Posted on March 9, 2012
Just OMFG. That’s all.
No, it couldn’t wait.
March 9, 2012
I thought I was going to find this site listed at first. Something of an anti-climax.
Well, I’ve posted articles at The Spearhead and IMF, so I’m sort of included. By proxy. I think we are viewed as one “of the sites make an attempt at civility and try to back their arguments with facts”. Or they don’t want to call a bunch of Christian homemakers “misogynists”.
I was shocked because I saw this linked to at Business Insider:
they don’t want to call a bunch of Christian homemakers “misogynists”
No, they want to, they just haven’t figured out how to couch it without looking like complete dingleberries. The SPLC, otherwise known as S(rich liberal)WPLC, is a farce. I’d like to know the last time they actually helped an indigent socially downtrodden person or group.
The point is that the FBI and other law enforcement use their list as a reference. We’re now definitely on the “watch list”.
It just means that these sites are effective.
Yes, they do, but most local agencies would laugh at such a list, and the Famous But Impotent are avoided like the plague by them. That’s not to say they and other agencies don’t insinuate themselves into local issues, but since Federal Law Enforcement is generally regarded as an oxymoron by state and local level le, I’m more concerned with the political angle. The Southern Hyperbolic Law Center is more their mouthpiece than a resource for your average county sheriff.
…and within days of the Int’l Women’s Day and Limbaugh/Fluke kerfluffle.
Coinky-dink? Fucking hardly.
So much for feminists “fighting the power”. They ARE the power.
Sorry that everyone’s ending up in moderation. I don’t know why that is.
For lack of something reasonable to say right now, I suspect the words of this song may be fitting:
If you’ve done nothing wrong
You’ve got nothing to fear
If you’ve something to hide
You shouldn’t even be here
You’ve had your chance
Now we’ve got the mandate
If you’ve changed your mind
I’m afraid it’s too late
You’re a threat
You’re not integral
To the project
– Integral – Pet Shop Boys
I think we are viewed as one “of the sites make an attempt at civility and try to back their arguments with facts”.
Admittedly, I suspect it’s because this is a bit of a coffee klatch of women discussing topics with each other while a few “non-bitter” men poke in and check up. The problem with some of the other sites is that to people who haven’t swallowed the red pill, they can sometimes reek of a certain degree of hatred and bitterness that they may see around them. Most men do not openly have such views even if they had them in a closeted sense, and even when men are angry about women, it doesn’t descend into the same level of muck that you may find at another blog. Plus, it doesn’t help that some of the guest posters and commenters reek of HBD-taint and White Nationalist sympathies, which is what probably dragged the SPLC into that part of the internet. If the MRA types want more sympathy, they’re going to have to watch their speech, and weed out their racist allies, or they’re going to get shamed into the abyss.
Regardless, it does bring up the challenge of how does one maintain a free society with free speech when there are some who have opinions and perspectives that are viewed as hostile to a sizable chunk of the population? FWIW, it’s weird in how I feel somewhat uneasy about the SPLC wading into this part of the internet, but I’d want them to shame all of the evil racists, but I suspect there are others with similar sentiments.
The SPLC are the evil racists and sexists, DA.
what would you recommend for Marxist-Leninists (or communists) if they want more credibility and sympathy?
Yeah, but they’re the good kind of racists and sexists.
Giving up Marxism, or only advocating it for robots.
LOL. What DA said.
Although one would consider me a natural ally of the manosphere (since I am male and anti-feminist), I don’t have all that much love for them. Namely because “manosphere” sounds like a gay sex toy.
For a more substantive reason, the manosphere is bleak proof that we are all feminists now. MRA/PUA/MRM/stupid adjectives are simply the male mirror to the bitter, hate filled feminist.
Maybe it’s because I’m “too beta/mangina/shaming word” but I don’t want half of humanity to be always at a state of low level warfare with the other half.
And the whole “red pill blue pill” metaphor is a bit inapt. If anyone remembers the Matrix trilogy, and yes, I am reminding you of the sequels, the red pills didn’t defeat the machines and only struck a truce by eliminating a problem that their Chosen One caused in the first place!!!!
If you check my site, you will see that I recently got a surge of people complaining about my blog. Some sort of Fundie Watch selected one of my posts for a “two-minute-hate”.
LOL. Yeah, that was funny.
Ha ha. FB’s loving the negative-attention.
He quotes the SPLC morons:
“This kind of woman-hatred is increasingly visible in most Western societies, and it tends to be allied with other anti-modern emotions — opposition to same-sex marriage, to non-Christian immigration, to women in the workplace, and even, in some cases, to the advancement of African Americans.”
Daniel de León
“to the advancement of African Americans.”
I LOVE this one. You know because liberalism has been absolutely WUNDERBAR for black people.
Not a very Traditionally Christian title.
LOL Well, they’re right about a few of those sites. Alte, I doubt you’re really included.
FB IS a moron, so he’s in good company. The dopes who speak of anti-woman hatred spreading are, luckily, very wrong.
“Not a very Traditionally Christian title.”
Ha ha. I know. I thought of changing it, but I just drew a blank as that was all I could think of. The dangers of real-time blogging.
At any rate, the left’s biggest enemy is the RCC, not the Manosphere. Even the Pope’s decided to weigh in and tell Americans to stop acting like a bunch of degenerate trash.
“Alte, I doubt you’re really included.”
Then I guess we’ll have to try harder.
Check out the vile comment thread. And they say that the Manosphere is the problem? How about the Huffington Post, for a hate-site?
I was watching a German news program this evening. The lawyers are suing to have the “special protections of marriage” removed from the German basic law. Gov.de is testing the waters with little pro-baby mamma news blurbs. They kept referring to marriage as an “outdated model”. No joke.
It’s on. Worldwide. It’s going to be massive. Watch the ongoing Greek default. Trash tends to get testy when the money dries up and this is an election year.
Civil war in five years. Trash versus trads. They’re going to try to take our children away and imprison us, and we’re going to defend ourselves. I’m calling it. Pick your side.
How about the Huffington Post, for a hate-site?
This probably sums up their viewpoints and explains why their hatred is seen as valid while yours is seen as wrong:
“gay people” > “your right to restrict their lifestyle based on your religious beliefs”
I’d also note the corollary:
“feminism” > “your right to restrict what women want”
So it’s okay to have hate if it’s toward the right people and not the wrong people.
I’m calling it. Pick your side.
I’ll promise to spare Terry, Texas Barbie, and you when the trash wins.
“So it’s okay to have hate if it’s toward the right people and not the wrong people.”
Well, yeah. We knew that. It was more a rhetorical statement than any true surprise on my part.
March 10, 2012
But it admittedly leads one to question the boundaries of free speech and the role of religion in our society, and one is left wondering why should gay people, women, and non-whites count over religious traditionalists and racists.
“Civil war in five years. Trash versus trads. They’re going to try to take our children away and imprison us, and we’re going to defend ourselves. I’m calling it. Pick your side.”
That’s not going to happen, Nostradamus.
Trads are not an ideological danger to the state or ruling elite, especially since they don’t even question the structure of the economic or argue that the economic elite’s influence is illegitimate or harmful.
No political persecution, not going to happen.
Actually no, we’re not supposed to have hate towards any human being, but towards their sins. Or even beliefs.
Now I have got the site back up (back up those databases. My blog one got corrupted, and whenever I attempted to reinstall it using phpmyadmin the entire blog curled up and died)
I agree with the SLPC. I hate feminism. Because it is evil. I hate murder, adultery divorce, the deadly sins, and the works of the devil. Go read the church fathers… hatred is sometimes a positive good.
Look, my youngest is 15. In another year his parenting order expires. (NZ law). I am more worried about how the feminists take any statement… including “I hate this because it is evil” and say that is violent.
That I will rebel against, for I have been bought with a price, I will not let myself be enslaved. And here all who believe will end up… either resisting or enslaved. This is a time for the church to again become the confessing church.
Alte, blog.pukeko.net.nz or pukeko.net.nz/blog will work, can you double check your link
I always thought that sooner or later that the liberals would go after dissenters on the Internet. The first hit was the race realists and Christians. Now it’s the manosphere.
I can just see the new version of SOPA. We will see SODA = Stop Online Dissenters Act.
They’re completely oblivious to that factor. They honestly believe themselves to be “fighting the power!”.
If the MRA types want more sympathy, they’re going to have to watch their speech, and weed out their racist allies, or they’re going to get shamed into the abyss.
Most MRA’s and PUA’s are not white nationalists. Those men who espoused white nationalist sentiments on The Spearhead were mocked (gee, we even had a “gay men are allies of men’s rights” post on The Spearhead). MRA’s and PUA’s continually extol the virtues of marrying and having mixed children with foreign women instead of horrible white American women (and yes I actually agree that many white American women are horrible and feminist). How is having non-white children white nationalist? Answer me DA. Race realism is not a “hate crime”. I second Ingerman’s comment. Men’s rights activists are a mixed bunch. On one hand they highlight important aspects of feminism on display, on the other hand they are not much different from feminists and are their male version.
I mean even the Orthosphere is more sympathetic to race realism than the Manosphere DA. The Orthosphere concentrates on spiritual and cultural matters sure but they realize that reality is not made of just nature, just culture or just spirit. It’s made up of body, soul and spirit. Three aspects yet one essence.
Most of the manosphere bloggers are quite liberal on race. Some do wander into HBD territory and beyond, but so do bloggers like Steve Sailer, who is notable mainly for his lack of interest in MRA issues. I suspect he is simply too happily married.
