Category Archives: Philosophy

Lousy Arguments the Left Uses to Counter “Racist Facts”

Below is a list of the “racist facts” that I listed in a previous post.

Blacks Have Made Much Progress in Ameliorating Black Problems and  Discrepancies

 

Yes, Blacks have closed the achievement gap by 1/3, which shows it was not purely genetic. However, 2/3 of the gap remains. Blacks in the UK have closed the achievement gap completely according to scores on the latest high school achievement tests.

Yes, the Black crime rate can go down and has gone down dramatically in the last 25 years. But that occurred at the same time as the crime rate for everyone dropping dramatically.  It’s definitely true that you can have large swings in the Black crime rate. Black violent crime is down 40%. That wouldn’t be the case if it was all down to genes.

Nevertheless, crime reduction becomes an arms race as the White rate declines concurrently with the Black rate so the Black 8X discrepancy remains. Yes, there are Black societies in Africa with over 1 million members who have homicide rates as low as the Japanese. This shows that a high Black crime and violent crime is not a genetic inevitability. An excellent environment which does not occur naturally very often can wipe out the entire Black tendency towards crime and violence (and I believe it is a genetic tendency). The problem is that replicating these “superenvironments” seems to be quite difficult.

The Black IQ gap has closed significantly among Black children, among whom it has closed by 40%, and in places like Barbados and Bermuda, where it has closed by 50%. Nevertheless a significant gap remains. Blacks have closed the standardized test score gap in high school in the UK. Such scores can be seen as proxies for IQ.

The Black single parent rate was quite low in the 1950’s when 80% of Black children lived with a mother and father. So single parenthood is not a genetic inevitability.

There are wealthy Black areas like Baldwin Hills and Ladera Heights that reportedly have low crime rates. They are the opposite of rundown, slummy, blighted, dangerous Hellholes. Apparently if you get a lot of wealthy Blacks in one place, they can create a well-functioning metropolis.

However, in general, it seems that not a whole lot can be done to ameliorate the Black problems and discrepancies below. This is why most of the people talking about such things resort to extreme solutions such as bringing back Jim Crow and legal discrimination or forming a separate White state. They advocate such extreme solutions  because those are the only real ways to deal with the problems below.  The problem here is that the solution is immoral. Immoral solutions are not acceptable no matter the problem.

Why Bother Writing about “Racist Facts?”

If there’s no solution, and if writing about this just gets me called racist, makes Blacks and liberals hate me, and stimulates a lot of White racism, why bother to write about this stuff unless I want to use these facts as a stick to beat Black people with? See what I mean? That’s why I don’t bother to write about these things. There’s no way to fix them, and all writing about them does is cause a lot of bad vibes, exacerbate hostility and racism in society, and make even more people hate me. Why do it?

Bad Arguments Used by the Left to Counter “Racist Facts”

Nevertheless, the Left still has no arguments or very poor arguments for all of the facts below.  I would like to point out first of all that the Left gets away with calling all of the above facts racist because they say they are lies.

Even things like “Black schools tend to perform more poorly,” they will say is a lie because it’s a generalization. They will say, “Lots of Black students do very well in school, so that’s a racist lie!” I would like to point out first of all that the Left gets away with calling all of the above facts racist because they say they are lies. Even things like “Black schools tend to perform more poorly” they will say is a lie because it’s a generalization. They will say, “Lots of Black students do very well in school, so that’s a racist lie!” The rest of them, they will just say they are not true.

I will list the previously stated facts below along with the bad arguments that liberals use to try to refute them. I would like to point out that all of these liberal rejoinders are very bad arguments. All are illogical or do not even attempt to counter the original statement. And in general, they rely in a huge way on all sorts of logical fallacies.

