Category Archives: Left

Review of Quora: Two Thumbs Down

Just posted this review on the Web.

Curiously it is very similar to another terrible review given by a woman who hates Quora for all the same reasons I do. And she’s a liberal just like me! She also says that anyone who criticizes modern feminism, gays, trannies, or Israel gets slapped with endless penalties and eventual bans. There are also reports that conservatives are regularly banned on Quora. There are also some very disturbing reports that Quora bans those who criticize many huge multinational corporations, Big Pharma, Halliburton, the Pentagon, the NSA, the US Presidency, and a host of other things.

This is extremely disturbing and it shows the potential for a truly nightmarish “liberal” Frankenstein: pro US state, pro US foreign policy, pro Pentagon, pro NSA, pro corporation, pro oil industry, pro Big Pharma radical SJW’s on steroids! Wow, that is a Frankenstein that needs to be shot on sight! Load up your 12 gauge and fire on it til it drops!

This is rightwing DNC corporate Democratic Party + US imperialism + Liberal Interventionism (humanitarian bombers) + corporate liberal + national security state + spy agencies + liberal partroidardism (Democratic Presidents’ foreign policy = 100% good) mixed with radical SJWism, which is everything horrific about the Left. The worst of both worlds! In other words, the world of Hillary Clinton and the DNC!

This horror has been going on for a while. A friend of mine got a university degree recently, and boy I am I glad I got mine in the 1970’s and 1980’s! Even the early 1990’s were not so bad. First there was a large section of Diversity Prerequisites, which was a slate of courses that could have been lumped together into a curriculum called White People Are Evil. However, those teaching the courses were pro-corporate, wild free market neoliberals for “open borders and open markets.” They just wanted to let all the minorities, gays, trannies, and women in on the neoliberal greedfest bonanza. “Free borders and free markets,” which is really just the DNC. This is Corporate Liberalism in its most bald, naked, hideous face.

This is the face of the enemy, people. Corporate liberals are not my friends, and they should not be yours.

I am supposed trade a rightwing corporate liberal project involving radical neoliberal and near Libertarian economics, a pro-corporate and anti-labor view, nightmarish free trade agreements everywhere destroying democracy and establishing corporate rule over state rule, and an evisceration of the safety net for a “Left” corporate liberal project involving complete open borders for the Third World to flood in, anti-White persecution and demonization from the minorities, a sexual deviant/pervert/weirdo/ free for all and probable war on straight men from the “non-straight” freakshow, an evisceration of gender to rival the shredding of the safety net from the “nonbinary” bizarros, and a radical feminist Matriarchy and declaration of war on straight men, especially straight White men.

“Sure, Bob, we know the rightwing project is horrible, but look at all those wonderful Cultural Left goodies you get in return! Give up something to get something. Get with it, Bob!”

Get with what? The rightwing vision I will acquire is softened down Ayn Randism. I am supposed to thank God it’s not the real Ayn Randism while multimillionaires Rahm Emanuel (yearly income: 13 million), Obama, and Hillary (yearly income 27 million) throw me a few crumbs “so I don’t starve” while they cruise by in their limos on their way to their next $300,000 speech at Goldman Sachs (no quid pro quo, mind you).

The Left is an SJW Hell on Earth. As a straight White male, there’s nothing there for me except an all out war on the very idea of being normal combined with Calcutta flooding in from the borders combined with a Feminazi dictatorship combined with a war against me from a bunch of identity groups who have singled me out as their enemy identity to be attacked.

Nothing for me on the Left combined with nothing for me on the Right! Great. A real shit sandwich, in other words. The worst of the Left combined with the worst of the Right. How can you not love that? It’s a veritable anti-Panglossian worst of all possible worlds, an Anti-Candide vision writ large.

Crap. Should be called Queera. The most fanatically pro-gay site on the Net. Wildly pro-gay, pro-tranny, pro every sort of sexual orientation and gender bizarreness, off the charts pro-feminist, just disgusting.

Politically, they are also very liberal, which is good in many ways. I just hate the SJW maniacs, and Quora is SJW Central on the web.

The off the charts SJW insanity is bizarrely combined with wild support for the most reactionary Zionism as the site is flooded with Jews and every post about Israel gets bombed by Jewish Israel-firsters. Most of the liberal Gentiles are also wild Zionists too.

So you get the worst of the Right (fanatical support for reactionary settler-colonial imperialism in Israel) combined with the worst of the Left (celebration of radical feminist misandry along with cheering, promotion and proselytizing for every type of non-straight and non-binary sexual or gender bizarreness out there.

Plus the moderators are the worst church lady, prissy, priggish, sanctimonious, ruler slapping SJW nuns around. You will get constantly reported for homophobia, sexism, racism, anti-Semitism, transphobia and other BS. After a while you get ban threats, temp bans, and then i guess they ghost you.

Great liberal site ruined by SJW fanatics and Zionist maniacs, all tied in the wool liberals like me.

Sad!

DOWN WITH QUORA.

20 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Anti-Semitism, Colonialism, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Economics, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Imperialism, Israel, Jews, Lame Cunts, Left, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Losers, Middle East, Moralfags, Neoliberalism, Open Borders, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Radical Feminists, Regional, Scum, Settler-Colonialism, Sex, Traitors, US Politics, Weirdos, Whites, Zionism

An Excellent Explanation of Class and Politics in the US White Working Class

Here.