Yeah, I know that, Jen. The point I’m making is that our political opponents don’t feel the same way.
We should start a False Hate Society, perhaps a Twitter feed, where we just post all of the hateful stuff they say. Hold a mirror up to their faces for once.
Marxist-Leninist girl is living under a rock. Economic issues isn’t everything. The elite is culturally liberal and trads are a huge threat in that regard. Economics flows from culture, not the other way around. Anybody who tells you that “social issues don’t matter” is a liar. The elite is also secular. Trads are religious. That’s a double-threat. There are plenty of filthy rich liberals you know.
Economics flows from culture, not the other way around.
Bingo. BR, you need to read about civilizational cycles. The economics just follows the demographic changes, which result from cultural changes.
At least, this will all separate the wheat from the chaff, as all of the lukewarm pick the popular side and the rest of us can stop pretending that we think they’re Christians too. Churchianity was the easy option, but that’s all changing now, and only the true believers are going to stick around to be shat on.
The economics just follows the demographic changes, which result from cultural changes.
Reminds me of one of the scenes from the documentary below.
Churchianity was the easy option, but that’s all changing now, and only the true believers are going to stick around to be shat on.
“So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.”
Revelation 3:16 KJV
What? I thought it meant Outta My Freakin’ Gourd.😛
I was thinking entirely in expletives for about 30 minutes. Sorry about that. LOL
I think we’re all going to be surprised with the shift that comes next; with who comes and who goes. The blood of the martyrs is going to draw some of the undecided deeper in the Church, and the rest will head for an exit. Once calling yourself a Christian opens you up to real persecution, people will think large and hard before using the label.
We live in interesting times, that’s for sure.
More from the SPLC’s report:
Some take an inordinate interest in extremely young women, or fetishize what they see as the ultra-feminine (read: docile) characteristics of South American and Asian women. Others, who have internalized Christian “headship” doctrine, are desperately seeking the “submissive” women such doctrine celebrates. Still others are simply sexually awkward, and nonplussed and befuddled by society’s changing mores. The common denominator is their resentment of feminism and of females in general.
Figures that promoting the Bible would get us into trouble. LOL That’s always been a radical book.
MRM and WN are incompatible. But so are Feminism and Multiculturalism.
Agreed, David. It’s easy to think that we’re less influential than we are, but when you see how angry people get about us, you realize that TPTB are getting rather nervous. The alt-right and the traditionalists are the only people who have crafted a convincing counter-narrative to what’s going on in the MSM.
Over half a million hits already on this blog alone, and we’ve been repeatedly on break since we started out last July. Type in “traditional Christianity” on any search engine, and we’re the top hit. No joke. Obviously, we’re not in IMF-league, but considering we really are mostly just a bunch of mommy bloggers, that’s impressive. And, more importantly, TC and sites like it (TTH, for example) are read by a lot of influential bloggers. They rarely link to us because we’re so “extreme”, but you can tell by their writing that they’re reading what we write.
“The elite is culturally liberal and trads are a huge threat in that regard.”
Yes, I know that they are socially liberal and secular. but they are economically conservative as they support the free market. BTW, I am an M-L, and you should know about my abhorrence of contemporary liberalism.
Trads are nugatory, since they are not overtly antagonistic towards the elites policies nor do they demonstrate any genuine opposition to their political power and influence. In fact, trads, by emphasizing social issues, are a conservative group that serves the useful, yet indirect purpose, of diverting people’s attention from important economic issues and other alternative economic visions; they also espouse the economic propaganda of the elite such as affirming the meritocratic and innovative nature of market mechanisms. (Moreover, the elite endorse higher education, since it makes the labor market more efficient as it provides reliable signals to employers on potential employees aptitudes and conscientiousness, because the economic externalities, such as an enervating debt burden and time spent completing a degree, are foisted on parents and students, not on the owners of capital).
Trads are most certainly not ideological or intellectual iconoclasts or revolutionary minority. Trads don’t know nor experienced what REAL persecution is in supposed “liberal democracies”.
You still don’t get it. The single most important political issue is life, i.e. reproduction. The people who reproduce the most (trads) eventually take over the political sphere and are then able to reshape the economy as they like. The liberals know that, which is why they’re waging a pro-death (abortion, euthanasia, contraception) war against us. They’re determined to kill themselves off, and they want us to join in so that we can’t demographically overrun them.
Separatism, or simply refusing to take part and maintaining your honor, is a form of revolutionary action by civil disobedience. You don’t have to pick up guns to take part in a battle. You just have to refuse to bow.
Don’t worry, the persecution is just starting. You’ll get the show you’re waiting for.
The elites also find you (collectively) useful precisely because of your zealous opposition to cultural liberalism since it is a source of faction within the masses; divide and conquer the masses — James Madison himself believed in that in order to secure elite power.
Huh? Nearly everyone in America is a cultural liberal. That’s not something “the masses” are divided over. We’re 25% of the population, or even less. We just have high fertility which makes us more politically relevant than our numbers imply.
Romneycare is identical to Obamacare on the abortion/contraception issue, after all.
Nearly everyone? Nani!?
I suppose that the Deep South isn’t a bastion of social conservatism then.
No, it’s not. The MSM says that, but they say a lot of untrue things. Most Americans wouldn’t know a conservative if it jumped up and hit them over the head. If anything, the MSM spends a lot of time crafting pseudo-conservatives for the populace to argue over, like Sarah Palin.
Gotta leave the house now. Later.
Firstly, Seriously Alte? OMFG? Try harder next time, young lady! (end scolding)
Secondly, the fact that we have all been linked to and or commented on sites like IMF means that yes, we’re on the radar screen. No doubt about it. That we refuse to abandon Christian doctrine in favor of a full blown war on women and femininity i.e. our balanced approach, makes us seem not quite as bad as the sites listed on SPLC’s list. But like Alte said, we’ll try harder, LOL.
Lastly M-L girl, no. The Deep South isn’t a bastion of social conservatism. The Deep South has a visceral disdain for all things they perceive as Yankee, which includes left-wing liberalism. They give lip service to God and country while living lifestyles nearly identical to liberal America.
It’s not as if the divorce rate, or OOW birthrate or crime rate is significantly lower down here. Of course, I’m from FL which actually isn’t considered part of the Deep South, for good reason.
By that logic, I can credibly claim that “nearly everyone” is an economic conservative because they do not find that abolishing capitalism is desirable.
If there is any divide at all, it’s more Big City/Suburban/Rural rather than North/South/East Coast/West Coast. The entire American country is infected with social liberalism to one degree or another and often people don’t even know it. Many individuals have internalized the assumptions of liberalism in their thinking. Heck even I internalized a couple of them and I’m not even American (much less a Westerner).
If anything, the MSM spends a lot of time crafting pseudo-conservatives for the populace to argue over, like Sarah Palin.
She’s a wonderful pseudo-conservative figure isn’t she? Kudos for the far-right blogosphere in general and the Orthosphere especially in paying little attention to such a superficial, narcissistic and foolish person. She’s a liberal in conservative drag.
Palin is a conservative. Being a “true” conservative doesn’t mean you have to be a giant extremist on every matter.
The thing is M-L, we live what we truly believe. If that’s faulty logic, then color me illogical. People who are true religious conservatives don’t get divorced without solid Biblical reasons (there are only two), don’t support divorce, don’t brush off as harmless OOW sex and childbearing, etc. Any of us can say anything. It’s just talk. The fact that the South votes GOP doesn’t make it socially conservative. It makes it a region favorable to the GOP. And that is all.
I’d say that my logic is better than yours except I realize that we’re basically working from two different definitions of conservatism. You from the commonly accepted political vernacular, and me from the actual definition: the idea that we should work to conserve those ideals and values that have proven to best serve humanity and society throughout history.
“The Deep South isn’t a bastion of social conservatism. The Deep South has a visceral disdain for all things they perceive as Yankee, which includes left-wing liberalism. They give lip service to God and country while living lifestyles nearly identical to liberal America.”
This. I’m from Atlanta, the capital of the deep south, and this place definitely ain’t what it used to be. What was once the home for much of the “southern aristocracy” is now a beacon of pop culture, post modernism and homosexuality.
Nearly everyone? Nani!?
Hello Japanese. Anime I presume?
Palin is a rabid feminist. That alone puts her out of step with true conservative principles. And as you know, we vehemently disagree with feminism here.
Palin is an economic conservative. That’s not our focus here if you hadn’t noticed yet. We don’t believe that rampant, unchecked capitalism is necessarily the best thing for the country. Local trading is always better than goods being shipped from around the globe, though I’m not against free trade. I’m just sayin’.
Speaking of which, I’m off to the farmers market. Y’all have a great weekend.
Palin is pro-family, pro-marriage, and very anti-abortion, Elspeth. I don’t see where rabid feminism comes in; even if she’s fierce on the topic of change for women and how it’s been good, her attitude and life as a whole are anti-feminist by themselves. I don’t like some things she believes in, but feminism seems a misapplied label.
Oh one more thing before I go: Alcuin (first blog on SPLC’s list) has hidden his blog. Is this a taste of things to come?
Jen: Palin calls herself a feminist and she is in favor a few things that I think don’t serve women and are actively harmful to young men such as Title IX. See Alcest’s comment following this one. I agree with it 100%.
I really do have to run and return to my Lenten break. Be well.