  •    Black people are less intelligent than Whites as measured accurately by IQ tests. They will say that’s a lie.
  •     Black people impose considerable costs on society. They will say that’s a lie. White people impose costs on society too, so therefore the statement is a lie.
  •     Your average Hispanic has an IQ of 90. They will say that’s a lie.   
  •     Blacks commit 8X more crime than Whites. They will either say that’s a lie, or it’s due to poverty (which means it’s still true) or that Whites commit just as much crime except they commit corporate crime.
  •     Blacks are 13% of the population but commit over half the violent crime. They will say that’s a lie, or resort to the poverty non-argument, or talk about Whites and corporate crime, imperialism, or White historical crimes like settler-colonialism or slavery.
  •     Large cities with high percentages of Black people tend to be slummy, dangerous, rundown, blighted hellholes. They will ask you to define those terms, say there are nice areas in all of those cities, say it is due to discrimination (which means it’s still a fact), or say White cities are slummy too.
  •     Blacks tend to be more impulsive than Whites. They will say that’s a lie and demand evidence. Never mind the candy bar test originally done in the Caribbean and now replicated ~15 times.
  •     80% of Black kids are born to a single mother. They will say that’s because of racism or because Whites took all the jobs away.
  •     Many Black men do not stick around and take care of their children. Same thing. Racism makes them do it, or Whites stole all the jobs.
  •     Most prison rape is Black on White. Almost none is the other way around. They will say it’s a lie and demand proof. Or they will bring up some weird case of a White raping a Black and say it’s a lie because Whites rape Blacks too.
  •     Blacks have quite high rates of STD’s. They will say Whites get STD’s too or it’s due to poverty or racism (which means it’s still true).
  •     Heavily Black schools tend to perform poorly. First they will say it’s not true, then they will say it’s due to poverty and racism.
  •     Blacks tend to be poorer than Whites at postponing instant gratification. See the candy bar studies. Liberals reject all of these studies as flawed even though they have been replicated 15 times.
  •     One of the main reasons so many Blacks get shot by police is because they commit so much crime. They will say that Whites commit crime too.
  •     Black people tend to be louder than White people. They will say that Whites are loud too and bring up some example of loud White people.

6 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Blacks, Civil Rights, Corrections, Crime, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Hispanics, Intelligence, Law, Law enforcement, Left, Philosophy, Police Brutality, Psychology, Race Realism, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites

Is Political Correctness Valued More Than Factual Correctness in Quora?

Answered on Quora:

Absolutely. Most of the time my answers have been flagged as violations of “Be Nice, Be Respectful,” I was simply reporting things that were 100% factual, in my opinion. Or at least reasonable opinions that almost any intelligent, rational and unbiased person would realize are factual. Did you hear that?

Almost all of my warnings have been from posting facts! Inconvenient facts, yes, but facts nonetheless. You see PC is based on the idea that if the truth offends you, it’s not true. So all facts that are offensive to PC people, including a vast range of common knowledge, common sense and even science, are deemed racist, sexist, homophobic and transphobic lies.

Apparently:

  • The truth is racist.
  • The truth is sexist.
  • The truth is homophobic.
  • The truth is transphobic.

Not only that, but PC people will try to destroy anyone who reports and inconvenient or unpleasant fact that violates the PC Commissars’ version of truth.

As far as philosophy goes, PC people’s versions of truth and falsehood are pretty interesting from a philosophical POV. I wonder how many famous philosophers would agree with the PC nation that:

  • Truth: That which does not offend me and is true
  • Falsehood: That which is not true or is true but offends me.

I would think almost all of the world’s most famous philosophers would reject that definition.

2 Comments

Filed under Cultural Marxists, Philosophy

As an Exceptionally/Profoundly Gifted Person (IQ 146+), What Are Your Thoughts on Derrida, Foucault, and Lacan?

Answered on Quora.

Thanks for the A2A. I am familiar with all three.

Lacan is completely full of it. Not only that, he was a fraud who ripped off his clients. He may have ripped off all of us with his nonsense.

Derrida is nonsensical too. He simply made no sense whatsoever. Apparently that is the idea.

Both men took modern philosophy off into postmodernism where nothing is true, so apparently nothing makes sense either. Most of their work is sheer nonsense or strings of incomprehensible or made-up words that sound important or intelligent but really are simply nonsensical.

Foucalt may be a bit more grounded, but I am not sure. I have not studied him enough. But I know some anti-postmodernists hate him and say he is full of crap.

I meet your intelligence qualifications, so it can’t be that I am too stupid to understand these charlatans. If I can’t understand them, I doubt if anyone can.

We need to get off the postmodernist nonsense train and back into the real world where things are supposed to be comprehensible and make sense.

6 Comments

Filed under Europe, France, Intelligence, Philosophy, Psychology, Regional

Defend Your People

An African immigrant attacks a Chinese beggar. It goes on for 10 seconds before a patriotic young Chinese man jumps in to defend his people.

Everyone, please, always defend your people. It’s the honorable thing to do. A people who will not defend themselves are doomed to destruction.

