*This is the Prolepticon... read site disclaimers
The LowBrowsing News Blog was short-lived I'm afraid. I have decided that my first instinct was correct - just turn off all social media for a while. I will be focusing on my academic research and on creative writing projects.
Using Voat was a very interesting experience and I believe that there are really great people there. Unfortunately, that forum is riddled with dogmatic Christian Right, hate-filled radical isolationists, pedophiles exploiting the "free speech" promise, and general misanthropes.
My conclusions have not changed since my Voat vs Gab article - we need a true free speech platform and one which phases out destructive and pointless forms of free expression that are not free speech, such as free gibberish and free ravings.
I will return to social media when that happens. My final hours on Voat were inspiring. The community started fighting back against the pedophiles and demanded that they get booted. However, the pedos and misanthropes throttled that by trolling the down-vote buttons on comments. It is clear that the owner of the site believes that it is hypocritical to censor pedophiles and justifies that position through advocating his definition of "free speech". Here is what I had to say about that:
"Free speech fizzles out when children aren't protected.
When children aren't protected from moral degeneracy then they grow up desperately seeking security, and this makes them fodder for becoming ideologues. They will desperately run to adopt someone else's answer to things and then use that ideology as a security blanket.
Once they have become ideologues their expressions are not free and their speech is not free. They simply spout garbled renditions of the messages of their masters.
I say remove all quasi-kiddie porn stuff from Voat in the logic of protecting free speech (more than in protecting the reputation of Voat per se."
The pedophiles had drawn attention to themselves through posting images of pornstars in the "WhiteBeauty" subverse. I had been finding that subverse inspirational up until then.
I am white and have dated women of every color and creed (not a brag, nor an exaggeration). I am open-minded to meeting the right woman who could be of any background, but I am most interested in white European women. I believe that the peoples that moved to Europe in prehistoric times were those who had a strong work ethic and a sensibility toward desiring breathing room geographically as well as aseptic conditions. Europe through its harsh wintry weather provided the ideal environment for those types of personalities and dispositions. In addition, the low-light levels over time led to a kind of morosity for northern Europeans that I experience and I find that women who share this with me are kindred spirits that can help lift me out of that gloom unlike any other kind of woman I have met can do.
And so, I posted the image above to the WhiteBeauty subverse and believe that it exemplifies the positive qualities I find in European ethnic heritage. I know the family in the image and they were high school sweethearts. I envy the life they have forged for themselves and I wish them the best. I think that there is no better example of White Beauty in this world really.
I also took an opportunity to plug Cato the Elder who I believe is a historical figure that we sorely need back with us today. He did everything right and preserved the health of the Roman Republic. It's a shame he wasn't immortal so that he could have been an enlightened despot for Rome centuries after. I discovered Cato the Elder during research after watching a video that had been posted at Voat. The video was by OrderOfMan and I know nothing about that channel, but the message "Intentionality" was incredibly positive and inspiring.
Therefore, I searched out the root of that inspiration and found it in Cato the Elder. I then compiled some historical details and posted them to Voat:
Cato the Elder (Marcus Porcius Cato) aka Cato the Censor, Cato the Wise, Cato the Ancient
Roman senator and historian 234-149 BC
Quotes (published and attributed):
The best way to keep good acts in memory is to refresh them with new.
Wise men profit more from fools than fools from wise men; for the wise men shun the mistakes of fools, but fools do not imitate the successes of the wise.
I would much rather have men ask why I have no statue, than why I have one.
Grasp the subject, the words will follow.
We cannot control the evil tongues of others; but a good life enables us to disregard them.
An angry man opens his mouth and shuts his eyes.
Patience is the greatest of all virtues.
I think the first virtue is to restrain the tongue; he approaches nearest to gods who knows how to be silent, even though he is in the right.
Cato the Elder's wisdom speaks for itself and so far it seems like he had everything right. What was really shocking to me was that Rome was suffering the social ills that the West faces today well before the Empire. In fact, one might presume that the perpetuation of these ills is what set up the conditions possible for converting Rome from a republic to an empire. And so what does the future have in store for us?
I then took some liberties...