Conservatism isn’t extreme. The problem is that Palin doesn’t have a basic traditional conservative philosophy. For one she believes in equality and freedom as being worthy goals of society and humanity. That’s liberal right there. She believes in democracy and wants to spread freedom and capitalism to Third world countries. That’s neoconservative talk. She just isn’t a conservative at heart and I’m tired of her babble. I’m also exhausted at the obsession with her from both mainstream camps. One side absolutely loves her and defends her, the other one hates her and despises her. And for what? For nothing. She’s not part of the religious right boogeyman. She’s an illusion and people are projecting their fears and wants unto her.
Wrong. Palin has never been against abortion. She just said that she’s as sympathetic to the pro-life side as she is to the pro-choice side and that if a woman doesn’t want an abortion than that’s her decision. She also was quite dear to the homosexual lobby cause during her time as governor. She thinks that homosexuals and women in the military was good move. She’s trying to live the feminist dream of “having it all!”. Of being a super-woman, of being both career woman and mother at the same time.
Thanks for your explanation, Elspeth, though I’ve seen many otherwise rational human beings call themselves feminists.
Conservatism isn’t extreme? LOL That depends on what type and level, Alcest. Some apparently define it as a political party’s attitude overall, but it can also be a personal attitude.
“For one she believes in equality and freedom as being worthy goals of society and humanity”
It IS a worthy goal; are you kidding me? This country believes in freedom and equality. We might know that not every kind is permissible, but that’s our general belief and our endeavor. I fail to see the extremism in the general form of that belief.
“I’ve seen many otherwise rational human beings call themselves feminists”
Usually because they don’t know what they really stand for.
Well Alces, Palin said she didn’t believe in abortion even if the cause of pregnancy was rape. That sounds pretty damn solid to me.
“of being both career woman and mother at the same time”
Well, she managed that pretty well. Too bad about some of her other beliefs. But on the other hand, she couldn’t care less about hunting, even in pretty harsh ways. Sounds like she’s a pretty interesting mixture.
You have a good weekend too, Elspeth!
Thanks for the explanations Alces, that explains why some conservatives are unhappy with her. Looks like it’s hard to peg her completely in either group. She’s pretty liberal in some areas, but I don’t define her as a standard feminist.
Thanks for the explanations Alces, that explains why some conservatives are unhappy with her.
Your welcome. Have a nice day.
You too. See you guys.
The single most important political issue is life, i.e. reproduction. The people who reproduce the most (trads) eventually take over the political sphere and are then able to reshape the economy as they like. The liberals know that, which is why they’re waging a pro-death (abortion, euthanasia, contraception) war against us. They’re determined to kill themselves off, and they want us to join in so that we can’t demographically overrun them
I suppose you implicitly believe in HBD based on the nature of your comment. You have too much faith in electoral democracy, and you believe that the children will influence politics. Perhaps, you believe that the children of NAMs will be too docile, and accept their socioeconomic status since they collectively lack the political savvy to challenge the political order. However, conservative whites, you believe, are too intelligent, and would try to influence politics.
You should know that class trumps reproduction: an example are various Central and Latin American countries where the indigenous and fecund majorities live in squalor while the elite whites have disproportionate political power.
If Marxist-Leninists want to succeed, they should focus on the economy, and agitate for a better welfare state. Ideally, there should be a guaranteed minimum income.
Bad example. You just evidenced HBD and race realism. The elite in Latin America are more European and have higher IQs. The lower classes are more Mestizo and African and have lower IQs. Class does matter but so does genetics.
You have too much faith in electoral democracy, and you believe that the children will influence politics.
I don’t believe a lot of commenters here are agitating for democracy. There have been criticisms.
I’m going to sleep. Later.
Well, I’m standing with you, Alte.
Though because I believe in freedom and equality as goals for society, I guess that makes me a “liberal”. But I’m not a neo-con.
Anyway with this “report” the SPLC just Jumped The Shark.
Regardless of whatever happens over the next 5 to 15 years, I think they are on the way to losing their reputation as “arbiters” of what is, and is not, a “hate group”, which, other than raising money, is their ostensible purpose for being.
For the life of me , I can’t figure out why , for instance, the False Rape Society made that list, nor can I figure out why they would call “Manboobz” a reliable source. Other people outside the “manosphere” already seem to be asking those questions, and that will kill them. Because of what they did in the 1960’s and 1970’s to early 80’s they built up a reputation, but that reputation is starting to be torn down even as they have inserted themselves more into the political apparatus of the country.
I’ll be with you on two things:
Nationalized healthcare (with an option to add your own private insurance), and a guaranteed minimum income or some other program to that extent.
Properly regulated and channeled capitalism is one of the best and most empowering systems ever devised by man, but like all things it can get out of control esp when the “chickens start guarding the hen house”. But you know what? All human systems are like that. So you’ll get no help abolishing capitalism from me or indeed 99.5 percent of anyone else. However, changes to it can be made, and this current global corporatist US version needs quite a few.
Even the Pope’s decided to weigh in and tell Americans to stop acting like a bunch of degenerate trash.
Clarence: I agree, the SLPC has jumped the shark. The irony is that Ferdinand has a very long list of manosphere blogs that he reads… and the way that they link together can be mapped. So the manosphere is self defined.
Besides, I;ve always arrgued for free speech. Including immoral speech, disgusting speech… because if I limit that I dislike or that which is evil…. I will also be silenced. If we use that Victorian idea of liberalism (Freedom of speech, protection of property, Laissez-Faire Capitalism) I’d agree with you. The current liberal definition… no.
Alte: you have to have hope to breed. As R.J. Stove showed when referring to his father’s death, there is nothing more terrible than when an atheist loses faith. The halls of liberalism are full of old farts. The younger intelligent people… will be, more and more, people of faith. But the faith matters.
Daniel, visited Atlanta. Lovely part of Yankeeland. Ain’t at all like rural Georgia. Personally, I prefer Northern Georgia — even though I got odd looks when my wife (this was before we got divorced) was shopping with me as we are clearly mixed race.
I totally agree with you about the free speech issue.
I hope we are both right about Jumping the Shark.
Alte, what is TPTB?
The Powers That Be
“Firstly, Seriously Alte? OMFG?”
Woops. Keyboard diarrhea.
March 11, 2012
I totally agree with you about the free speech issue.
For them it’s all about “hate speech”.
Perhaps, you believe that the children of NAMs will be too docile, and accept their socioeconomic status since they collectively lack the political savvy to challenge the political order. However, conservative whites, you believe, are too intelligent, and would try to influence politics.
This is very likely the PRIVATE belief of the elites. They only feel threatened by other whites; they regard Mexicans and blacks as dumb enough to control, and Asians as docile enough to control. As they see it, only white conservatives — high fertiltiy, well armed white conservatives — are a threat to their power, and they’re determined to get rid of us by any means necessary.
Yes, the elites howl about racism publicly, but this is likely (a) a cover to hide their own racism, and (b) a convenient rhetorical weapon against their white enemies. BTW, any white person who is not a high-fertility, armed conservative — and most especially a Marxist — is a “useful fool” to the elite.
Quite. This is precisely the model the elites likely hope to emulate. But they believe that if the teeming masses are too “white”, revolt is inevitable.
Indeed. A lot of “anti-racism” is taqiyya. Think of abortion.
3 sites there that I was unaware of but now added to my list of favourites (after such a great write up at Southern Poverty Law Centre.
Can’t believe the Southern Poverty Law Centre gave us such great advertising and didn’t charge us a cent for it.
This is very likely the PRIVATE belief of the elites.
Elites are the ultimate SWPL. Traitors to their own race.
“and most especially a Marxist — is a “useful fool” to the elite. ”
Since the elite are on the economic right, I find it hard to fathom that they find Marxists to be a useful tool because intellectually sophisticated Marxists can articulate grievances about the “unjust” nature of the status quo. Marxists, since they are an alienated minority in American politics, seem to be irrelevant to them.
There is a great quote by Orwell that perfectly summarizes this situation: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” The institutional left has so eroded the foundation of its house of cards over the past 50 years – too many takers vs. not enough makers, and the incentives for the makers to stay in the game are too few and far between. Why start a famiy if your “wife” can get up and smash it to pieces any time she likes through the family court system? Why work hard and become “marriage material” when most of the women around are totally unworthy, rather like little 5 year olds in women’s bodies who view men’s principal responsibilities as a husband revolving around keeping them entertained? Who have laid with too many men, and are thus chemically unable to pair bond or in many cases, so utterly spent that they no longer feel love? Better to sit back, live the best life you can, and help your family and friends rather than hope for winning the lottery. The problem of course is that as men start to realize this, and start to back out of the rat race, the tax base that the takers rely on becomes unsustainable – ergo the fiscal situation much of the west finds itself in. God willing, we are witnessing the last gasps of the ongoing attempt to destroy the greatest gift bestowed unto mankind ever known to human history. Illegitimi Non Carborundum!
“And the answer is that liberalism is the most convenient way for the ruling class to make a profit.
The key fact that reveals the financial motive of the ruling class is that their liberalism vanishes like a puff of steam the minute it threatens their profits. If this country really were in the grip of ideological leftism per se, we would have a high and rising rate of private-sector unionization, a heavily regulated financial system, high tax rates on high incomes, etc.
But we don’t. Instead, we have non-economic liberalism as a battering ram against all the non-economic structures of society, i.e. traditional inequalities of sex, race, religion, culture etc., while we have aggressively right-wing economics replacing those structures with economic structures.
This is why the last 60 years has seen the relentless destruction of non-economic inequalities and a concomitant increase in economic inequality. The for-profit economy relentlessly seeks to delegitimate everything other than itself, be that thing the economic public sector or non-economic social institutions like family and traditional religion.