21 Comments

Filed under Asia, Asians, Back to Africa Candidates, Blacks, China, Chinese (Ethnic), Ethics, Immigration, Philosophy, Race/Ethnicity, Regional

Male Homosexuality and Lesbianism as “Syndromes”

 Jynxi: I’m glad you cleared that up because that was exactly my conclusion. That being said, how would you go about classifying homosexuality? Would it not be a type of BDD light?

Homosexuality is not a sin and it’s not chosen anyway. I am not much of a Christian, but it seems hard to figure out if it is a sin considering that God obviously made these people gay.

Homosexuality itself is not a mental disorder. Just because a man is turned on by men and not women or a woman is turned on by women and not men doesn’t mean that that man or woman is crazy. It’s not nuts or crazy to have a sexual preference for your own sex and not the opposite sex.

And it makes no sense to call the whole homosexual syndrome a mental illness because many gay men and possibly lesbians are extremely healthy psychologically. You can’t have mental disorders where the sufferers are very well-adjusted and mentally healthy. That goes against the definition of a disorder.

Nevertheless, both male homosexuality and lesbianism, while not being mental illnesses, still resemble them. In other words, homosexuality is not a mental illness, but it looks like one! This is because there is so much pathology that seems to go along inevitably with these orientations when you look at them as groups.

The PC claim is that all homosexual pathologies are due to discrimination. However, recent surveys have found high levels of all sorts of pathologies in both gays and lesbians even in places like Sweden and most recently in the Netherlands. Gays are more accepted there than anywhere on Earth, so the gays can’t use the discrimination excuse which they always use to handwave away all gay and lesbian pathology.

Male homosexuality and lesbianism on average cut a full 20 years off your lifespan. The most recent studies showing a 20 year lifespan reduction have come out of Sweden, Denmark and Canada. Gays also say that the 20 year reduced lifespan is due to discrimination, but this is hard to reckon with in places like Sweden and Denmark where there is little discrimination against gays. Gay men who die of non-HIV causes only live a few years longer than those who die of HIV, and lesbians who are not affected by HIV don’t live any longer than gay men.

The implication is that all of the pathologies and the reduced lifespan are simply inherent aspects of this homosexual syndrome when look at the groups as a whole. There is something inherent in homosexuality in many cases that causes you to be unhappy, have all sorts of problems and die young.

However, if you believe in Natural Law, homosexuality seems to be violation of Natural Law. Obviously nature wants men and women to pair off and make babies. When that gets messed up as in women raising children alone or homosexual couples raising children, all sorts of problems seem to develop. The children have quite a few more problems than those raised by a father and mother.

A household with a father and a mother continues to be the best for children. This doesn’t really make sense unless you think that possibly Nature wants it this way, or perhaps we have evolved to raise children this way. If the latter, we might not be adapted to raising children in other ways very well.

Homosexual relationships both gay and lesbian seem to run into all sorts of problems. First of all, they usually end up caricaturing heterosexual relationships with one playing the dominant and masculine man and another the submissive and feminine woman in both gay male and lesbian relationships. That even gays end up caricaturing the basic heterosexual pattern implies once again that this is either Natural Law or we have evolved that way (possibly “Natural Law” might mean nothing other than the way we have evolved).

Gay relationships seem almost inherently pathological. They do not seem to last long. 91% of even lesbians never have a relationship that lasts more than five years, and gay men are even worse. Hell, even I did better than that. Gay male couples are 4-5 X more likely to suffer from domestic violence than straight couples are. Lesbians beat each other up so often and so badly that their rates are off charts, worse than even gay men’s rates.

Lesbians often fall into what is called Lesbian Bed Death where they have sex once a month if that often. No one knows why this happens, but perhaps lesbian relationships lack the male “charge” that may be necessary to fire up female sexuality. Lesbians try to imitate the charge by having one woman play the male role, but maybe it doesn’t work.

Gay men typically have notoriously unstable relationships which are much more temporary even than those of lesbians. Gay male life often revolves around a never-ending swirl of temporary and often one-time or even anonymous relationships. A survey out of Australia in 2000 showed that many gay men were continuing to have sex with more than 100 men per year. And this is long after the wild promiscuity of the 1970’s that preceded the HIV epidemic calmed down to much lower levels in  the 1980’s. Even at this late date, gay men are very promiscuous.