Absolutely  immaculate. I have been observing these things all of my life. It also shows why the White working class or WWC (which really overlaps with the White middle class) hates the poor so much. Why they hate the professional classes so much. Why they love the rich so much. Why they are so frustrated with the bullshit issues of the Cultural Left so much. Why they hate the White Democratic Party elites so much – exemplified by Hillary Clinton. I don’t want to call the Democratic Party elites (DNC) liberals because that’s not what they are – there’s nothing liberal about them.

About how Democratic projects to help the poor with social programs always fail for the WWC and why the WWC resent them so much. About the almost crazy levels of work ethic and workaholism in the WWC. About the extreme level of self-sacrifice and value of decent, moral and thrifty behavior that this class has long exemplified. About the lack of proletarian consciousness in the WWC, their love of the rich, and the desire of so many of them to own their own business (to become bourgeois). About how they don’t just want a job – they want a good job. About why so many of them dislike unions. About why they hate the professional classes – doctors are quacks, lawyers are shysters, professors are idiots and teachers are despised and suspect. All of these are mostly hated as know it all’s who look down on the WWC.

About how white liberal elites sneering at WWC people for being racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and xenophobic arouses such hatred among these people. I mean Hell, I have been Cultural Left my whole life, and in the last 10-20 years, the Cultural Left has gone so bonkers that I of all people am now an evil reactionary Nazi fascist sexist, racist, bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic, transphobic, xenophobic freak. And I am still Cultural Left. I am just Cultural Left from a ways back, just not Cultural Left Full Insanity 2017. If they have this much hatred for a decent liberal like me, consider how much the Cultural Left must hate the real rednecks of the WWC!

About why the WWC hates the poor as shiftless, profligate bums sucking off the public teat while the WWC must work their tail off, gets no benefits, and has to eat beans out of a can.

About how WWC contempt for the shiftless and immoral poor overlaps with racism. Hint: it’s rooted in behavioral differences between the WWC and the non-White underclass. About how pride in America and patriotardism are very deeply rooted in the WWC and about how much they hate liberal upper middle class college students and college educated “traitors to America.” About how much they love cops and hate these same college educated elites for being cop-haters.

About how Donald Trump was the first politician in a long time who actually spoke to these people. About why they love Trump for being a rich man who is contemptuous of professionals and liberal elites. About how much they love Trump’s “straight talk.” About how straight talk is tied into WWC men’s sense of masculinity and their dislike of elite liberal “wussy” men who beat around the bush and don’t give you a straight answer about anything. About how much both male and female WWC people value good, hard masculinity in men and why they see Trump as a real man and elite liberal men as a bunch of wusses. About how they do not want to join the elite upper middle classes that they dislike so much but instead wish to live their same WWC lifestyles but with somewhat more money.

About how the immiseration of this class has humiliated a class that values pride of manhood, family, town, culture and nation so much and takes hits to their pride so hard.  About how this devastating loss of pride and sense of humiliation led not only to the election of Trump but to the current declines in life expectancy among the WWC, and the concurrent epidemics of alcoholism, domestic abuse of various kinds, suicide and opioid use

I will confess straight up. I never liked WWC values, although we inherited some of this as a White middle class family that also always lived in the edge and was constantly in debt. I grew up to never-ending tales of financial woes while living in a very nice White middle class neighborhood that would be considered a wealthy neighborhood full of mansions in most of the world. The White middle class of professionals I grew up with shared many values with the WWC.

My father was a man of endless sacrifice who nearly felt that fun was a sin. But he sure gave a lot of his money to us, though he moaned while he did. There’s a sense of deep generosity in my father that ran concurrently with the nearly masochistic workaholism, priggishness, suspicion of leisure and fun, and value of decent living, thrift, and deeply moral behavior. My father’s values were not that different from the rock-ribbed WWC family’s next door.

I am afraid that commenters and like Trash and Jason Y just do not understand the WWC or even WMC (the overlap) very well. I know these people like the back of my hand, though I do not share their values and honestly I despise a lot of their values as sanctimonious, silly, naive, masochistic, and ultimately reactionary. I never saw why they had to see life as such a hardass, miserable game. I always hated their contempt for the poor, the educated and the professional classes. Their love of the rich is disgusting and repellent. Their lack of proletarian consciousness and adopted bourgeois mindset (if only in fantasy) is infuriating. The contempt for the shiftless, the profligate, the irresponsible, and the hedonists seems vicious and senseless. I do not hate any of these people. Their embrace of the politics of resentment is sickening. Their racism makes me shake my head.

But hey look. They are not changing anytime soon. They are what they are. This is the way they are. This is their culture. It’s not going away, and in fact, it’s getting worse. We must deal with reality as it is, not as we wish it should be as females, SJW’s and other dreamer types are wont to do.

We must deal with the reality of these people and their culture, quit showering abuse on them, and figure out a way to get them to vote for us. We are not going to change their culture. Only they can do that, and I don’t think they want to change. If anything, they want to act even worse.

The first step to dealing with a problem is to define it and understand it in the first place. We must understand these people as they really are, not as our lies and fantasies make them out to be. You can’t get the right answer if you keep asking the wrong questions. We on the Left are not doing any of these things. We are failing to even remotely understand these people in the first place, which means we keep asking the wrong questions. The wrong questions just keep giving you the wrong answers, which is what we keep getting.