Disappointed in a way that I didn’t make the cut. After all, I write here, and at SH, and have links to everybody on the hit list except for Roosh. And Mr. Manboobz links to me too…which drives more than a few trolls my way.
No not quite your standard feminist, particularly when it comes to the sacrament of abortion, but a feminist nonetheless.
@ Columnist: can you clarify what you mean by “right wing economics”?
Do you mean laissez-faire, free-market economics?
No not quite your standard feminist, particularly when it comes to the sacrament of abortion,
Careful with the MSM. Much about her is quite misinterpreted Elusive Wapiti.
Absolute equality is the leftist myth, while the bona fide free market is the rightist myth. No elite, even if his economic views are right-wing, advocates the free market out of self-interest; in reality, the elites convert their economic influence into political influence in order to capture the apparatus of political power, through funding electoral campaigns, media propaganda, and buying lobbyists, to advocate policies in their economic interest.
However, the elite are sociopaths and generally believe in free market social Darwinism where the economically disenfranchised have no political or economic rights guaranteed by the state, much like yourself EW.
I have to go to Mass, C ya!!
I quoted a piece. I do not know what he means with right-wing economics, but I suppose he means a system in which the taxes are low, wages are low, and welfare is non-existent.
March 12, 2012
„The economics just follows the demographic changes, which result from cultural changes.”
I’ll have to disagree. It’s more correct to say that technological innovations drive economic changes, which drive cultural changes, which in turn drive political changes, which in turn drive legal change. Brendan, others and I have discussed this on the „Will the real Sheila…” post at Dalrock. Ferdinand also had a post about this. The main reason why the feminist system can exist in the first place is because it has an economic foundation, unlike 100 years ago or in completely shithole countries like Afghanistan and Yemen. The Four Horsemen of the Sexual Apocalypse and whatnot. But I’m sure you know about that.
„Trads are not an ideological danger to the state or ruling elite, especially since they don’t even question the structure of the economic or argue that the economic elite’s influence is illegitimate or harmful.”
I’ll have to agree but I think the reasons are somewhat different. The main reasons are that tradcons basically encourage men to work hard and sign up for Marriage 2.0 while remaining silent on women’s general behavior. As long as they keep doing this, the feminists won’t see them as a threat at all. As long as a man works hard and signs up for Marriage 2.0, feminists are content with him and don’t really give a damn about all the other stuff he does, really. And as long as someone refuses to criticize modern women’s behavior, feminists are happy. There’s only a very minuscule and negligible number of tradcons who actually call on BOTH sexes to assume their traditionalist roles.
We can also see that tradcons are easily co-opted by the feminist system. They implore men to ’man up’, oppose men’s rights and so on. In that they are feminism’s co-belligerents. They also avoid any genuine attempts to influence mainstream culture, preferring to disengage and hunker down in small isolated communities. They aren’t even a nuisance to the powers that be. Tradcons may be more fertile than other Westerners but we can see that their children are easily influenced and brainwashed by mainstream culture. Their daughters will become de facto feminists and their sons beta chumps. In effect, they are merely creating new serfs for the powers that be, really.
„The single most important political issue is life, i.e. reproduction. The people who reproduce the most (trads) eventually take over the political sphere and are then able to reshape the economy as they like. The liberals know that, which is why they’re waging a pro-death (abortion, euthanasia, contraception) war against us. They’re determined to kill themselves off, and they want us to join in so that we can’t demographically overrun them.”
With all due respect, Alte, aren’t you overestimating the political importance of you tradcons? I doubt your political rulers obsess over you that much. The proliferation of abortion, euthanasia and contraception are driven by demand, not some sort of forced supply. It’s average people who want contraceptives and accessible abortion for their daughters and wives, euthanasia for people suffering from untreatable illnesses.
Even if the powers are afraid of being demographically overrun by tradcons, they can easily neutralize that threat by allowing even more Third World immigrants in, thus squeezing white tradcons even more in every sense of the word. In fact, that’s exactly what they’re doing now.
And look…it’s so damn easy for feminists to coopt tradcons, especially ’traditionalist’ white women and older ’conservative’ men. Bennett, that Driscoll guy, that Sheila woman, the Concerned Women of America etc. There has been many posts about this in the Manosphere.
I recognize what you say, Hound, but things are slowly turning. It’s the fourth turning.
Tradcons are finally reaching critical mass and they’ve become the main source of productive wealth and efficient human capital in America. Although they’re a small portion of the adult population, they’re increasingly separatist (which raises retention rates) and they’re swiftly becoming a plurality of economic and demographic capacity. Immigration is actually declining quickly, as the employment prospects dry up. Liberals are sterile, immigrants are going home, and tradcons are going to be the future as they’ll be the only ones to show up.
We’ve been a side-show for so long that people are waking up in shock to realize that there a fucking lot of us now and we breed like rabbits. And — most importantly — our men are hard and stable workers and valiant soldiers. Who else is working? Do you think the oil rigs, farms, utility companies, trash collection, truck companies, and coal mines are manned by a bunch of liberals and pansies? Do you think the military will continue to function as a permanent gay pride parade?
As those same men pull out of the corrupted fighting and working forces to defend and provide for only their own families, the liberals are having a fit. They’re starting to go after the RCC first, as that’s the biggest political prize. Then it’ll be the (mostly Protestant) homeschoolers, then the Mormons, and so on. They’re going to try to pick us off one by one, if we don’t show a unified front and send them packing back to the deviant ghettos they come from.
Tradcons are only irrelevant as long as the debt-money keeps rolling in. Cut off the spigot, and things will get ugly fast. The economic decline hasn’t even started yet (remember the Recovery Summer of 2008 — bwaahhhahaha!), and once they notice that we’re the ones still eating when the cash dries up, it’ll be on.
It’ll be a resource war, and we’ll have the resources. The land, the food, the energy, the manpower, the fertile women. They’ll have the MSM and oodles of weaponry and godless mercenaries they’ve bought on credit with a toilet-paper currency. It’ll be fun to watch.
For now, they’re sticking to distraction, and will be reduced to bombing some brown people somewhere, as soon as the farcical elections are over. War in Iran anybody?
Remember the Argentina thread? One by one, those predictions are coming true, even faster than I suspected. Everybody thought I was crazy then, and I’m sure they think I am crazy now. No mind. I can see the signs and I know the cycles.
I’m just referring now to the Next Step.
There’s no question that the future belongs to those who show up for it. However, I do agree with Hollenhund that mainstream Christians (even the most devout and well-meaning) are having a hard time keeping the children among the ranks of the faithful.
This of course, why increasing numbers of parents are opting out of the public school system, which is probably ground zero and the first step to take if you want to keep your children at least open to the gospel and traditional values. That, and not getting divorced or annulled, which the church is failing at miserably also. the church does need to hold women more accountable for their own sinful and frivolous behavior. No argument from us on that.
For the reasons stated above, I agree with Alte that the homeschoolers are probably next in line to get bullied, especially if El Presidente is re-elected. He has an almost obsessive interest in the feminist agenda and part one of that is to discourage childbirth and child rearing because women and men alike almost always become more conservative in their beliefs and lifestyles when they have children to tend to and raise in an increasingly coarsening culture.
I know it seems hopeless right now, Elspeth, but you have to realize that a lot of traditionalists are only now just waking up to the fact that they’ve been kicked out of the political center. It’s like they’ve been sleep-walking and are only now blinking, looking around, and thinking, “What the heck happened to this country?” The Manosphere made the SPLC list because of their ever-increasing relevance and incredible rise in influence. They went from nowhere five years ago to being seen as a threat to national interests, along with traditionalists, paleo-libertarians, alt-right, etc.
Moderation and assimilation is the habit of those welcome in the majority. Things are changing, and the desperate behavior of the liberals is going to accelerate that. People are going to have to finally pick sides, and that’s the game-changer.
In America it’s going to be mostly a religious conflict, with a secondary ethnic one. In Europe it’ll be an ethnic one, with a sharp rise in populism and devolvement of government, with an increase in religiosity coming only afterward. In both cases, people are going to move back to their traditions and the liberal governments (and the bottom-feeders they support) are going to resist, with violent results.
Major presidential candidate as evidence of the turning:
It’s the fourth turning.
Given that the authors noted that their theory snaps apart when attempting to fit the American Civil War into their pattern, I’ll refrain from actually bothering with that theory.
Liberals are sterile, immigrants are going home, and tradcons are going to be the future as they’ll be the only ones to show up.
As I’ve jokingly pointed out, if the liberals die out, and the traditionalists win, one could argue that the liberals still won as their children won’t have to suffer with the indignity of living under a traditionalist regime.
It’s trend-plotting, not sooth-saying, DA. The trend is clear. Do you deny it? Do you have any contradictory evidence?
This is the direction that Europe is moving. The guys at Patriactionary have been following it: http://patriactionary.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/hungary-yet-another-thorn-in-the-new-world-order/
by a bunch of liberals and pansies
Remember kids, we’re weak and effeminate, yet magically willing to resort to brutal tactics to destroy our enemies.
Although, as I noted in the shower just a moment ago, if one is forced to choose sides, somehow, I suspect I’m going to find myself on the liberal forces despite my relatively friendly experiences here. Mind you, I function best under this status quo, and as a bit of a MRA-sympathizer, I don’t find traditionalism to be too appealing or beneficial to me because it doesn’t shift the responsibility away from men, and for men like myself, it merely supplies a glut of desperate and less attractive women who magically want to be our wives.