All of this wild sex for some reason does not seem to make them happy and in fact it may make them unhappy. Many gay men seem to be caught in this never ending drug and promiscuous sex cycle in which they seem to be chasing an elusive happiness and fulfillment that they never seem to find.

Many gay men seem to be looking for a father figure. Gay men’s relationships with their fathers and male peers were typically quite poor, and it has been suggested that gay men are forever trying to fill the “father hole” that never got filled in them or are forever trying to find the male acceptance and brotherly love that they never got from their peers while growing up. Gay male culture revolves heavily around the notion of the “Daddy,” and many gay male relationships incorporate the “Daddy” archetype. A number of gay men have stated that a theme of their adult lives, particularly sexually, was a search, often wandering, painful, and yearning but ultimately fruitless, for the father relationship that they never had.

Neither gays nor lesbians seem very happy. Gay men have a 3X elevated rate of suicide even in the Netherlands, which is as gay-friendly as you can get. There seems to be something inherent in male homosexuality that causes this suicidality.

One can picture heterosexual relationships in the yin and yang figure. Take them apart and they float alone, missing their other half. Men and women only become completely whole in a heterosexual relationship where the male donates his masculine element to the woman which she incorporates into herself and the woman donates her female element into the male which he incorporates into himself. They are both now whole, locked together in that perfect fitting embrace, the key in the lock of the yin/yang emblem.

Look, I do not think that male homosexuality or lesbianism are lifestyles that gay men and lesbians choose to lead in most cases, although there are some women who seem to choose to be lesbians, and there are a few basically straight men who choose to live a gay lifestyle, but the numbers of the latter are very small.

By age 15, gay men cannot be changed to straight, and they cannot even be made somewhat more heterosexual or somewhat less homosexual. Male homosexuality is incurable, unfixable, or permanent, however you want to look at it.

In early onset cases, lesbianism appears to be quite permanent and incurable too. So almost all gay men and many lesbians are pretty much stuck being gay. 

Still the lifestyles that especially so many gay men in big cities seem to live seem to be very unhealthy both physically and psychologically. In many cases the way they live is simply not a good way to live your life.

I don’t hate gays and lesbians. You can’t hate people for what they can’t help. I wish for all of them the very same happiness and health that I want for myself in life, not 1% less.

Nevertheless, I worry that all of this pathology may simply be somehow inherent in the “syndromes” of male homosexuality and  lesbianism, possibly due to their violations of Natural Law or our evolution, and that these problems may never be fixed much.

And that is quite a sad thing to believe. 

2 Comments

Filed under Canada, Civil Rights, Culture, Death, Denmark, Discrimination, Europe, Gender Studies, Health, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Illness, Mental Illness, Netherlands, North America, Philosophy, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Sweden

The Likable Homophobe: Are You One, and What Do You Tell People When You Choose Not to Spend Time with a Someone Because of Their Homosexuality?

Answered on Quora:

I believe that almost all straight men are homophobic on a certain level – and that level is that they hate homosexuality and especially the idea of doing it themselves. Dirty little secret – most straight men are completely straight in part because they think that engaging in homosexual acts is the worst thing on Earth, and this is why they don’t engage in them.

There is a problem when you say that engaging in homosexual acts is just fine. Now the question comes up, “Well, why don’t you do it, then?” And the ugly truth is that most straight men find that idea so horrific that they would rather die than do that. A number of straight men have told me that they would rather take a bullet than engage in a homosexual act. That’s how severe the revulsion is.

Now the question becomes if we think this type of sex is the worst thing on Earth, how can we accept it in other people? This is a bind, but many straight men solve the bind by saying that gay men cannot help being gay, so it’s therefore immoral to hate them. Others somehow say that it’s the worst thing on Earth for them to do it, but it’s ok if those gay guys want to do it.

As you can see, it is difficult for straight men to reconcile their extreme revulsion for gay sex with somehow managing to accept biological gay men for what they are.

The source of a lot of homophobia is simply this rooted in this very revulsion. This seems more common than religious objections from guys I have known.

And it is a problem once you say gay sex is fine. I assure that once a lot of straight men say there’s nothing wrong with gay sex (as we are supposed to think nowadays) that you are going to see a lot more opportunistic and recreational bisexuality among basically straight men. And my anecdotal evidence is that we are seeing just that right now.