I decided to indulge a bit in bigotry and get some monkeys off my back. Islam has had no development historically whereby there is a schism that has produced a more moderate sect (unlike Christianity with the Reformation). Islamic society in its most "moderate" articulations remains pervasively misogynistic. I am pro-woman, pro-man, pro-civilization. Feminism is anti-woman. For the sake of power in the attempt to grab top-spot, feminists throw Muslim women under the bus, withholding support for their suffrage. I find this deplorable.
No young woman chooses to dress as proscribed by her father and husband. Muslim women do not have the choice to remove their hijab, niqab and burka. The father and then husband choose for them. The idea that religion is used to reinforce that sexism is irrelevant and it doesn't authorize the sexism. God is either non-existent or a non-sexist. Sexist Gods should not have their authority and values recognized by humans. So for shame to all the feminists and leftists who bandy about the stigma of "Islamaphobe" simply because they, one, hate Christians, and two, want to convert Middle Eastern people to collectivist socialism through appearing as friendly allies.
For the image I created above, the idea was that instead of strong-arm tactics at the Western borders, we would take a more passive-aggressive approach by simply covering the land and ourselves in pork products. I have absolutely no respect for religious doctrine and find it inhuman. Religion has the worst human rights violation track record of any institution ever (even worse than Communism). Although Communism has killed more people than religion, religion has been more enduring and created more misery overall.
The taboo nature of pork for Judaism and Islam is a bad joke. The reason to fear pork is that in ancient times, its preparation in the agriculture industry produced certain serious health risks. To avoid needless illness, society of the time used religious authority to get the message across that people shouldn't mess around with pork. The taboo nature of pork in religion is nothing more than a superstition and I will gladly mock it in order to knock even just one Muslim out of their brainwashed state and bring them up to date with the real world. I can't imagine any other way to challenge religious ideology in a friendly manner than through the use of humor.
Anyway, I continued to do a little humor across Voat, getting in on some of the Clown World Order stuff. I think that CWO was a good idea, but it is perhaps too programmatic to capture the hearts of conservatives. It is more a leftist tactic to do the same tired redundant attack on opponents. These kinds of attacks can be easily co-opted by opponents once proponents of the original movement begin to articulate their attacks poorly.
I made some colorful generalizations about the institutionalized self-pity of Indigenous Peoples, offering not only a logical analysis but some hope through productive solutions to the problem. I criticized the internet troll term, "lulz" as being laughter deferred - a kind of laughter that panders to the opinion leaders of the movement. I noted that this is a pitiful form of expression and affiliation. I laid out my terms for why I believe that most rape accusers are indeed victims yet also prone to finger-pointing those that are not the perpetrators. I provided advice to those in the academy who are suffering hardships due to feminist witch hunting. I suggested that they make liberal use of the only agency at the school that is impartial with respect to political ideology and which also protects people from religious-based leftist rackets.
I would say that all of this activity was content that would need to be in the Prolepticon and so I committed to moving my News Blog to the Prolepticon which is where it is now and will stay. This content is a little more on-the-nose and self-reflexive for the spirit of the Prolepticon but I will let it pass and perhaps review this News Blog in the future and decide to restructure it with some kind of narrative frame.
Part of my attack on illegal immigration was related to a recent story involving migrant ships trying to enter European waters but which were subsequently turned away. The ships were almost entirely young men, but the journalist reporting also noted that a woman had given birth during the voyage. It is absolutely clear that the immigrants have no conscience. They intentionally brought along an extremely pregnant woman despite having no proper supplies or even food to make the trip when considering contingencies and the possibility of being turned away from the first port of call. These are not energetic people that provide a Brain Gain for the West. These an unethical, uncivilized brutes - in effect they are monsters. To try to leverage your claim for asylum through sacrificing the well-being of a newborn child is unconscionable. There can be NO justification for this. The Leftist global-historical agenda does not come before the life of any child. There is no "greater good" to consider here.
Surprisingly, I was down-voted in a concerted way for promoting reading comic books (old Marvel X-Men) as a hobby. I can only assume that it was the rabid antisemites who came after me believing that comic books are an industry controlled by Jews. I believe that Chris Claremont was an excellent storyteller who had a relatively even approach politically when it came to writing about Marvel mutants. I disagree with denigrating any form of literature but I didn't start a flame way about the issue.