Mind you, as I thought back to the novel Brave New World, I noted that I identified the most with John, the savage outsider to the strange utopia to the novel’s utopian city, but also with Mustapha Mond, the resident controller who essentially keeps the system flowing. It’s one thing to hold the ideal of free speech and liberty, but one could argue that for all intents and purposes, deep down inside, some of us would end up becoming resident controllers ourselves, and becoming Mustapha Mond types because of the fear of what exposing the truth would do. So yes, I could easily end up being in the liberal truth suppression squads in order to keep the status quo going because traditionalism is a horrible nightmare and destruction of our lives if one comes from my perspective. Maybe my joke to protect you once the war breaks out isn’t that far fetched though…
How’d this get to 114 comments before I found out about it?!
Anyhow, the SPLC is obviously speaking the truth! Everyone knows that men don’t have rights! Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously hates women!
Anyway with this “report” the SPLC just Jumped The Shark.
I see you haven’t been familiar with the SPLC for very long
This is the direction that Europe is moving.
Presuming that your theory is right, we could easily end up back to the liberal status quo once it peters out. Some of the underlying arguments about traditionalism fueled fascism back in the 1930s, and the fascist regimes failed terrible in the medium to long-term, and in the German case, ended with the a sizable chunk of the country becoming Slavic land, a huge chunk of the country’s wealth going to finance a Jewish state, and the Americans occupying the land with their jazz music playing soldiers.
In other words, while liberalism isn’t inevitable, neither is the return of traditionalism.
Even if the powers are afraid of being demographically overrun by tradcons, they can easily neutralize that threat by allowing even more Third World immigrants in
Third World fertility rates are declining rapidly and a few Third world countries have below replacement levels. People are living longer due to technology but the birth rate is going down.
It’s more correct to say that technological innovations
Technology is more of a tool than a cause. It can be twisted either way (e.g. see eugenics where technology was used for nationalism). Hollenhund the great majority of traditional conservatives on the net know and discuss that marriage is in trouble and broken. Little of us are going around clamoring for men and women to sign up blindly for marriage.
So yes, I could easily end up being in the liberal truth suppression squads in order to keep the status quo going because traditionalism is a horrible nightmare and destruction of our lives if one comes from my perspective.
The truth is horrifying so you’re rather live a pleasant lie.
Wrong. The Nazis were anti-transcendental and reductionist. People tend to overlook this factor due to concentration on Nazi hatred for the Jews. My view is basically this: the liberal West is committing suicide. Our goal is to save ourselves from the Titanic, not to fix the ship. As the Orthosphere has said: lifeboats, not soapboxes. The strategy should be rejection and separation. I have realized a long time ago that fixing the Titanic is hopeless and a waste of energy. It’s actually better to let the liberal feminist genes die out of the genepool instead of sustaining it.
I’ll half agree with DA. The rise of Christian traditionalism to dominance is not inevitable. However, the collapse of liberalism *is* inevitable (whether to Christian traditionalism or to some form of more brutal and more practical illiberal paganism), as is the fact that Christian traditionalism will outlive it. That which is unsustainable won’t be sustained.
“”The truth is horrifying so you’re rather live a pleasant lie.””
The lie is far better substitute for the horrifying nature of certain elements of the “truth”, so for some of us it’s better to obfuscate certain things while advancing others to ensure a more comfortable society for as many people as possible.
the liberal West is committing suicide
And nobody outlasts their own suicide, no matter how many casualties they take with them.
Kind of reminds me of the character Cypher from the movie The Matrix (1999, Keanu Reeves).
Here’s the thing DA. Traditionalism isn’t liberalism’s real enemy. Liberalism is. We’re not doing anything to you that you aren’t doing to yourselves. You can lie to meth addicts about what they’re doing to themselves all you want. You can shoot anyone who tries to tell them the truth. You can even embark on a vain quest to shoot all the non-meth-addicts in the world who are simply minding their own business in order to prevent the meth addicts from being exposed to the non-addicted and thereby realizing how screwed up their own lives are by comparison. But that’s not going to save the meth addicts.
I’ve been aware of the SPLC for over 25 years (was reading National Review when I was ten), and I learned quite a bit about it at VDARE which I started reading in 1998 or thereabouts. What I meant is that now some “mainstream” organs are starting to question it due to the overreach, and I’ve never really seen that happen before. Yeah white nationalists and some very far right (though non-racist) groups have in the past (some people did a double take when they started listing militias and immigration restrictionists as all being anti-government racists who hate brown people) but this is the first time I’ve seen established right wing or libertarian commentary (heck, even some “liberals” think this current report is overkill) questioning a decision of Whom to Put on the Hate List.
So that’s what my comment was all about. They’ve finally made some major players take the chance of scratching their heads and going “what’s this about?”. Plus, they’ve given the manosphere free publicity.
„This is the direction that Europe is moving. The guys at Patriactionary have been following it:”
Since I’m a Hungarian citizen with a somewhat decent knowledge of my native country’s history, I can tell you with some certainty that the idea of Hungary being „yet another thorn in the New World Order” is the biggest crock of absolute bullsh*t I’ve read on the Internet in about 6 months, which is saying something.
You see, Alte, Americans (or Germans or French for that matter) don’t know sh*t about small nations. They have no idea what’s it like to live under centuries of foreign subjugation, to have no sovereignty, to be ruled by the unscrupulous minions of foreign powers. You don’t realize that such foreign subjugation breeds a certain mentality of lowliness, dependence and subservience you cannot even imagine, let alone understand.
Hungary is basically similar to the Czechs, the Kurds or the Baltic ’nations’ – an insignificant bunch of worthless boot-lickers who always get stumped on, for the simple reason that their ancestors were stupid enough to settle in the periphery of competing great powers. It used to be Constantinople’s whore, then it was Vienna’s whore, then that of Berlin’s, it was Moscow’s whore after 1945 and now it’s the whore of Brussels. It’s the perfect breeding ground for traitors and sycophantic scumbags. But it also resents it’s sluttiness while wallowing in it like pigs. Why? Whores always resent those who pay them, because they remind them of their own whoredom.
So now Hungarians complain that they suffer from the dictatorship of Brussels. Nevermind that they rushed to suck Western cock after Soviet occupation ended in 1991, voting for NATO membership in a referendum in 1999 and supporting politicians who pushed for EU membership. Now the government lashes out at the heavy-handedness of the UN, but it’s nothing but a prostitute complaining that it had to engage in [Editor: redacted, use your imagination] in order to pay for her crack habit.
If you think Hungary represents some sort of new European trend or a thorn in anyone’s side, you’re delusional. It’s nothing but a whore that has been forced to kneel and suck for 500 years, so that’s the only thing it has ever known; a wasteland of a country that has heavily indebted itself for decades in order to pay for the standard of living it thinks it’s entitled to, yet produces absolutely nothing of value.
If you want to stick to the elite, maybe it is interesting to know of ether-energy.
a country that has heavily indebted itself for decades in order to pay for the standard of living it thinks it’s entitled to, yet produces absolutely nothing of value.
Sounds eerily familiar…
Hmm… let’s look into the future. On the one side you have this:
And on the other you have this:
Yup. Liberals totally have this one. We’re doomed.
I know that Hoellenhund, as I’m familiar with the Czech situation, and the way they’ve been overrun from all sides throughout history. However, I do think the political agitation in Hungary (and Finland, Norway, Austria, Germany, Spain, etc.) is part of a larger political trend toward nationalism and away from the EU.
lol, you owe me a coke
On the one side you have this:
Maybe it’s me, but her arguments reeked of feminist gin.
Kind of reminds me of the character Cypher from the movie The Matrix
Alcestis, I owe you a hug. A brief reading of that character on Wikipedia reveals how I’ve felt at certain moments where I wish to purge everything that I learned from the internet after swallowing the red pill…
Any thoughts on the Irish?
but her arguments reeked of feminist gin
That’s because Catholics believe in the dignity of women. Feminists claim to believe in the same, so the rhetoric can sound similar, but they’re not actually talking about the same things. Feminists consider “dignity” to be “acting like a man”, whereas Catholics believe “dignity” to be honoring the feminine virtues and women’s special role in the Church and home.
Catholicism is empowering for women, but not in the same destructive manner that feminism is. That is why feminists hate the RCC (because it insists that women are not men) and masculinists hate the RCC (because it insists that women are fully human).
Catholics believe that women have souls. Atheists don’t believe anyone has a soul. That leaves them open to all sorts of odd attitudes to both men and women.
Catholicism is empowering for women, but not in the same destructive manner that feminism is.
Yet, it gets into that issue where if one openly states that men built civilization and made technology that allows civilization to function, then you’re left with saying that because women didn’t do these things, they’re inferior to men in general, that argument is what drives feminists to argue that the only sensible reason for women being unable to do as well as men is systematic oppression, while masculinists have fuel for their arguments that women are inferior. Plus, I suspect that from a modern stand point, for a masculinist male, other than warm body for sexual output, he doesn’t need a woman to do anything for him, so the notion of having a special role at home or at Church sounds like bunk designed by white knights to put women on a pedestal. In contrast, while feminists are taking advantage of what men have done and have “allowed” them to do, some will not be fully content until they are as rich and sucessful as the highest ranking men, if not richer and more powerful due to what’s essentially a loser’s bias.
One could argue that masculinists and feminists both believe the same thing at the core, that men are superior to women…
Yes, DA, I have long said that a feminist is a woman who suspects women are inferior.
To some feminists, the solution is to handicap men, to others, it’s to attempt to become as masculine if not more masculine. As long as male success is seen as the fluid target for success, you’ll always have women comparing themselves to that target, hence the need for some feminists to ape men in an attempt to be as successful as them.
Feminists and “patriarchy” both agree on the success model.