I would urge Democrats and liberals to read this article and attempt to deal with these people as they are, not as we wish and dream them to be, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. The response of the Democrats to the anti-SJW backlash has been to double down on the insanity and make everything worse. Like I said, they refuse to even ask the right questions.

And about the true dangers of what might happen when the WWC figures out that voting for Trump didn’t work and instead made things even worse. That’s right – they will go even further rightwing than they already area.

26 Comments

Filed under American, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Democrats, Higher Education, Labor, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics, USA, White Racism, Whites

Is Homosexuality Natural?

Answered on Quora. I don’t know I am answering all these damned gay questions. I think it is because almost all of the gay questions are full of gay people lying their fool heads off. At this point, almost all gays, lesbians, and trans types are some of the craziest and worst SJW’s of them all. They infest the whole Internet and they pitch a line in which almost not one single thing that they say is true. Like most IP groups, gays and trans types are allergic to nothing more than the truth.

 

About as natural as left handedness and probably caused by the same thing. A minority of people are lefthanded due to abnormalities in the prenatal environment. Hormonal abnormalities in the prenatal environment also seem to be implicated in homosexuality. So in left handedness and homosexuality, frankly something has gone wrong with normal prenatal environment. This is why only 10% of the population are southpaws and only 2% of the population are homosexuals.

I suppose we can say that some developmental abnormalities are natural, if not normal. If they were normal, majorities would be lefthanded or gay. If a small number of people experience a developmental disruption that results in them being markedly different, and if these disruptions occur at a steady rate, say 3%, then I suppose we can say that this is a natural process. Perhaps it is natural for say 3% of the population to end up this way due to variations in the womb environment.

4 Comments

Filed under Biology, Cultural Marxists, Gender Studies, Homosexuality, Left, Science, Sex

The Underlying Dynamic of all Identity Politics: “The Truth is Objectively Harmful for Our Group, Therefore We Must Lie to Protect Our Group”

  • Gay Politics is propaganda and recruitment advertising for all species of non-straights.
  • Feminism is propaganda for women and hate propaganda against men.
  • MRA is propaganda for men and hate propaganda against women.
  • Antiracism is propaganda for non-Whites and hate propaganda against Whites.
  • Trans politics is propaganda for trans and all species of nonbinary people.
  • BLM is propaganda for Blacks and hate propaganda against Whites.

One thing that all of these groups have in common is nearly incessant lying. Lately it has merged into out and out abuse of science. It’s social science, which isn’t even science anyway (mostly just lies and propaganda), but it’s still nasty to see it abused so much.

The line of all of these groups is that the truth is bad for the group.

  • Feminists feel the truth is harmful to women,  so they lie.
  • MRA’s say the truth is bad for men, so they lie.
  • Gay Politics in particular is adamant that the truth is objectively harmful to gays (in fact, they more or less openly say this) so it is necessary to lie to protect gays.
  • Trans politics feels that the truth is objectively harmful to trans people,  so they have made up a vast narrative of lies to protect trans folks from harm.
  • Antiracists say that HBD truth is harmful to non-Whites and objectively causes racism, so they have to lie to protect non-Whites from racism.

7 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Homosexuality, Left, Masculinism, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Sex, US Politics

Diglossia in China

Dear Robert

I have no basis on which to agree or disagree with your assessment of the linguistic situation in China. However, aren’t nearly all Chinese born after 1949 sufficiently conversant with official Mandarin to understand it, read it and also carry on a conversation in it? In that case, China would be a country with diglossia, with all the non-Mandarin languages/dialects spoken in informal settings between locals, and official Mandarin spoken in formal settings and between people of different regions.

Regards. James

The younger people speak, read, and write Putonghua (a version of Mandarin) very well. A lot of the older adults can do the same. I believe there may be some monolinguals of the other tongues out there. And there are also monolinguals under age 5. Some Westerners adopted a 2-3 year old girl, and the girl could only speak some obscure Gan language. It took them a while to figure what the Hell language she even spoke because it was not obvious and the tongue was not well-known.

A problem is that some varieties have actually developed their own Putonghuas now! So in a sense the experiment is having unexpected consequences. Putonghuas of various regions can hardly be understood by Putonghua speakers of other regions. So even the standard is starting to split! However, getting everyone to speak, read, and write was definitely a good idea.

My father was stationed in China in 1946 after the war for a while. The US occupied China for a while there. He said that when he was in Peking (the old Beijing), there were rickshaw drivers everywhere. If you wanted to get anywhere, you summoned a rickshaw. He said that the rickshaw drivers had the pens and pads and they were always running around offering the pens and pads to passengers and other drivers because the other person spoke some other lect, so they could not understand each other. But most of them could read and write Mandarin! So if worse came to worse and you could not talk to each other, you could always write it down! So actually, China had a Putonghua of sorts even before the Communist victory and the introduction of Putonghua.

And I do not believe that Putonghua was introduced in 1949. I think it took the Communists a little while to come up with it and formulate it properly.