It’s a bind. On the one hand, the revulsion causes a lot of homophobia, but on the other hand, once you say there’s nothing wrong with it, I assure you that a lot more guys will start doing it. There’s bad outcomes either way in my opinion.

The likable homophobe would be someone whose homophobia is simply limited to a desire not to associate or deal with gay men. If that’s the total extent of your homophobia, I don’t see the problem. Nobody has to associate or deal with anyone. Our associations are our personal choice and in a free society, everyone has a moral right to associate with whoever they wish.

In fact, I do not associate or even deal much with gay men myself. I don’t hate what they do if they can’t help it. On the other hand, I have had a lifetime of bad experiences with gay men, and I simply do not wish to deal with them anymore. Can someone tell me why this is wrong?

However, I have supported gay rights for decades and even endured accusations of being gay for supporting gay rights. To this day, I support a lot of gay political causes, and I am on the mailing list for gay political organizations. And I do participate in a lot of their campaigns.

In summary, if the total extent of your homophobia is not wishing to associate with gay men, I would say your homophobia is basically nothing and that level of mild homophobia indeed qualifies as a “likable homophobe.”

14 Comments

Filed under Ethics, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Philosophy, Politics, Sex

You Can’t Fool People Forever

You can’t fool people forever.

You can fool people for a pretty long time, but sooner or later, people are going to catch on to the fact that you are screwing them over. Why is that? Because human beings, contrary to popular belief, are not stupid. Even a 100 IQ human is easily one of the most intelligent creatures on the planet, far more intelligent than most other animals.

Ordinary people aren’t as dumb as you think. People have a nose for being screwed over, and they don’t like it. Most humans are able to figure out who is scamming them, lying to them, and ripping them off after a while. As part of an instinct towards self-preservation, we have our antennas out all the time looking for enemy creatures and particularly, sneaky enemy creatures because those are the most dangerous people of all. Go visit some primitive tribe and stay with them for a while. Try to lie to them, scam them, and rip them off by devious means. See how far it gets you. Even those “idiots” and “low IQ tards” with war paint and spears will figure you out faster than you think, and the payback will not be pretty. You’ll be lucky to get out alive.

This is why con artists move around all the time. Like child molesters (who also move around a lot), after they have been in one place for a while, people start catching onto their cons and molestations, so they need to take off. Con artists are always in search of new victims and that means always finding “fresh blood” who are not onto them yet.

 

4 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Philosophy, Psychology

Trailer for William S. Burroughs Documentary

Human faces tentative flicker in and out of focus. We waded into the warm mud-water. Hair and ape flesh off in screaming strips. Stood naked human bodies covered with phosphorescent green jelly. Soft tentative flesh cut with ape wounds. Peeling other genitals. Fingers and tongues rubbing off the jelly-cover. Body melting pleasure-sounds in the warm mud. Till the sun went and a blue wind of silence touched human faces and hair. When we came out of the mud we had names…

…Larval people whispering flesh. Eyes ejaculated spine mud. Black gum in member. Old junky coughing limestone in the obsidian morning: the sale mirror to red sky. Manipulated spasms puppets vestigial meat. Pulsing pink shell. Red pagodas and crystal accounts. Wet dream eyes hanging in lust of dead flesh patios. Boy chrysalis in streets of postcard. Eating birds patrol black lichen. Catatonic sports sear lungs of dream clay. Lust of mud bubble coal gas the insect street. Flesh ejaculation. Penis in the broken mirror rocks of Marwan. Serving the crystal dawn photo of sex. On the Brass and Copper Street…

An evil old character with sugary eyes that stuck to you…They were ripe for the plucking forgot way back yonder in the corn hole—Lost in little scraps of delight and burning scrolls…The man opposite me didn’t look like much—A thin gray man in a long coat that flickered like old film…in these times when practically anybody is subject to wander in from the desert with a quit claim deed and snatch a girl’s snatch right out from under her assets…When the boy peeled off the dry goods he gives off a slow stink like a thawing mummy…Crab men peer out of abandoned quarries and shag heaps some sort of vestigial eye growing cheek bone and a look about them as if they could take root and grow on anybody…

William S. Burroughs, The Soft Machine, 1963.

William S. Burroughs is one of those authors that people either love or hate, but that’s the objective, the purpose of his work – to be a human lightning rod of gesticulating and mercurial passion. Like yours truly, in other words.

Always wanted to see a good movie about this maniac, who has always been one of my favorite writers.