Clarence, some of it is American careerism. Yes, you get careerist Australians and careerist Frenchmen and so on, but this is very much an American thing at base, and I think, as FB wrote recently in a startlingly insightful and honest piece, it is tied in with a Calvinist mentality.
Frenchmen and Australians know how to have a bit of fun, and how to relax. I have a bit of the old Protestant Work Ethic myself, from that side of my family, but I also know that pursuit of career is an uncertain thing at best. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when I read of American women whose first priority in life is something like becoming Vice President (Public Relations) for the E-Z-Snooze Bedding Company. It is a bit pathetic in a man, but abysmal in a woman.
LOL, DC. I tell my husband it’s the American version of the “work makes free” meme.
March 13, 2012
Since the thread is the fourth turning… let’s do the analysis. Years are Birth YEARS, add 20 to get the generation time right.
Depression babes (Greatest Generation) 1920 — 1940. Now 70s plus. In retirement. Have done fairly well. HIGH generation. SUpported and indulged kids.
Boomers 1940 — 1960 Now 50s to 70s. Retiring. The new elder generation. AWAKENING generation: set the moral tone for this cycle (and screwed it up, the bastards). Ignored and neglected kids during periods of consciousness raising and divorce.
Xers 1960 — 1980 Now 30s to 50s. Middle generation, now taking over leadership (NZ, Australia, UK, USA). UNRAVELLING. Grew up under Thatcher or Reagan. The unionised certainty of the American high was gone… the front edge of this and the rear edge graduated into depressions. Had minimal confidence about parenting, but tended to be over protective. memes about keeping children safe… There is a demographic crash for this lot as the baby boom finishes.
Y 1980 — 2000. Now teens and twenties. CRISIS. Still to come(perhaps) but a much more sheltered generation than their parents, and at the same time grew up in tractured houses where more bad things happened. This bunch, to me (I am talking about my children here) are both very conservative in life with a liberal ideology — daughter — to radically right wing (sons, born 10 years later)
Millenials 2000 on. The new HIGH generation, if the US survives the crisis.
Again think life cycles. 20 years of childhood and adolescence, shaking things up and wanting to change things in 20s and 30s (revolution is a young man’s game) and then wanting to preserve during the period of peak responsibility in 40s and 50s, before slowing down in 60s and 70s (letting younger generations lead, but probably still working) before old age in 80s plus.
How a generation is depends on how they are raised. And… what Alte is saying is that the tradcons are the ones raising kids. My question is raising kids for what generation The crisis generation is Svar, Alcest, Will S, and she who goes by the initials BF. Perhaps elspeth’s older kids. Definitely mine. Alte’s and Grerp’s kids are probably millennials, who will lead after the crisis.
But I am afraid Alte is right. The crisis is coming.
Alcestis, I owe you a hug.
That is why feminists hate the RCC (because it insists that women are not men) and masculinists hate the RCC (because it insists that women are fully human).
Maybe its late but I don’t see anything but evil (however you define such a thing if it exists at all it does when one has malignant motives) in their characterizations of SAFER and The False Rape Society. Those are good people who help other people. I can only think they were smeared specifically to try to destroy their ability to help people. The people who take the SPLC as Total Unvarnished Truth now will never have any reason to investigate SAFER or FRS on their own, and the few rad fems who for reasons of prestige, power, or ideology, want to keep criticism from their door now have something that they can point to and discredit those sites because many people, esp on the left, never question the SPLC.
I’ve heard of “dirty pole” in politics, and one almost expects it these days, but really, the only way the SPLC could go lower in their report was if it had attacked a hospital or orphanage.
„However, I do think the political agitation in Hungary (and Finland, Norway, Austria, Germany, Spain, etc.) is part of a larger political trend toward nationalism and away from the EU.”
Opposing a bloated mess of an organization because you have been burdened with financing it for decades is one thing (see: Germany). Resenting it because you have second thoughts about inviting a new overlord while living off his loans so as to avoid bankruptcy is another (see: Hungary). If you value your national sovereignty, perhaps it’d have been a good idea not to voluntarily surrender it to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats hundreds of miles away, you know. It’s a bit late to have second thoughts now.
The EU is like the COMECON – it’s impossible to secede. Either all member states decide to dissolve it after the hegemons (France and Germany) give the green light or it will bumble on. The problem is that unlike in 1991, nobody is prepared to pick up the slack. The Eastern European states are in a huge economic mess, they need foreign markets and new loans or else they collapse. Western Europe could offer such opportunities in 1991, but nobody can fill the same role today.
What the EU will use to squash dissent:
he European Gendarmerie Force (EGF) is an initiative of 5 EU Member States – France, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain – aimed at improving the crisis management capability in sensitive areas. Since Wednesday, 17th December 2008, the High Level Interdepartmental Committee Meeting (CIMIN) decided to welcome the Romanian Gendarmerie to become a full member of the EGF. Therefore the EGF consists from that moment of 6 member states.
EGF responds to the need to rapidly conduct all the spectrum of civil security actions, either on its own or in parallel with the military intervention, by providing a multinational and effective tool.
The EGF will facilitate the handling of crisis that require management by police forces, usually in a critical situation, also taking advantage from the experience already gained in the relevant peace-keeping missions.
Based in Vicenza in the “Generale Chinotto” barracks, the EGF HQ is now developing a comprehensive and coherent operational system, which will permit to be ready in case of prompt deployment to crisis areas.
EGF goal is to provide the International Community with a valid and operational instrument for crisis management, first and foremost at disposal of EU, but also of other International Organizations, as NATO, UN and OSCE, and ad hoc coalitions
The crisis generation is Svar, Alcest, Will S, and she who goes by the initials BF.
You do realize that Alte and I are both products of being born in the early 1980s. Either move your years back or include us in your prognostications. Mind you, that shows some of the problem in coming up with designations for generations as if it’s too narrow or too wide, it’s pointless. Can one really call somebody who could have been drafted into Vietnam and somebody who watched it as a child on TV a member of the same generation?
are both very conservative in life with a liberal ideology
I suspect some of that generation watched the end game of our older siblings and cousins, hence our somewhat conservative positions. As an example, they’re less likely to use ilicit drugs or get pregnant under the age of 18, but more likely to be pro-gay marriage.
And… what Alte is saying is that the tradcons are the ones raising kids.
Ultimately, the strength of the trads will come based on their ability to isolate and inoculate their children against liberal influences. If they’re unsuccessful, it may simply be in vain, and if they’re successful, then liberals may simply have to become political refugees fleeing a land that has become hostile to them. In every group, there’s always the child that rebels, but it remains to be seen if there are enough traditional children to rebel in large enough numbers to provide fresh recruits for traditionalism.
Of course, some would argue that liberals should pump up their birth rate, but what’s the point of pumping up birth rates when it hampers the movement and makes into half-assed clones of the traditionals? If one is ultimately paranoid, it makes more sense to eat at the opposition’s birth rate in order to maintain one’s numbers, but it’s hard to fully implement that without an authoritarian regime.
OTOH, you can buy into resource depletion, and argue that the planet is going to go to pot, and just laugh at the notion that the trad children will suffer horrible lives in the future, while feeling smug about not having children that will endure such a massive collapse in their living standards.
I tell my husband it’s the American version of the “work makes free” meme.
I’m tempted to argue that things are different in Germany because there’s a bit more acceptance of hierarchy there, which may also explain your traditionalist leanings even more, while with Americans, there’s less of an acceptance of it, and thus there’s this weird notion that everybody must climb the career ladder or you’re failure, something that I suspect may not exist in Germany. So a woman can’t just be a “good mom”, but she has to be a good mom and a Vice President of Something to show that she’s accomplished AND important, and that sentiment is probably amplified here in the Northeast, especially in NYC Metro where your competition are the guys who graduated and went to FIRE and BIGLAW and have more money than you’ll make in five years with the ability to outbid your ass for everything and lock up the women that you want, or you have immigrant parents who came to the States from the third world in order for their children to become what they couldn’t be in their home countries.
I scored 45549
I scored 42010.
As an example, they’re less likely to use ilicit drugs or get pregnant under the age of 18, but more likely to be pro-gay marriage.
Lack of pregnancy doesn’t necessarily mean that teenagers are less promiscuous and less sexually liberal. How chaste are they? Not much.
Environmentalism in its current state is quite bogus.
Doesn’t the elite consume a lot of the world’s resources? Yes being single and childless but living a wasteful lifestyle and not being frugal at all is so environmentally friendly.
Clarence, it is an interesting example of something I have observed a lot, the running down of trust capital. That is, an organisation like SPLC builds up a lot of trust under one group of people, then it is taken over by another group who use it for worse purposes and use up the fund of trust. Eventually people realise that the organisation has gone bad.
I think there is something called Derbyshire’s Law, or maybe it was invented by another conservative, but basically it says: “All organisations not specifically founded as conservative eventually drift to the Left”.
Amnesty International did this. I was a member for a few years, but it eventually went the pro-feminist, pro-abort way, and I withdrew my membership.
Or it could easily mean that their lives are so over-scheduled that they simply don’t have the time to engage in sex with their peers. Surveys seem to hint that compared to their Gen X forebears, Gen Y and trends to being somewhat tame in comparison.
One must remember that the actions of the elite are a questionable proxy for what others with liberal tendencies may engage in. There are plenty who speak of peak oil and peak anything in the same way that Alte and others speak of peak government borrowing or peak economy. So while some pay lip-service to environmentalism, others are living the cause with an optimistic view of the future with low energy use, and few are taking a pessimistic viewpoint and hoping that they’re wrong.