The “Speak Mandarin” campaign has had some unintended consequences because it is not allowed to teach school in any language but Mandarin for Sinitic speakers. I believe that speakers of other tongues such as Tibetans can have home language education, which is considered a progressive thing. I know that teachers were still teaching classes in Shanghainese not so long ago. Also speaking dialects was discouraged and possibly even punished at school. I am not sure if even today you can take courses in other Chinese languages at school. But the Mandarin only campaign went too far and it has led to the destruction of a lot of the less spoken varieties, which in many cases are full languages and not dialects at all. So it has been very controversial.

3 Comments

Filed under Asia, China, Chinese language, Language Families, Left, Linguistics, Mandarin, Maoism, Marxism, Regional, Sinitic, Sino-Tibetan, Sociolinguistics, World War 2

Opinion: The Alt Left Should Be Neither Feminist Nor for Men’s Rights. It Should Be for Good Relationships between the Sexes

Great piece by Ryan England. Personally, I feel things are far, far, far too gone for this and this sort of pacifism is just not going to work. England is calling for unilateral disarmament on the part of the men and then sending us unarmed men in to negotiate with savage, ISIS-like terrorists (the feminists). That’s not going to work. It’s like bringing a knife to a gunfight. It would be great if this would be enough but I am afraid that things are far too gone for that now and the only thing left is the more extreme measures. Hey, the feminists started it. They started shooting at us men. You want a war, baby? Bring it on!

Beyond Feminist vs. MRA

OPINION: THE ALT-LEFT SHOULD BE NEITHER FEMINIST NOR FOR MEN’S RIGHTS. IT SHOULD BE FOR GOOD RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE SEXES.

It’s a familiar story for anyone who’s been online for any length of time. A discussion starts over a gender or feminism-related topic.  There’ve been plenty of these lately since the Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment scandal broke in Hollywood and the metoo hashtag campaign, so there’s no shortage of examples to choose from. There’s nothing unique about these conversations, however. They’ve been taking place on social media since Facebook and Twitter first launched and were commonplace on bulletin boards long before anyone knew what a comments section was. The basic conversation hasn’t changed much in the decades since Al Gore invented the internet. A typical conversation will go something like this.

Feminist: Men rape and harass women. That’s why men suck and women should reject them.

MRA: But not all men. But not me. That should give me an advantage in the mating game with women, should it not?

Feminist: But only men. Plus patriarchy, power, privilege, rape culture, etc. Not so fast, buster!  You’re part of the segment of the population that does the most rape and who benefits from rape and are therefore not so innocent as you’d like to believe. And therefore suck no less and are no less deserving of rejection.

MRA: But what about false accusations? What about women who sexually assault men? This nullifies the advantage you claimed in your previous statement. Therefore, women should more readily accept and sleep with us. I mean me!

It’s never long before a conversation like this breaks down, and school yard level copypasta insults break out. “Boo hoo! Eh poor menz!” “Enjoy your cats!” So on and so on. It’ll inevitably come down to one or both sides being ugly, living in their parent’s basements, and being unable to get laid. This is due to the fact that the surface conversation is never nearly as important as the subtext that continually underlies conflicts over gender theory and its real world implications.

The unstated but nonetheless omnipresent axioms that are revealed when any kind of deconstructive analysis is applied to such discussions are that male power is expressed through sexual conquest of the female, and that female power is expressed through sexual rejection of the male. All else is ancillary. Which is largely why pro and anti feminists talk past one another and at one another far, far more than with one another. The legitimate issues raised by either side fall by the wayside because they’re obviously being weaponized to one or the other of those two ultimate effects.

The real purpose for bringing up rape, harassment, divorce, child support, or any other issue, at least in online discussion, is to lower the value of one gender relative to the other for the ultimate purpose of making sex either easier (in favor of men) or harder (in favor of women) to attain.

There’s just one problem with this paradigm, however. It doesn’t work. It’s not making anyone happy. It’s based in a glaringly flawed assessment of human nature and is much more rooted in ego than in reason or human empathy. Men were not rejected into sympathizing with women’s concerns. They go their own way instead, doubtlessly with the intent of bringing those pesky, uppity women to heel. No dice: women are angrier now than ever. Who’d have guessed? The result is that heterosexual activity has been driven into a kind of moral black market wherein most people actually do it at some point or another but also have to conceal it, rationalize it, or engage in it under some kind of false pretenses much of the time to avoid social censure. No wonder bad behavior abounds.

It’s time to smarten up, people. Get out of the grade school mentality. Let’s at least try and hit puberty, okay internet? Human nature is not especially complicated. We tend to simmer down when we feel that our concerns are being heard and taken somewhat seriously, even if disagreed with in some ways. The natural response of people when faced with a lecturing, condescending tone is to get defensive, not to open one’s heart or mind. This is true however legitimate the surface grievance actually is or is not. Which isn’t to say you accept bullshit uncontested. Rather, let your assessment of what’s bullshit and what isn’t depend on honest appraisal, which you can’t get without listening and understanding.

Whatever your claim to victimhood past or present, however poorly you were treated as a child or in your past relationships, other people, even the opposite sex, will not accept your shitty and abusive behavior. Not indefinitely at any rate. However much you feel entitled to it. Two wrongs don’t make a right. This is something we feel instinctively if not intellectually. It stops mattering who started it or who inflicted or suffered the greater suffering after a point. Neither women nor men will accept the other’s claim to morally superior status based on previous victimhood and grievance even if real.