I gave out Naked Lunch to a few of my friends, and they would bring it back warily with shaking hands convinced that I was obviously gay. Well, Burroughs’ writing is full of gay sex, but that’s not a reason to read it. The sex is boring and repetitive anyway, but the descriptions of it like all his writing are often beautiful. Gay sex scenes usually disgust me, and I end up throwing the book at the wall. This often breaks the spine and pages fall out, but it’s just as well. That book deserved that wall for the audacious travesty of daring to put that awfulness in there. But Burroughs, that I can read.

Anyway, 90% of the people who read Burroughs aren’t gay. Burroughs is so much more than a gay writer. For a while there, he may well have been the greatest writer in America.

I read almost all of his writing. Most people thought I was a freak for liking the guy in the first place. But Burroughs is not only a Beat but the original avant-garde writer and the forerunner to punk rock. More than that: Burroughs actually was a punk, decades before his team. He’s been loved by hipsters, artists, and cutting edge freaks and psychos for decades. He’s very much worth reading.

His writing is a lot of things, but it’s often also beautiful, which is strange given its often ugly subject matter. But to find beauty in the awfulness of life, the sublime amidst the squalor, is one of the purposes of life.

Viewed one way, half of life is glorious and the other half is sad. Half of life wonderful and the other half is horrible. And that’s if you are lucky. I have counseling clients who are sad. I tell them that sadness is a natural part of life and that half of life is sadness, even if the other half is radiant happiness.

“When you feel sad,” I tell them. “Say to yourself, ‘Thank God for that feeling! Sit back somewhere alone and just immerse yourself in the sadness of life. Don’t kill yourself or do anything drastic. Just be part of the reality of life’s essential sadness.”

If half of life is sad (and that’s being generous – Jack Kerouac often said that that Buddhists said, ‘All of life is sadness’ – and in way he was correct), then it only makes sense to make yourself aware of that fact and even bask or immerse yourself in it if you dare. If you do that, you may find that there is even an a transcendent beauty in sadness, something the great artists and mystics have taken about forever. Ever seen a great sad movie that moved you to tears. It was awful and beautiful at the same time, right?

Burroughs led a very interesting life. He lived in Mexico City for a while with some other Beats. One night he was playing “William Tell” at a drunken party with his wife Joan (yes he was married for a bit and even fathered a child named Billy), trying to shoot a drink glass off her head. He missed and shot her in the head instead. Police interviewed and determined it was an accident and let him off. Talking about this with a friend who liked Kerouac a lot more than Burroughts, my friend shook his head, “He definitely went crazy after that,” he said. Maybe so. But Burroughs was always pretty crazy, even as a boy. The great writers and artists often are after all.

Your task: Identify the following famous Beats and hipsters in this short film:

  1. Allen Ginsberg
  2. Lucien Carr
  3. Patti Smith
  4. Herbert Huncke
  5. John Giorno
  6. James Grauerholz (twice)

Leave a comment

Filed under Cinema, Literature, Music, Novel, Philosophy, Punk, Rock

People Are Better Than You Think: Humans Vastly Overestimate the Evil of Their Fellow Men

One thing I have noticed in life is a lot of people have a tendency to put sinister motives on people who have done nothing to deserve it.

I had a bartender job once. Lasted one weekend. The  boss came in on Sunday night and  said someone had stolen money out of his safe. Of course I did it. So he fired me. Thing is, I didn’t take anything out of his safe. In fact, I had no idea he even had one and I would never go in his office anyway.

An aunt of mine does this all the time. She needs to see people as having lousy and nasty intentions. She heard that I had made $9,000 off this website. It’s true. At the time she heard that, major car repairs were needed on my car to the tune of $2,000. I only had $1,000. My Mom kicked in the rest and I’m paying her back. This ugly-minded aunt of mine actually thought that I was sitting on $9,000 and refusing  to pay the $2,000 for the car repair, instead claiming poverty and forcing the bill on my Mom. In other words, she thinks I’m a huge scumbag. Well anyone who knows me knows I would never do that.

This idiot aunt has known me my whole life, but she doesn’t have the slightest understanding of what sort of a person I really am at the core of my being. I’m actually quite decent, but somehow she’s always seen me an evil-minded scumfuck.