I made some comments in support of environmental awareness and the need for a concerted effort globally to reduce, reuse, and recycle. I also commented on Europe's history with alcohol, both its benefits and drawbacks. I played around a little bit with theories of global control making the novel suggestion that the Right conflates the actions of a historical cult (what is usually named Illuminati or NWO) with the anxieties of a religious ideology (what I call Radical Zionism, which can be distinguished from Israeli nationalism, Judaism proper, and traditional Zionism). Then I used that hypothesis about global control duopoly and prognosticated a doomsday scenario.
I believe that these more left-wing comments suit my overall balanced approach to politics and social media contribution.
I was then abhorred by learning about the phenomenon of "pozzing" and "bugchasing". It led me to re-articulate some of my theories on the origins of homosexuality in nature.
I tend to have high diction in my writing and a marked intellectual rhetoric. Many readers find it pretentious, arrogant, and insufferable. This isn't news to me, but the truth is that I am an intellectual and believe that it is in my best interest to express light bigotry through logic. Let readers interrogate the logic to prove my prejudice wrong. I'm always open to changing opinions once it is clear that I was misguided.
As I plan my exit from Voat, it is clear that my greatest usefulness to the community would have been through sporadic TIL contributions (Today I Learned). My current highest rated submission was for the Cato the Elder historical information and my highest rated comment was the information I provided the community about smallbeer (or tablebeer).
I'm not sure if I will return to Voat, and I am fairly certain that I will not return to Gab (I had been gone for well over a year and only posted a few more times recently because I had to wait to post on Voat until my comment contribution rating was high enough). If I post again on "free speech" platforms then those postings will also end up in the News Blog or the Prolepticon section (which is where you are right now).
The final thing that I should express about my adventures at Voat is that I have a much better understanding of the right wing now, especially radical isolationists and the Christian Right. I shared this insight with a friend who is a 3D thinker like myself. Now, I will share my insights here as well:
The Right wing political position and culture is an assembly of fragmented parts. Some of the factions are aware of this and urge unification. Yet, these fragmented factions tolerate each other unlike any other ethnic-based or religious-based group. Turkey has a long history of wanting to genocide Kurds, despite them being almost identical ethnically. It would be akin to an Englishman wanting to kill an Italian based on ethnicity. Europe simply doesn't operate this way and it takes religion to produce this kind of ethnic-based hatred (Bosnia-Serbia, for example).
The Right seeks unification and although they tolerate each other based around certain shared qualities (white ethnicity, moral values against degeneracy, anti-semitic conspiracy imagination), they are also unable to organize consolidated efforts due to important differences. There are a dozen unique political agendas in the Ideological Right political position. Yet, the style and rhetoric of all the Ideological Right is a distinct one. I truly believe that a large proportion of "hate crime" vandalism is perpetrated by terror groups such as BLM and Antifa who are trying to frame the Right. My experience with leftist ideologues is that they are not informed and not very intelligent. They hate their enemies so much that they refuse to get to know them and learn what they are about. The character and details of most hate vandalism is reflective of how Leftists imagine the Right, and not how the Right would ever represent themselves when making a show of strength through violent protest. The Right has a brand despite their fragmented nature - it is a paradoxical thing, but real nonetheless.
The anti-semitism seems all-encompassing and transcends the politics of the Ideological Right. The genuine perception is that all Jews are amenable to an elite class of Jew that is actively creating culture in a way that undermines wholesome family values. All Jews are winking and nodding approval for these cultural initiatives, and these cultural initiatives are executed largely through hegemonic control of other industries such as banking, media, and entertainment. I think that the real problem with the Ideological Right is that they don't properly understand ideology as a construct and psychology as a way to understand how people think and behave. Jewish culture and Christian culture are indeed mutually antagonistic but the attack on Christian values is not something that happens in Jewish living rooms as Jewish couples talk, nor does it happen in boardroom meetings at Jewish companies. It is all operating at an unconscious level.
Jews unconsciously desire whites to be neutered and that is a historically-determined imperative and it then pervades how Jewish culture develops. If a business or policy decision would have the end result of neutering whites then it feels right to most Jews and they support it not consciously realize what the effects will be. The way to deal with this is to make Jews aware that they fear whites and want them neutered. From there we can identify what it is about whites that evokes this fear and maybe white people can change in order to create a more cooperative relationship between Jews and Gentiles. Currently, the Christian anti-semitism simply acts to perpetuate the fear in Jews and keep them valuing the neutering of whites at an unconscious level in their psychology.