It is easy to say that we should set our fragile egos aside and listen seriously to the other side when they lay out their grievances and issues. This is true. But when the other side does not expect this of themselves, even the most legitimate gripe becomes tainted by the ultimately self-serving purpose to which it is put. The kinds of behavior displayed by feminists and MRAs alike in most internet discussions between the two would be emotionally abusive were they done in real life, and increasingly these kinds of relationship dynamics are spilling out of cyberspace and into the real world. It is no wonder that growing numbers of people, especially the young, are eschewing relationships with the opposite sex all together and claiming to be happier doing so.

And that’s fine for some individuals. If you’re happier going it alone, and I think some people are naturally disposed this way, have at it.

But that’ll be a disaster for society as a whole. Fewer lasting successful marriages and long term relationships (LTR’s) are poised to cause all kinds of problems down the road. Demographic and economic dependency ratios are bound to get worse, and socially destabilizing levels of mass immigration will need to be employed to compensate for falling birth rates. Frustrated romantic and sexual drives will find expression in other usually more antisocial ways from mounting political or religious extremism to mental health problems and increased cynicism.

Even many, though not all, of those who claim to be happier being single are not so much once you scratch the surface. A certain regret often though not always presents itself. And why not? Humans were not hardwired to live alone and not pass on their genes to future generations. A society losing its capacity for love and empathy is not one we should aspire to be a part of.

So here’s a proposal. The Alt-Left should be neither feminist nor MRA. Not exclusively. We should be instead for healthy and good relationship dynamics, be they platonic, romantic, or erotic. We should listen to the concerns of both sides and sort the valid and legitimate grievances from the entitled whining and vapid boasting. It should not be a concern of the Alt-Left which of the two has the more legitimate grievances and is therefore more deserving. Ten years and God knows how many flame wars into the social media age later, we should know by now that ideological partisanship and competitive victimhood isn’t actually helping anybody. It’s driving a spiral of mutual frustration that is causing increased polarization and extremism.

Even if one gender really does have it worse than the other by a wide margin, our approach should be one of mutual listening and empathy, not one of grievance and vengeance. This is not to say that we can’t prioritize some issues over others or that wrongdoers can’t be called out and exposed to such sanction and censure as their actions warrant. But it should never be an ego stroking exercise. Even if you’ve had it worse or your sex or gender has been on the receiving end of injustice, the world doesn’t owe you anything, whatever you may think. Success, be it alone or in partnership, derives from responsibility, not entitlement.

So if you’re single or attached, male or female, here are some things you can do vis-a-vis the opposite sex to improve the situation. And in case you are wondering, this is over twenty years of relationship success (I’ve been with my present wife since 1995) and a decade of every mistake imaginable leading up to it, talking. There’s much I learned the hard way:

  • Listen. Nothing is more effective at defusing anger.
  • Do not stereotype the opposite sex unironically or for non-comedic purposes.
  • Stop with the vain, stupid games. Crushing some young man or woman’s confidence in him/herself won’t bring down the patriarchy or gynocentrism, and it doesn’t make you strong or independent. It makes you an asshole, be you male or female.
  • Do not participate in discussions that tend to descend into pissing contests of competitive victimhood, and clearly state this. Ask instead, “What do you want?”  That’s a powerful question that can very effectively shut down entitled whiners with weaponized grievances.
  • You are owed nothing. Approach all relationships with the opposite sex or with anyone with that in mind. This is not to say that you should tolerate shit and abuse. Don’t. But don’t expect to be put on a pedestal either.
  • Do not have as an expectation for an ideal partner a trait you do not have or can not match. Half of our problems stem from 6’s thinking they’re actually good matches for 10’s, so to speak. Do not expect a prince if you’re not a princess or vice versa. And assess yourself honestly to save a lot of trouble.
  • Live a good life outside of a relationship context. This signifies that you will not be dead weight but instead a net asset in other people’s lives. No one wants a needy dependent.
  • Trust must come before any kind of relationship intimacy, be it physical or emotional. Always. Take it upon yourself to earn rather than demand trust. Decide at what point your efforts are in vain and when to move on.
  • Do not expect from a relationship partner anything that you can do for yourself.  Relationship success thrives best when free of contrived obligations and expectations. Otherwise resentments creep in and do damage.
  • Do not be afraid to point out the elements and their underlying axioms (see above for examples) in gendered discussions but do so only if the person you’re discussing things with becomes obstinate, obtuse, or clearly hostile. The underlying pettiness and stupidity become readily apparent when brought to light.
  • Likewise, if need be, remind people that two wrongs don’t make a right. Plus, no man was ever rejected, nagged, scolded or castrated into liking and respecting women. No woman was ever convinced by rational argument or else likewise rejected, scolded or shamed into liking men. People don’t work that way. Don’t hesitate to point this out.
  • Make your disdain for passive-aggressiveness clear, if need be.
  • If people insist on dominating conversations with socially destabilizing displays of rudeness, sarcasm or hostility, do not be afraid to call them out on it and exclude them from further social activities. If you moderate or administer an online or social media space, you have a special responsibility here. Trolls thrive on the emotionally destabilizing effect that their refusal to be decent and reasonable people has. Do not tolerate it, and ban them at once.
  • Admit that the opposite sex doesn’t always have it easy.  Try to replace resentment with walking in the other man or woman’s shoes, as the case may be. This isn’t to say it’s equally bad on both sides, all the time. Occasionally people will need to be told to stop whining.
  • Do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to clumsiness or ignorance without evidence. This is especially true with flirtation, flattery, or the like.