She also routinely thinks I am dangerously incompetent to the point of being a menace, such as driving vehicles. True, I burned up a couple of transmissions because no one told me I needed to be in 2nd all the time. Turns out Drive is actually Overdrive. If you put the car in “Drive” and drive it that way, after several years, you burn up your tranny. Counterintuitively, the car is not supposed to be driven in Drive. It’s supposed to be driven in 2nd.

I figured it out and started driving it in 2nd. But she insisted that I was a permanent menace behind the wheel because I burned up car engines, apparently because I am a dumbass. I guess she also assumed that I am incapable of something called learning. I drove a new vehicle 35 miles from my Mom’s house to my home, in 2nd of course. She was alarmed and running around like a circus geek insisting that I had just blown up another transmission by driving a car 35 miles in the wrong gear. Truth is you don’t blow the tranny by driving it a few dozen miles that way. Instead, the tranny blows after ~60,000 miles when you mis-drive it like that.

I could go on and on. She has been doing this my whole life. 

Why do humans do this? We vastly overestimate the evil of our fellow humans.

Most people are actually quite decent people. They are also generally competent, responsible, considerate, thoughtful, conscientious, pleasant, self-supporting if not out and out giving and generally harmless and efficient.

Yes, scumbags, layabouts, fuck-ups, assholes, incompetent morons, leeches, and generally dangerous idiots exist of course, but they’re not too common. I don’t see a lot of evil or wickedness in my day to day life, and I live in a slum!

Most people want to be good people,  not bad people, regardless of their religion. And most people are going about their day to day lives trying to be about as good or decent as they can be, simply because most people seem to have well-developed consciences or religious beliefs that keep them from acting too ugly.

Yes, there are nasty, wicked, unpleasant, malevolent, and downright evil people in the  world. I assume there are some even around this neighborhood. But most humans, at least in the US, don’t seem to rock that way.

So once again, why do we vastly overestimate the evil of our fellow man? What’s the advantage of seeing someone as evil when they’re not, or even if they are the opposite? What’s the point? People want to see a nasty world crawling with very bad people everywhere? Why? If I felt that way, I would hardly go outside. How does this mindset benefit the person who twists reality in this way to put a malevolent spin on so many innocuous things?

3 Comments

Filed under Philosophy, Psychology, Travel

Something Wrong with my About Page?

I think a lot of my haters people simply hate me for being me. An example is my About page. For some reason, almost everyone on the Net hates that page. I think one person on the whole Net, a guy on American Renaissance, actually figured out what I was trying to say on that page.

I’ve reread it 5,000 times to try to figure out what’s wrong with it, but I’m stumped. It’s actually rather clever, and I think it’s pretty funny too. Sure, it uses some big words, but if you can’t handle obscure vocabulary and lexical gymnastics, you’re reading the wrong damn site.

http://www.retard.net is that-a-way. You know, the site most people hang out on?

Almost always when someone posts that About page, the reaction is, “Wow, that guys really insane/crazy/lunatic/mentally ill/weird/freaky/bizarre/incomprehensible.” The About page is apparently evidence of insanity. As someone who works in mental health, you would think I know a thing or two about that. I’ve read that page over and over looking for sins of mental disorder or dysfunction, and for the life of me, I can’t see any signs of psychosis or  any mental illness on Axis 1 or 2 on that page.

The latest is that the About page is very weird, disturbing, and creepy, and it makes people very uncomfortable. Why? What’s so weird about it? How is it disturbing? Where’s the creepiness? Why in God’s name would a page like that make you creeped out or uncomfortable? I don’t get it.

Guess what? That About page is me. It’s really, really, really, really me. If you hate my About page, you simply hate me because that page is me at my absolute essential self, my being, my soul, my Dasein. You don’t hate me for one sentence I said or the way I walk or how I looked at that waitress or the strange expression in my eyes or some funny mannerism I just made. You don’t hate me for some minor situational behavior. It’s much worse. If you hate the About page, you hate me at my very core essential self. In other words, you’re an enemy. When someone hates you for being you, hates your true, pure, real, authentic self, they’re gone. There’s no bringing them back, and nothing you do can change them because you can’t stop being you.

More importantly, if someone hates you at your deepest inner self, your very Being, why on Earth would you want to change yourself to please this person?

You know what? What you see is what you get. You either like me or you don’t. You either love me or hate me. Take your pick. And if you hate me for simply being me, if you hate me at my very essence of selfhood, I have only one thing to say to you:

FUCK YOU.

Leave a comment

Filed under Personality, Philosophy, Psychology, Vanity