Will S. is 39 years old, Chris. LOL. But I see your point.
You do realize that Alte and I are both products of being born in the early 1980s.
You and Alte are really an apples to oranges comparison DA, despite the closeness of your ages. I’m 9 years older than her but our similarity of values and lifestyle display a commonness of destination that you don’t.
Ultimately, the strength of the trads will come based on their ability to isolate and inoculate their children against liberal influences.
This is actually intriguing because I gather you were raised much more conservatively than your opinions indicate.
Or it could easily mean that their lives are so over-scheduled that they simply don’t have the time to engage in sex with their peers.
What about hook-up culture? Despite the helicopter parenting of SWPLs, hook-up culture is still all the rage and is arguably more entrenched today than yesterday (see Hooking Up Smart). I also don’t believe that generation Y is more conservative. If most of them believed that sex differences exist and that men and women are not the same then they wouldn’t buy into the canard that single parenting, a village or homosexuals raising children and getting married is the same as a man and a woman doing it. How many of generation Y are anti-feminist? How many of them are sex/gender realists? How many have swallowed the red pill?
I also don’t believe that generation Y is more conservative.
I meant to say that the “spirit of the age” of Generation Y is liberal-leaning.
Or maybe the “spirit of the age” of Generation Y is just left-overs from other generations like the Boomer generation?
Maybe its late but I don’t see anything but evil (however you define such a thing if it exists at all it does when one has malignant motives) in their characterizations of SAFER and The False Rape Society. Those are good people who help other people.
Yeah, it was a bit like kicking a kitten. Not very noble to list people fighting against false imprisonment (as Amnesty used to do) as a “hate group”.
Millennials actually don’t differ from their parents and grandparents much, when you control for age. I.e. Boomers were actually less conservative and religious than millennials when they were the same age that millennials are now, and the pattern is that people tend to become more conservative as they age.
The thing you have to understand about millennials is that they’re a very libertarian (classically liberal) group. So they believe in dropping legal prohibitions on a number of things, even if they personally are against that thing. They are also slightly more chaste:
Their pro-gay marriage views are mostly based upon their completely jaded view of marriage. It’s worthless to them, so they don’t see much point in protecting it. I’m also rather ambivalent about civil marriage, so seeing my “elders” get all worked up about it all seems silly. Civil marriage is just a piece of paper; just another contract. Soon millenials are going to see the light and promote chucking the paper altogether, as I do.
The liberals are going to die off and make room for us.
You and Alte are really an apples to oranges comparison DA, despite the closeness of your ages.
Not really. I’m even more jaded then he is, which makes me more inclined to chuck the whole system and start over. He’s still living under the delusion that things aren’t really that bad and we can just continue extend-and-pretend.
I think that pretty much nails it. Generation Y is the generation most thoroughly indoctrinated in distilled, PC “sex is socially constructed” pablum in all of history thanks to their elders, but they’re coming of age at a time when the consequences and contradictions of that ideology are increasingly coming to bear on them. There’s going to be a lot of reevalution and resentment over the next few decades.
I used to believe all that stuff too. I was fully indoctrinated into the “liberal mindset”. Needless to say, it didn’t stick.
My mother bought my daughter a “Girls Rule” t-shirt for her birthday. When my husband saw it, he said, “We should get our son an ‘I’m with stupid’ shirt, and they’d be a matched set.” It’s become a finger-painting smock.
She was so proud of it, saying, “You get it? Girls rule. Because men rule everywhere…” voice trails off at the sight of our disgusted faces. Then my son said, “If girls rule, what does that make boys, Grandma?” Yeah, Grandma? What does that make your grandson? Hmm? We’re all listening. I just told her that she was mentally stuck in the 1960s and that we don’t generally use our children’s bodies as propaganda platforms.
My headcoverings are funny. At first my husband wasn’t so enthusiastic, but then my mother complained that he was “making me wear those rags on my head”, so now he delights in them.
Robert Conquest’s Three Laws of politics:
1. Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
2. Any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will
sooner or later become left-wing.
3. The behavior of any bureaucratic organization can best be understood by
assuming that it is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies.
Of the Second Law, Conquest gave the Church of England and Amnesty
International as examples.
1. Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
2. Any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will
sooner or later become left-wing.
3. The behavior of any bureaucratic organization can best be understood by
assuming that it is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies.
Of the Second Law, Conquest gave the Church of England and Amnesty
International as examples.
John O’Sullivan’s First Law is similar to Conquest’s Second law (of whom he is aware and has written about) of politics stating:
All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing
When the SHTF in Europe, it will be very useful to know Turkish e.a. This can be done at:
Turkish, incidentally, is a lot like Hungarian; agglutinative, and having vowel harmony.
“I used to believe all that stuff too. I was fully indoctrinated into the “liberal mindset”. Needless to say, it didn’t stick.”
Do you think I was/am “fully indoctrinated” into the “liberal mindset”? Personally, I find the term liberal to describe my political views to be derogatory, and, because of my autism, I am immune to groupthink such as liberalism. I wasn’t even mesmerized by Obamania in 2008, unlike many bona fide liberals.
I am autistic, too. The difference between Liberalism and Marxism-Leninism is as great as the difference between M-Lism and Fascism. Then again, the difference between Conservatism and Fascism is as large as the difference between Conservatism and Liberalism. The four ideologies form a square.
I’ll admit that my parents to have a somewhat conservative streak in terms of how they raised me, but they’re not exactly traditionalists. Yeah, they’re Church going types, but they’re not exactly in the chaste no-sex before marriage pool either. Even my mother can hold some what contradictory viewpoints as she’ll note her reasons for staying at home with us, while she complains about my cousin wasting her Ivy League degree on doing the same thing. Mind you, something like gay marriage would be horrifying for them, and my mom isn’t even fond of female altar servers. OTOH, they’re basically perpetual DNC voters, but more so because they view themselves as not-rich and incapable of becoming rich with no real desire to argue lower income tax rates that won’t help them.
Mind you, as I’ve jokingly said, one’s ability to be conservative depends on one’s ability to live a liberal lifestyle. If you’re an alpha, then your ability to live a non-chase lifestyle is high because one derives considerable benefits from doing so, while for a beta male, they’re forced to live a relatively sex-free lifestyle due to an inability to attract women. The same is true for the lifestyles of attractive and unattractive women as well.
But to return to your original topic of your comment, I’ve had somewhat liberal viewpoints since my early teenage years, but it may simply be the product of my personality, and less some condition of rebelling against my parents, and potentially a recognition of my status as a low-ranking, non-white, non-masculine omega male at the fringes of society needed the state to intervene and keep me safe.
I still find it rather interesting that traditionalists and to a lesser extent conservatives have such a focus on liberal birthrates, almost as if you want us to stick around for some strange reason.
Their pro-gay marriage views are mostly based upon their completely jaded view of marriage
It’s not so much that they’re jaded, but also because they’ve fully bought into the values of secular marriage instead of traditional marriage, and by that logic, if two people love each other that they want to live together on a somewhat permanent basis, why shouldn’t they get married? The jaded viewpoints eat away somewhat at the religious aspects, but it’s defining elements of modern marriage basically seal the deal, and arguably a sympathetic viewpoint to those who may know an openly gay person. Even if one runs around arguing that marriage is the bedrock of civilization, then without much critical thinking, one could argue that including gays would improve said bedrock and allow it be inclusive of our friends while improving their lives too, especially if marriage is seen as a positive middle class trait.
Soon millenials are going to see the light and promote chucking the paper altogether, as I do.
I just discovered that one of my friends isn’t going to get married because her fiancee finds US divorce law to be too harmful for his interests. So given the choice between losing his savings and property in case my friend wants a divorce, he’s opted to play long-term relationship with her. Of course, one may say that’s a consequence of modern marriage, but as I’ve noted before, traditional marriage isn’t much better once you realize the true nature of women which may explain why the Church is so obsessed with chaste sexual acts within marriage.
I’m even more jaded then he is, which makes me more inclined to chuck the whole system and start over. He’s still living under the delusion that things aren’t really that bad and we can just continue extend-and-pretend.
Of course, and we have experts who will save the day and keep the world safe for pornography and railfan trips around the world while preventing mass suffering. Hopium is a far better drug than what you’re drinking.
I drink Hard Cider. Once a month, usually.
The difference between Liberalism and Marxism-Leninism is as great as the difference between M-Lism and Fascism. Then again, the difference between Conservatism and Fascism is as large as the difference between Conservatism and Liberalism. The four ideologies form a square.
Do you think Anarcho-communism (I respect them), left-communism (my least favorite far-left ideology), or Trotskyism form vertices for any political geometric figure?
I think Anarcho-communism could transform into Libertarianism, and I really understand why you don’t like left-communism. Trotskyism would be the most pure form of Communism, right into the corner, with Stalinism being very close to Fascism. Within Fascism, Strasser would be almost a Commie, Pinochet almost a Conservative.
I wonder if left-wing autistics are more likely to be part of the far-left, such as M-Lism, than normal people who would just be liberals. Are autistics more likely to be M-Ls than left-communists?
Yes, autistics would be more likely to be far-left than liberal. For two reasons. First, autistics are more committed to logic and reason than to respectability. So, given the axioms of the left, they follow them to their logical conclusions.
Second, more pragmatic, autistics have a hard time finding and keeping a job, so are more drawn to the economic aspects of leftism.
My expectation and experience is that the more aspergery types tend to be libertarians.
The right-leaning, yes.
Some of the far-left ones break right on through to traditional Catholicism.