And above all …

  • Get the f**k off the Internet every once and awhile. Yeah, I know. It’s hard. But there are numerous dynamics that contribute to the Internet being a relatively uncivil place where your faith in humanity can easily go to die. Meet people in the real world from time to time. They’re usually (though not always) not what they appear to be when seen as just a social media profile.

So that in mind, get out there and see the world, dear reader!

2 Comments

Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Left, Man World, Masculinism, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology

A Call to All Liberal and Leftist MRA’s: Please Join Us in Building an Anti-Feminist Left!

I submitted a post something like this to a couple of Reddit boards, including Men’s Rights and Masculinism. Masculinism is probably saner. Men’s Rights are MRA’s and most of them are nuts. Men’s Rights buried my post somehow. Masculinism kept it up there, and we will see what the response is, if any. It’s a low-volume group. There’s no way to post on Redpill, and it’s probably a waste of time anyway. Men’s Liberation are some feminist MRA’s. It’s crap. It’s part of the feminist movement, thought I will grant that it’s a bit more sane than feminism. Men’s Liberation started out great. Warren Farrell was one of the founders, but it went full SJW long ago. There’s probably something worthwhile there, but they would never accept a post like this.

Regarding this post:

I believe that the Alt Left should incorporate anti-feminism as a core value. Nevertheless, that statement is an extreme one. I think there are many good things about feminism, but some things are so horrific that they have poisoned the entire movement. In particular, they seem to have morphed into Puritanical, Victorian, prudish, frigid Comstocks who seem out to shut down all heterosexual sex as illegal or a societal transgression.

I am an MRA. In fact, I am an ultra-MRA. Nevertheless, I do not like many things about the MRA movement. In fact, I hate the MRA movement. The MRA’s are almost as bad as the feminists. Nevertheless, the toxicity of modern feminism must be opposed. Mostly I feel like Ryan Englund that the MRA movement is the other side of the mirror of the feminist movement. They are basically the same thing while being opposites of one another. And I am very concerned that the MRA movement is becoming just another Identity Politics rabbithole.

I also, like Warren Farrell, came out of the feminist movement back when it was sane. I was actually a dues-paying member of NOW for a number of years, much to my mother’s pride. I would not join NOW at the moment if you put a gun to my head. I still support liberal feminism, equity feminism, and sex positive feminism. Nevertheless, it is clear that feminism is a clear and present danger to all real men in the West. And as this feminist cancer spreads beyond the West, all men on the planet will soon be menaced.

Yes, we hate feminism, but we are Leftists! Or at least the movement as it started was a Leftist movement. The real Alt Left worth defending has morphed into a Leftist wing and a liberal wing. The rest are just rightwingers, and most are supporting Trump. I have renounced all of them.

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/18/proposal-for-an-alternative-left/

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/dealbreakers-what-the-alternative-left-is-not/

Those are two early foundational documents.

We are a big tent movement with a philosophy of “everyone form your own wing.” That’s not completely true, but what I mean is that except for a small set of non-negotiables, everyone construct your own ideology via picking and choosing the beliefs that suit you best. We are not party line, and we don’t have a lot of litmus tests.

The early founders were straight, masculine men who love sex. Such men either do not exist on the Left anymore or they are being burned at the stake as witches. However, one of our top thinkers is also a gay man. Nevertheless, we do not spend a lot of time on Gay Rights. The Cultural Left has that area pretty much covered. I myself support gay political causes and I even work on them. I am on a number of gay political mailing lists and I work for their causes. A lot of them hate my guts and call me homophobe, but I will continue to work for them no matter how many names they call me. For the most part, gay rights is a matter of doing the right thing. People deserve basic rights whether they like me or not.

We started out as race realists, but most of the movement has rejected that.

Mostly we just think the Cultural Left is out of its head. A lot of us are social conservatives to some extent, but we are not femiservatives and we despise the social conservatism is the US Republican Party. The principal nonnegotiable is on economics. You must be Left on economics! No exceptions! Other than that social conservatism is ok. Some have called us conservative Leftists or socially conservative Leftists. But at least my wing are radical social libertarians.

I came out of the Left. I was a member of the Communist Party USA. I even got a membership card! I used to be on the mailing list for the Weathermen. I bought guns for the Marxist rebels in El Salvador. You get the picture. But a man-hating psychotic feminist Left is something I want no part of.

As a Leftist, I am utterly sickened and disgusted at the reactionary nature of nearly the entire MRA movement. It’s vile and disgusting. We are MRA’s, but we want no part of these ruling class suck-ups. We are for the workers, the working MEN in particular!

Peace out, from a brother to the brotherhood.

I make this post as a call to all lonely MRA liberals and liberals and Leftists wandering in the political wilderness. I call on all of you to come join us to help us build a real anti-feminist, pro-men Left!

5 Comments

Filed under Civil Rights, Conservatism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Masculinism, Political Science, Politics, Radical Feminists, Republicans, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, US Politics

A Motto of the Alt Left, Via Liberation Theology

La gente, unida! Jamas sera vencido!