As for the Ideological Right, they are most concerned with moral degeneracy and they too have an acute unconscious recognition of what is happening... they understand that they are being systematically neutered but they can't articulate it properly to themselves or publicly. They can't explain the logistics because their irrational fear and hatred is in the way. Two peoples that are probably supposed to be friends and get along (no turning back now, guys) cannot do so and have those efforts stymied because unconsciously they fear each other and as a result privilege cultural and political initiatives that hurt the other.
The factions within the Ideological Right (as distinguished for all conservatives, which would include laissez-faire capitalists) are not always easy to deal with. The Christian Right faction is really difficult to work with. They do not listen to reason and all ideas for them must be cross-checked with two-thousand-year old scripture. They express themselves online with a marked lack of cosmopolitan sensibility which makes them come off as losers. They are uptight and hate-filled. They liberally attack their own guys (others factions of the Ideological Right, that is) and they will gang-up for petty retributions.
All of the factions see all white Europeans as "brothers", and the sense of white pride is distinct from the contempt of non-white. The reasons for why they love whiteness is not related to why they hate blackness, or jewishness, or arabness, etc. (however, the Christian Right faction is more susceptible to negative thinking). Most factions love whiteness for what is inherently good about it anthropologically and historically. The admiration of whiteness is a powerful seduction because it is fair. Whites are relatively well-bred unlike most other ethnicities.
On that point, Jews suffer from a lot of hereditary disorders (such as Aspergers Syndrome) that reflect too many generations having mated through inbreeding. The Japanese in having been isolated for five centuries also show marked physical-based signs of inbreeding. They did an experiment using photography several years ago where they wanted the "ideal" representation of each major ethnicity. They did composite photos that blended 100 portrait photos of separate men or woman from the distinct ethnicities. What was incredible to see in the final composite portrait was that the Indian (South Indian) male and female face were so much more attractive than when we see them in real life. But, there is a very simple explanation for this - the caste system in India has resulted in inbreeding that has made each caste less physically attractive than if they had been able to choose a partner from anyone of their ethnicity.
Finally, it is a tragic point to make, but after thousands of years of using Africans as slaves (African empires, Ancient Egyptian empires, Arab empires, European empires, and finally the United States) it has always been the slavemaster that is making the decisions for Africans on who will mate with who (at least for the highest stock of slaves). The choice of the slavemasters has been to privilege physical power attributes, and thus blacks have ended up developing accordingly. They are not as attractive as they would have been if they had been allowed to choose their own mates.
And so, white people have been both fortunate and wise to execute sound mating strategies, and as a result white people are on average very attractive (facial symmetry through lack of inbreeding, and more balanced hormonal profile through free choice on mates). These are not facts that can be debated unless your only interest is in removing truths that hurt feelings because you feel that hurt feelings could hurt the future. That's all speculative and based purely in affective imaginations. I am one who believes the pursuit of truth is already correct even if the truth hurts.
Coming back to the Ideological Right, I note that all of the factions despise "race traitors" and being labeled a traitor isn't about being white but having friends of different races, but instead is about procreating with other races thus diluting the white gene pool and also emulating the aspects of non-white cultures that are degenerate. The Ideological Right doesn't tend to go after whites who play saxophone in jazz bars or who dance samba at night clubs. Instead, they have problems with young white kids who think that hip-hop culture's values of promiscuity and glorified violence are admirable and "cool". Are they wrong? I can't stop putting on N.W.A. at the gym ever since I started listening back in 1992, but it is admittedly degenerate messages breeding pathetic and destructive community values. I'm fairly insulated because of my upbringing but poorer white families don't have the same luxury. My lessons in Compton gangrape were tempered by my lessons in European history, art, and science which I got at home and from the good schools I attended as a kid.
