Picture your typical small tribe or town. People are kept in line by rewards for doing good, and the threat of exclusion from a social group or society itself for doing bad. This contradicts the order before civilization, which was “everybody do whatever they want.”
Humans have an in-built engineering flaw: they see the world through their powerful brains, but in doing so, elevate themselves above reality. They share this viewpoint with other humans and, if left alone, will create a social construct of reality based on human desires, judgments and feelings based in the ego.
This creates conflict between the needs of society as an organic whole and the impulses of individuals. Eventually the individualists form a collective to demand “everybody do whatever they want” and create friction.
Leftism occurs when the people back at home in armchairs decide that it is more important to eliminate conflict than resolve it.
The problem with this thinking is that it requires us to invert our method of perceiving the world. Instead of observing what is, and then constructing a thesis based on that, we must construct the socially-appropriate thesis and then look for data to support it — and exclude the rest. This simple idea breaks our thinking. This is parallel to our mental dysfunction of opting to eliminate conflict rather than achieve cooperative goals, which requires conflict with the in-built human engineering flaw (which the Greeks refer to as “hubris” and the Christians, “evil”).
. . . . .
Humans have a default type of entropy within us. Much as every object in the world seems to desire to return to a state of chaos, humans desire returning to the “everybody do whatever they want” that existed before civilization. However, they also want the benefits of civilization, so they must find a way to compel others to provide them.
They do this with guilt. Instead of using direct compulsion through threat of exclusion, they invert this process too, and create a fake positive reward for doing good that casts those who refuse it into a bad light. Sort of like asking people if they are “for” peace, and if they say no, saying “So why do you love war?”
Do we need to even hear her speech? Her fans do not; they care only about the symbol of being correct, and have long ago cast reality aside. If her many ethical and legal violations do not concern them now, it is because they do not care about such things; they only care about their ideology, like all zombies.
This is the nature of Leftism, which creates politics: there is One Right Way which happens to contradict reality, and all who want to be helped by the Leftist gang had better start repeating that narrative like robotic tape recorders. Everyone else is bad of course.
The Right does not pretend that it tolerates difference of opinion.
It finds some things that work for the purposes of making a thriving civilization, and sticks by them; the Left advances conjectures about what might make people feel better, and chases a new one every week.
. . . . .
We do not need to “justify” these ideas; our ideation is based in a knowledge of what works, as opposed to the feelings-based prevarication of the Left. We know how to make a thriving society; the Left wants to destroy this formula and replace it with one where mediocre, clueless people like Hillary Clinton are important.
A mouse placed in a cage with a snake will first explore, sniffing the walls of the cage and then the snake. He will tense, realizing his certain doom. But then, something interesting happens: he acts as if the snake is not there, so that his last moments before the crushing strike are happy and distracted. Nature knows when to apply anaesthesia.
Humans living in modern civilization are staggering under this mental numbing as well. We know that all civilizations seem to go out the same way, and that its is perennially more popular than any other activity, and that the signs of our senescence are on the wall. Instead of looking the snake in the eye, we too go into denial.
The proof of this can be found in the refusal of Europeans to breed at replacement levels. Starting with the smartest, people look at the direction of civilization and realize that it is hell, and they would be raising their children to be imprisoned in hell, and that no matter what good they do the herd will destroy it.
As the saying goes, you are either ruled by the best, or oppressed by the rest.
Why is Europe in decline? It’s the misery, stupid: we have forced our best people to labor to support a vast undergrowth of not especially useful people who are constantly screwing up.
As a result, instead of working four hours a day and then spending the rest of time growing our souls, we are trapped in tedium.
Western civilization has been dying out for millennia because of this.
White “asserted virtue on the cheap” shitlibs will just have to come to terms with the lovefact that White morality doesn’t port smoothly to other races. Assuming nonWhites share the same moral and ethical impulses as Whites is a mission-critical error of judgment.
Projecting White morality onto other races was always going to end in tears. And caustic laughter.