The people, united! Will never be defeated!

– An old Castroite Marxist revolutionary chant from Central America and South America, with roots back especially to the great Sandinistas in Nicaragua, the FMLN in El Salvador (who I used to buy guns for), the URNG in Guatemala, probably the ELN in Colombia, and probably the great FARC in Colombia.

All of these movements except the FARC were “Christian Communists” or “Catholic Communists.” Most of the rank and file guerrillas all the way up to the leadership were Catholics. In Nicaragua, leader Daniel Ortega was and still is a practicing Catholic and one of the top leaders of the Sandinistas was Tomas Borge, a Catholic priest. The ELN was led by a former Catholic priest named Camilo Torres, who traded his frock for an AK-47 and led a guerrilla group in the mountains of northwestern Colombia. He was killed soon after he started the ELN in 1964. The ELN has never renounced its Catholic roots and is a de facto “Catholic Marxist” organization.

 

The Eastern Catholic Church or Eastern Orthodox have been much more progressive than the  Catholic hierarchy, but that was not so at the  beginning of the century when the Cheka executed over 12,000 top ranking Orthodox officials in first several years of the Revolution. The Russian Orthodox Church or at least many believers are quite leftwing these days. They often hobnob with Communists, Leftists and even monarchists. Even the monarchists are pretty leftwing in Russia today.  Russia is a place where everyone is leftwing. There is no Right in Russia. Well actually there is,  but the Right has only 10-15% support. Putin’s party is defined as “Russian conservatism” but Putin says he still believes in the  ideals of Communism and socialism which he regards as very similar to the Biblical values of the Russian Orthodox Church. This marriage is not unusual and high ranking Church officials even today regularly make pro-socialist and pro-Communist remarks. Sort of ” Jesus as a Bolshevik” if you will. Stalin himself was studying to be a priest in a sen\minary of the Georgian Orthodox Church when he gave it up to be a full-time bank robber/revolutionary.  The thing is that you cannot understand Stalin at all until you understand his deep background in the Orthodox religion. Although Stalin called himself an atheist, he remained deeply Orthodox in  his mindset until he died. He ever revived the Church during and after the war for patriotic reasons. Stalin was very much a social conservative and his social conservatism was deeply inflected by his Georgian Orthodox seminarian roots, which he never renounced.

The Orthodox Christian churches of the Arab World have always been leftwing, along with the Church in Iran and Turkey. George Habash, founder of the Marxist PFLP in Palestine, was a Greek Orthodox. Many of the rank and file even of the PFLP armed guerrilla have always been Orthodox Christians. The Greek Orthodox SSNP in Lebanon and Syria are practically Communists. Interestingly, this was the first group to widely use suicide bombings early in 1982 and 1983 in the first years of the Lebanese Civil War. Most of the first suicide bombings, up to scores or hundreds in first few years, were by Communists, often Christian Orthodox Communists. Many of these suicide bombers were even women. It was only later that the Shia adopted the technique.

The man who created the Baath Party, the Iraqi Michel Aflaq, was an Orthodox Christian. The party had Leftist roots as an officially socialist party. Tariq Aziz, high-ranking member of Saddam’s Baath party, was an Orthodox Christian and a Leftist. Assad’s party in Syria is a Leftist party. Most Syrian Orthodox Christians are strong supporters of Assad, the Baath Party and Leftism. Recently the Syrian Defense Minister was a Christian.

The few Orthodox Christians left in Turkey are typically Leftists.

Many Greek Orthodox are Leftists. Serbian Orthodox laypeople and hierarchy long supported Milosevic, who was a Communist.

The Russians who violently split away from Ukraine in the Donbass were so Leftist that they called their new states “people’s republics.” Most of the leadership and the armed forces are Orthodox Christians. The armed groups had priests serving alongside in most cases. They often led battlefield burials for the troops.

There are deep roots of this sort of thing in Russia. Tolstoy is very Christian in an Orthodox sense, but he is also often seen as a socialist. Dostoevsky’s work is uber-Christian from an Orthodox point of view and he is not very friendly to radicals. However, before he started writing, he was arrested for Leftist revolutionary activities and sentenced to prison in Siberia. Most of his colleagues were hanged and Dostoevsky only barely escaped by the tip of his nose. Dostoevsky was not very nice to the rich either. No Russian writer of that time was, not even Turgenev. The rich destroyed 19th Century Russia. Anyone with eyes can see that. It would have been hard for any artistic heart above room temperature to not hate the Russian rich and feel sympathy for the peasantry. Turgenev’s first books were paeans to the Russian peasantry, and he was raised on an estate!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under Catholicism, Central America, Christianity, Colombia, Economics, El Salvador, Eurasia, Europe, Greece, Guatemala, Iran, Iraq, Latin America, Lebanon, Left, Literature, Marxism, Middle East, Nicaragua, Novel, Orthodox, Palestine, Politics, Regional, Religion, Revolution, Russia, Serbia, Socialism, South America, Syria, Turkey, USSR

Liberation Theology: Jesus Christ as Marxist Guerrilla in the Jungle with a Machine Gun

From the Sandinistas of Nicaragua to the URNG of Guatemala to the guerrilla column in Honduras led by the Irish Catholic priest in 1983 to Father Aristide’s Lavalas in Haiti to the ELN in Colombia to the Chavistas in Venezuela, all of these radical leftwing groups had one thing in common: they all came out of Liberation Theology, more or less a “Jesus Christ, Marxist guerrilla in the jungle with a machine gun” type of armed to the teeth Catholicism.