I think I’ll be a walking contradiction (a Catholic M-L) just like Peter Thiel is a gay Christian and Republican.
Again, I wonder if autistics gravitate towards M-Lism relative to left-communism or Trotskyism.
March 14, 2012
Trotskyism sure is more hip.
There is little mentioning of him as a Christian. He’s a libertarian -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel#Politics
“Thiel inherited the Christianity of his parents–he grew up as an Evangelical–but he describes his beliefs as “somewhat heterodox,” complicated by his cultural liberalism. “I believe Christianity is true,”he said. “I don’t sort of feel a compelling need to convince other people of that.” (It’s hard to think of another subject about which Thiel would say this.) Sonia Arrison, the author of “100 Plus,” a book on research into life extension, first met Thiel in 2003, when she heard him give a lunch talk about thefailure of the U.S. Constitution. Eight years later, they are close friends, but she has no idea of his religious beliefs. “He won’t tell me what he is,” she said. “He thinks I should just know. He would never tell me whether he believes in God.”
Thiel compares the difference between faith and empiricism to the difference between technology andglobalization: “Technology maps to miraculous supernatural creation, and globalization maps tonaturalistic uniformitarian evolution. Technology involves the creation of radically new things thathave not existed, and globalization maps to the continual copying of things that already exist.” As for being gay and Christian, Thiel said, “There obviously are all these things that are complicated about it, but I still don’t like the ideological thing that the correct response means that you have to give up your entire faith.””
but he describes his beliefs as “somewhat heterodox,” complicated by his cultural liberalism.
As “somewhat heterodox” as the ‘Catholic beliefs’ of Nancy Pelosi isn’t it?
As for being gay and Christian, Thiel said, “There obviously are all these things that are complicated about it, but I still don’t like the ideological thing that the correct response means that you have to give up your entire faith.”
Unfortunately, the correct response is to give up his faith. Lukewarm Christians don’t do much good. They have one foot in the kingdom of God and one foot in the Devil’s house.
Yes, autistics would be more likely to be far-left than liberal.
We must live on different planets. Everyone I know ITRW who is “on the spectrum” is a hardcore right-wing constitutionalist, myself included. Ron Paul is getting pretty much all of the Aspie vote, LOL.
For two reasons. First, autistics are more committed to logic and reason than to respectability. So, given the axioms of the left, they follow them to their logical conclusions.
However, autistics are more likely to be smart enough to figure out that the axioms of the left are not “given”, but in fact are wrong.
You’re right though, about following lefty axioms to their logical conclusions: back in high school I realized that liberalism, whether it realized it or not, led straight to communism, and of course I was aspergerish enough to say so. My liberal classmates didn’t like that, especially since it was the Cold War and the Soviets had a whole lot of nukes pointed at us — and while they were smoking dope and fornicating, I was learning survival skills, learning to shoot, and preparing for a “Red Dawn” that fortunately never came. (Or, not yet?)
Second, more pragmatic, autistics have a hard time finding and keeping a job, so are more drawn to the economic aspects of leftism.
Again, we must live on different planets. Check out the engineering and science salaries:
van Rooinek March 14, 2012
I was comparing Liberalism vs Communism, not Left vs Right. If an Aspie has to be a Leftie, it will be Commie.
As I said, politics is a square. During the Cold War, I was a Conservative/Fascist, but now I am at the intersection of Communism and Fascism.
I did study Chemistry for a few years, but dropped things and could not work together with classmates in the lab, so I had to finish the Law study I was doing in parallel.
About twelve years ago, the government decided I was eligible for disability checks. Since then, I have irregular jobs/ am on workfare.
Ron Paul is getting pretty much all of the Aspie vote, LOL.
As for jobs and such, PPD doesn’t appear to be dysgenic, except in its more severe forms like low-functioning autism or really debilitating Aspergers. That’s why the rates are rising so fast, just as with SSA (same-sex attraction, another neurological disorder). PPD and SSA both convey traits to carriers that are only a negative in higher quantities, so the mildest cases and their siblings have a net-benefit.
I don’t have autism, but I’m a carrier of those traits and they’ve been of great help to me.
If an Aspie has to be a Leftie, it will be Commie.
This is true. At least communism makes an attempt at structuring their philosophy around logical arguments, whereas most left-liberalism is just a bunch of empathetic nonsense.
We must live on different planets. Everyone I know ITRW who is “on the spectrum” is a hardcore right-wing constitutionalist, myself included. Ron Paul is getting pretty much all of the Aspie vote, LOL.
Perhaps, this is due to selection bias, since you probably would not associate with left-wing people in your social life. You seem to suffer from paranoid delusions.
I wonder what proportion of autistics are verbally oriented, like myself. As for myself, I was unimpressed with the liberal intellectual material (such as the stuff posted by Paul Krugman), but I found HCKL’s profound historical knowledge, insightful analysis, and sincerity irresistible. I think HCKL is verbally oriented, and I certainly venerate him.
March 15, 2012
„Tradcons are finally reaching critical mass and they’ve become the main source of productive wealth and efficient human capital in America.”
I’m not debating that but there’s a huge difference between creating wealth and controlling it. You’ve written many times about the US rapidly turning into a Brazil-like oligarchy where a small and isolated elite has virtually all economic and political influence. History teaches that wealth production certainly doesn’t necessarily lead to political power.
„Although they’re a small portion of the adult population, they’re increasingly separatist (which raises retention rates) and they’re swiftly becoming a plurality of economic and demographic capacity. Immigration is actually declining quickly, as the employment prospects dry up.”
Well, Alte, haven’t you written about the probable return of manufacturing to the US? It’s turning into a plantation economy where the middle class has disappeared and the impoverished masses work at the plantations and industrial plants of the oligarchy, picking oranges, drilling for oil, growing peanuts etc. Will that require more immigrants or fewer? You know the answer.
Besides, immigration as an issue is largely water under the bridge. The time where there was a chance of it being curtailed has long passed. Immigration rates may be declining but that doesn’t change the fact that huge masses of Latin Americans are already living in the US and being much more fertile than the natives. Not to mention the apparent long-term desire of the political leadership to create an ethnically heterogenous state. As this comes to pass, it’ll be very easy for the political leadership to play a) various ethnic groups against each other b) various groups of whites against each other.
„And — most importantly — our men are hard and stable workers and valiant soldiers.”
Which happens to be precisely the reason why it’s so easy for the regime to turn them into legally powerless white knights, serfs and cannon fodder. By being a hard worker and a dutiful husband, a man is giving feminists, liberals and the whole system exactly what they want. You do recognize that, don’t you?
„Do you think the oil rigs, farms, utility companies, trash collection, truck companies, and coal mines are manned by a bunch of liberals and pansies? Do you think the military will continue to function as a permanent gay pride parade?”
The oligarchy is free to import virtually any amount of Third World paupers in order to fill all those positions. The lack of manpower will never be a problem for them. They print the money, they decide the policy, they allocate the spoils. Sorry, Alte, but you tradcons aren’t irreplaceable.
„They’re going to try to pick us off one by one, if we don’t show a unified front and send them packing back to the deviant ghettos they come from.”
You bet! And history teaches it’s rather easy to turn tradcons against each other.
„It’ll be a resource war, and we’ll have the resources. The land, the food, the energy, the manpower, the fertile women. They’ll have the MSM and oodles of weaponry and godless mercenaries they’ve bought on credit with a toilet-paper currency. It’ll be fun to watch.”
Again, you seem to fail to understand the correlation of forces. The oligarchy can just recruit hundreds of thousands of mercenaries from the Third World, arm them and let them loose on you by offering them spoils. If not fiat currency, then confiscated land, diamonds, oil concessions and whatnot. Don’t think for a minute you won’t be outgunned.
“Latin Americans are already living in the US and being much more fertile than the natives”
The Latin Americans claim to BE the natives. And if you don’t believe in Solutreans, they ARE.
March 16, 2012
Immigration rates may be declining but that doesn’t change the fact that huge masses of Latin Americans are already living in the US and being much more fertile than the natives.
There is the solution of deportation (but that is going to mount a lot of liberal opposition and hysteria).
We all know very well that deportation won’t ever happen.
Then you should go for secession. Leave the South-West to Aztlan.
I live in Texas. Hopefully we don;t get included in “Aztlan”. I think some of our University professors are doing work to put us in that category.
March 17, 2012
Columnist has a point. Secession is another widely discussed solution.
March 23, 2012
Aztlan is Aztec for “white soil”. The prophecy is that many of their descendants will live in a land of “white soil” where they will enjoy unprecedented freedom and prosperity.
Sounds to me like America is not the enemy of the Aztlan vision, but the fulfillment of it. Especially if you interpret the “white soil” to mean, not literal white dirt — which is rare — but, a nation founded and built largely by white folks.
March 24, 2012
So, there is an interesting correspondence between Aztec and Latin:
tlan = humus
tlacatl = homo
[…] Looks like the Ess Ell Pee Cee is at again!: https://traditionalchristianity.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/omfg/ […]
[…] I note that those who do not believe that we are fallen have listed a bunch of sites as hatemongering. […]
[…] night son one decided that he was going to watch the demographic winter. This leads back to one of the ongoing observations, that the religious have more children: that […]
[…] back the boomers, who were the last generation that shook things up. Quoting Alte (from today, the same thread…) I recognize what you say, Hound, but things are slowly turning. It’s the fourth […]
[…] feminists, is that they may have injected their medicine into us, but like Stephen Daedulus, it has not taken. There is a great quote by Orwell that perfectly summarizes this situation: “During times of […]
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.