feel great to be a pig, order people around and mess up their lives? It does?

You asshole. No it doesn’t. No decent person likes being a narc or a pig. If you do, you’re a bad person.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: America Has a Wild Hair up Its Ass: The Culture of Perpetual Outrage

I get banned from local establishments for no good reason except I pissed some silly cunts off unbeknownst to me.

The world’s antisocial now: #metoo was the death knell for socialization, and now Corona put a stake in the heart of human closeness and commingling, never to let the gregarious beast of human intimacy rise again.

We are ruled by our fears. Of creeps, of horny guys, of dangerous people who barely exist, of weird diseases. Of everything. Of nothing. Mostly, of not much of anything important.

We live in an Outrage Culture or Culture of Perpetual Outrage where you’re supposed to be outraged about the SJW nonsense du jour. The Zeitgeist is Perpetual Outrage, and the expression on everyone’s face is “one minute away from outraged offense.”

Offended! Offended! Offended! I’m offended! You’re offended! We’re all offended!

Cool, now we can have an Offended Party. We can get drunk and call each other names until we all beat each other up!

Let’s go on the net. Ban! Ban! Ban! Ban! That poster looked at you wrong! Ban the heretic.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Semantic Entropy Is Here: We Are All Lexicographers Now

Definitions of crimes, thoughtcrimes, or offenses against this, that, or whatever social norm creep steadily upward ever year.

Rape? It’s as big as the Atlantic Ocean now.

Assault? What is that? You looked at someone wrong. That’s assault.

Sexual assault? The definition spreads every year like a kudzu vine. In my opinion, sexual assault is simply another word for dating. It didn’t used to be, but that’s how the ladies have it set up now boys, and the girls make the rules now in this world, and don’t you ever forget it.

Battery? What’s that? I tapped a woman on the shoulder. That’s literally battery nowadays.

Sexual battery? What’s is that? Can someone explain to me what it is so I don’t do it because it sounds kind of fun, and I might try it. They want to get pounded anyway, and that’s kind of right battery now that I think of it.

Sexual abuse? What does it even mean? It means any time an adult human had sex with an adolescent human ages 13-17, the poor teenager got abused. Oh boo hoo. Not only that, but the little lass now needs 20 years of therapy for that time she got sexually abused by seducing that 25 year old man at that party and grabbing his cock. She seduced the guy, so I guess she abused herself. Oh well, self abuse is fun. I prefer to do it with some porn though.

But no matter. Abused she was, and abused she will be! The inevitable damage is already there. We can’t see it or measure it, but women tell us it’s there, so we have to take their word for it. Damaged how long? Forever more. Because of the scars that won’t heal.

All women are not only Permanent Children but they are also Permanent Victims.

The victimization starts on the first day when any men around, if there even are any that is, start misogynisting the newborn girl. Because that’s what males do to little girl babies. They misogynist them in all sorts of microaggressive ways. The microaggressions are hard to see or measure, but if you get an electron microscope, you can make them out all right. Wicked men. Turning their misogynist abuse into nanotech!

Because that’s what we men to do females. We misogynist them. Every day. All day long. Like a rocket barrage that never ends. Poor women! Poor babies! Women are crying! Women are babies!

Quick, someone get that lady a handkerchief to wipe her tears. That man over there walking away just misogynisted her, and now she’s going to cry for half an hour!

The misogynisting goes on all through the wretchedness we call the Life of Woman, even in those retirement villages where those evil old men who can’t even get a hardon anymore still misogynist those little old ladies all the doggone day. What’s a lass to do?

Grooming? What’s that? I guess you can groom anyone now. Men can groom 40 year old women. Who knew? Turns out I’ve been grooming females my whole life. And I had no idea! I heard lower primates like to groom each other as a show of affection, but I had no idea I had so much chimp in me!

Illegal looking! Watch those eyes! It’s illegal to look at women now in California! Stamp out that male gaze! We’ll put out your eyes and send you to Purgatory to stand on a cliff for half of eternity till you work it off!

Pedophilia? That’s probably 90% of all sex now, especially now that all women are shaved as bare as 12 year olds. It’s mass hysteria and a moral panic. So half the population are effectively psychotic at least on the issue being hysterisized.

Hitch a ride on the moral panic train! It’s a fun ride, folks. Full of thrills and spills and an outrage around every bend. You’ll be scared from the moment you hop on til the moment you disembark, if you ever do. But that’s the whole idea.

Pedophiles? Well that’s 100% of us men for sure because if you get turned on by 17 year old girls, nowadays you’re literally a pedophile. Well not all men. Dead men and gay men don’t count, but the rest are disgusting pedos!

Trespassing? What’s that? I don’t even know what that is anymore.

Breaking and entering? That includes reaching inside someone’s door to knock on their door now. You broke into their house with your hand to knock on the door. I got the cops called on me the other day for that. A cop came to my door and threatened to arrest me for putting my hand into someone else’s doorway, and thereby breaking and entering their residence. I tell ya, we got one Hell of a serious crime wave in this country!

Sexism? What’s that? Define it. Another word with either no definition or any definition, whichever you prefer. Take your pick! Or just make up your own definition. DIY!

Misogyny? It’s everywhere. How do we know it’s everywhere? Because it’s misogyny. How do we know it’s misogyny? Because it’s everywhere.It’s a great theory because it’s not even wrong. There! I just saw some misogyny crawl under the bed! Get a broom and stop it before it kills again!

Racism? What’s that? Define it. Ever notice that no one can even define that word? It’s literally a word with no meaning at all or a meaning that encompasses half of life, so it’s everything and nothing both at once.

Nazi? That’s 42% of the population now. Didn’t I know that? Silly me!

Hater? That’s half the population. Well, now you can feel better as you stew. Know you’re not alone.

Homophobia? Nowadays we are at the point where if you won’t suck another guy’s cock, you’re a homophobe. Another word with no meaning. Define it. If you’re going to accuse half of society of it, the least you could do is define it. Nope. No one knows what it means, or worse, it means whatever the person uttering the word thinks it means. Everyone gets to define their own words now. Fun, huh? We are all lexicographers now!

Sexual harassment? If a woman was made to feel uncomfortable, she got harassed. That’s literally the definition. Crazy, huh? How to avoid giving the crazy the lovely lass a wild hair up her ass? Easy, just read her mind. Easy as pie. Anyone can do that, come on!

Sexual harassment means whatever the woman who says it thinks it means. If the little lady thinks she got harassed, she did.

Rape? It’s all rape, baby! What is? Sex! All of it? Well, not all of it, sure.The vanilla stuff isn’t rape at the moment, but don’t worry, the feminists are hard at work on it. Inventing new crimes every year!

But most of the fun kind of sex is rape, or rapey, or grey rape, or acquaintance rape, or spousal rape, or rape by deception rape (otherwise known as “seduction”), or rape by handing her a beer before you  have sex with her rape, or regret rape the next morning or 20 years later rape, or coercive rape by talking or better yet arguing her into it rape (my specialty).

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20