Liberation Theology came out a movement of Professors of Pedagogy in Brazil in 1964, especially an influential book written by a priest named Gutierrez. The argument was that teaching in Latin America was an overtly political act, and teachers should ideally by Leftist revolutionaries. Out of this flowed many documents laying out Liberation Theology or “the preferential option for the poor.” It was most powerful among lay workers, of which there are many in Latin America. In heavily Catholic areas, Catholic lay workers are nearly an army.

The French Communist Party in  France long had Catholic roots as did the PCI in Italy. Near the end of his life, Fidel Castro praised Catholicism and said he was a “cultural Catholic.” Hugo Chavez and the Chavistas were of course a ferocious part of the Catholic Left. Chavez Leftism was heavily infused with the social teachings of the Catholic Church.

Even the viciously anti-Christian Sendero Luminoso in Peru had many supporters in the Catholic Church, mostly at the lay and priest level but surprisingly all the way up to the bishop level. Sendero killed many reactionary Protestant missionaries in their war, but they left the priests alone.

The great Edith Lagos, a 19 year old year revolutionary woman who led one of the first Sendero columns, was killed in battle in 1982. Her funeral in Ayacucho at night a bit later attracted 30,000 visitors, nearly the entire population of the town. Everyone was in line for the funeral – the local police, the local government and of course the entire local  Catholic clergy. The line wormed all through the city for hours far into the night. She was treated to an actual Catholic funeral right there in the church led by the local priest. Her casket stood next to the priest as he delivered his sermon. It had a Sendero Communist flag on it.

A communist flag on a coffin in a Catholic church! The crowd then filed out through the town to the graveyard where she was buried in the middle of the night. Her tomb exists to this day, although it has been repeatedly bombed by reactionaries. Local Indians make patronages to the tomb on a regular basis, leaving flowers at it. Rumor has it that she has obtained informal sainthood and is now Saint Edith Lagos in the local Catholic Churches.

FARC called itself officially atheist, although they had the support of many priests in the countryside where the FARC held sway. Nevertheless, most FARC rank and file were Catholics.

In Paraguay, a former guerrilla was elected president. He was also a former Catholic priest.

The armed Marxist Left in Uruguay and Brazil also had deep links to the Catholic Church.

In the US, we have something called Cold War liberals. This is the pathetic Left of the United States,  people who would be rightwingers or center-right anywhere else on Earth.

 

 

 

4 Comments

Filed under Brazil, Caribbean, Catholicism, Central America, Christianity, Colombia, Conservatism, Cuba, Europe, France, Haiti, Honduras, Italy, Latin America, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Regional, Religion, South America, Uruguay, USA, Venezuela

The Reactionary Catholic Church Hierarchy and a Link to Secretive Syncretic Religions of the Middle East

The Catholic Church hierarchy nearly everywhere has been reactionary.  The Catholic Church had been in with the ruling classes in Europe forever. This was one of the main reasons why the Bible was never translated into the vernacular and why masses were always held in Latin. The people could neither read not speak Latin, hence there was a huge disconnect between the Church hierarchy and the people.

This is similar to many other religions, especially eclectic religions of the Middle East such as Yezidism, Alawism and Druze. In all of these religions, the secrets of the religion are usually held in secret by a priestly caste of mostly men, though the Druze actually have female priests. For a long time, the secret book of the Yezidis was thought  to not even exist except perhaps only in oral form – this is how secret it was. This ended when an actual copy fell into Western hands around 1900.

In all of these religions, the “real true” religion is in the hands of the priestly caste and they make sure not to tell any outsiders what the religion is about. Hence it has been very hard to get good data on any of these religions. The people are fed some watered down version of the religion that doesn’t mean much of anything and  if you ask the average Alwai, Druze or Yezidi what their religion is about, you will only get some diluted harmless synopsis acceptable for outside ears. Usually what the people say the religion believes and what it really believes are two different things altogether.

The Catholic Church was in with the rich and in Europe especially in the Middle Ages it was very wealthy. It was this extreme wealth that enabled the Church to build those huge architectural masterpieces we see in the form of Medieval churches across the north of Europe, especially in France and England. They sold the peasants pie in the sky when you die like religions always do. It was this anti-people, pro-rich philosophy that made Marx so hostile to religion. He was not so much against it because he was a materialist and he thought it was superstition; he was also against it because he thought it was reactionary.

The hierarchy of the Church remained reactionary all through the  20th Century. Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador and the four Catholic priests assassinated in 1989 at the start of the great guerrilla offensive (a crime that was plotted in the US ambassador’s office of the US Embassy two days before) were the exceptions to this rule. The Church hierarchy in Venezuela and Nicaragua remain rightwing and hostile to the Sandinistas and Chavistas to this very day. Same with the church hierarchy in Spain to the best of my knowledge.

1 Comment

Filed under Alawi, Catholicism, Central America, Christian, Christianity, Druze, El Salvador, Europe, History, Islam, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Marxism, Middle Ages, Nicaragua, Political Science, Regional, Religion, Shiism, South America, Spain, Venezuela, Yezidism