Porn for women is an overlooked phenomenon, partly because the type of porn that stimulates women isn’t as visually arresting as the porn that consumes men. The pink and moist pyrotechnics we associate with the online porn that readily captures male attention does little for women (though recent data suggest more women are turning to online porn for sexual relief, the numbers are still low, under 20%).
Female porn utilizes a different medium of arousal delivery, but the effect on the female libido and ability to form healthy relationships is just as profound as that of online porn’s effect on men.
So what is female porn? It’s pulp romance — in the form of books, movies and TV — that caresses lady limbic lobes to sprout slick clit dick. In a word: words.
More wokely, a lot of that female porn is rape fantasy porn.
If online porn is a problem for society, then so is word porn. If you argue that online porn is causing men to “drop out” and deep-six their marriages and relationships, then you have to also argue that word porn is causing women to do the same.
I’ve said it before to obstinate tradcons and their ironic bedfellows, the man-hating feminist cunts:
It takes two to tango. Especially if that tango two-steps to the metagrave.
SCIENCE! and CH: dancing the duet of fated lovers.
This study literally discovers neurological proof for the truefact stereotype that women are more hysterical than are men.
State control…it’s a man thing. You women just wouldn’t understand.
I gotta wonder how self-deluded feminist are gonna spin this latest out-take from the HARDASFUCK sciences?
RANDOM MANJAW: “well, you see, that’s just the patriarchal culture influencing female fetuses and changing their brain wiring.”
THE SHIV OF PRIVILEGE: “is the patriarchal culture also influencing female fetuses to become raving lunatic feminists?”
Legions of feminists will ferociously type smash the patriarchy! at their Internet rallies, calling out for the end of the male supremacy in all spheres of life. Yet, few of them acknowledge the fact that one of these spheres, the government (the institution granting them rights), is entirely funded by male taxpayers.
Economically, women cost more to the state than they benefit. The government is literally paying women to be alive.
As such, strong independent women are only that way because the state is transferring money from men to them. Feminists are not seriously against being dependent on men, they are just against men having the full control over their money.
According to court documents obtained by the Enid News, Good eventually admitted to Enid police that her elaborate tale — which had apparently fooled even her husband and children — was entirely a lie. She told police she used her cellphone to post the faulty Facebook messages and create the GoFundMe accounts, the newspaper reported. On it, she would check the balances of her fraudulent accounts and pocket the money she had coerced from oblivious donors.
Alongside her lawyer, Good appeared in court Friday on three felony counts of obtaining money or property by false pretense for charitable or benevolent purposes and another felony charge of child abuse, reported the Enid News. Good made arrangements to post her $2,500 bond Friday afternoon, according to the newspaper. She turned herself in to police earlier in the day. It was unclear from media reports if she entered a plea.
“I’m disgusted,” Kendra Dorsey, who fundraised for Good and has a son who suffers from seizures, told News 9.
“That was my little buddy,” she said. “We’re furious, because we really and truly thought she was sick. We knew some things didn’t add up.”
UBC psychology professor Don Dutton, who has studied domestic violence for 40 years and written eight books, has told the B.C. Liberal government it has adopted a “false” premise that will do little to diminish partner-on-partner violence.
“It is understandable how an uninformed observer in British Columbia would tend to believe that family violence perpetrators are male and victims are female,” Dutton wrote in a recent letter to Premier Christy Clark.
“But that assumption could not be more incorrect,” Dutton said, objecting to the way virtually all B.C. government documents describe domestic violence as being perpetrated by men, with women as the victims.
As a result, Dutton said, B.C.’s police procedures, court policy and prevention programs are based on a misleading theory.
The UBC psychologist, B.C. government officials and a group of therapists are engaged in a behind-the-scenes debate over the way the Liberals spend tens of millions of dollars earmarked for domestic violence programs and women’s shelters.
“Social science research contradicts the assumption the B.C. government is making,” Dutton said in his letter to the premier.