To the Ideological Right it seems unnecessary that white kids take the worst parts of other cultures and try to participate for street credit. The Right can't explain what possesses kids to do this except that media and entertainment push the idea that degeneracy is cool. Entertainment companies are almost entirely owned by Jews, ergo Ideological Right anti-semitism conspiracy theories. I think I should quote a recent post at Voat regarding the new movie Shazam:
"Shazam! is disappointing. It still has kike degeneracy propaganda. After the boy becomes Shazam, one of the first things he wants to do is to visit a strip club full of disgusting whores. Any 14 yo teen knows what a strip club is and that only perverts go there to lose their money like assholes. Hollywood just can't stop from turning everything into demented shit."
This might be difficult to read for some because of the clear anti-semitism, but it is also true statements about the content and ideology of the movie being objectively problematic. Why are we peddling these ideas to society? Why are we celebrating protagonists who have such low moral character? The movie Big with Tom Hanks showed us a wholesome kid once transformed into an adult body. Hollywood was still dominated by Jews in 1988 and Big's screenwriters were Jewish. So Jewish conspiracy doesn't make sense here at face value, but what changed in 30 years to make celebrations of depravity so popular or "cute"?
Coming back to poor white kids that are suckling the teat of a black gangbanger's pistol - peddling this degenerate culture is a mixed bag though because not all urban black music is degenerate. In addition, is the problem more one of laissez-faire capitalism? Capitalists will benefit from a secular approach to making money, and so for them the questions are not about morality but instead about profit - can entertainment moguls get blacks to think white is cool? No. Well, can they get whites to think black is cool? If so, then they will try to exploit that new market for economic gain. The neutering-fear hypothesis is only an underlying guidance in this case.
Is the shameless pursuit of capital gain degenerate? Sure, but you won't find many Jewish moguls curbing their business practices on behalf of the Christian Right when the Christians do nothing to stop the shameless charlatanism of evangelical churches.
The Ideological Right see most Leftists as clowns. The Leftist rhetoric is nonsensical and pervaded by fear - Leftists refuse to face their enemy eye-to-eye on honest terms. The Left will continue to fabricate who the Right are and what they represent as opposed to actually learning through getting to know the Right. As a result, the Right see the Left as a clown posse because the way the Left characterize the Right is pretty far off base. The Right isn't wrong in this regard - the Left is a clown show. The Left are prone to running into battle with wiggling fingers in their ears, eyes shut tight, and screaming at the top of their lungs
The problem between Right and Left is the following: the smartest people are more on the Right but not affiliated explicitly with Right wing factions (they are instead individualist socialist such as myself). The next smartest are on the Left (professional university academics). The next smartest are on the Right again but are now the cultural curators of the factions of the Ideological Right. The next are on the Left (university students). The lowest group is on the Right (poor under-educated religious types). And so all the match-ups are uneven. The cultural curators of the Right (like libertarian pundits on YouTube) can easily tear apart leftist university students, however they have little hope against university faculty. Meanwhile, university faculty can't shed the ideology that has been essential to validating their careers and so they don't wield the logic necessary to beat the top group (3D thinkers and individualist socialist who lean right). And so the Left never wins because they don't have the most effective arguments, yet the right doesn't win either because those on top can't abide joining the general cause. The reality is there is too much bigotry in the Ideological Right for someone like me to join and then lead. I would have to subscribe to ideals I don't find ethical (such as blanketed anti-semitism, oppressive Christian sexual repression, notions of absolute racial purity, etc.). I'm simply not that extreme in my views.
2D politics remains in deadlock.
Some of the factions of the Ideological Right deserve explicit mention. The libertarians are on the Ideological Right but ironically they self-identify as a form of "anarchist". Left-wing anarchists are more consistent with the philosophy of anarchism because they believe that there should be no governance and that the bar should be lowered to the point where everyone gets to feel that they are achievers. Libertarians in all honesty don't want this - they want a meritocracy, but one where the people decide what qualifies as achievement. In a truly libertarian state there is no governance unless there has to be because it supports the freedom to achieve. For leftist anarchists there is no governance ever.
For example, an ideal Libertarian state would spend community funds on building a wheelchair ramp at a construction site if a citizen was physically disabled but wanted to contribute to the building project, whereas true Anarchists of the left wouldn't have a construction project because it would alienate the physically disabled that can't contribute. To the anarchist, building the ramp would be problematic because it would make the engineer of the ramp more valuable than other members of the collective. It would only work if everyone in the collective knew how to make a ramp and was capable of making one. You can see that the ideal Libertarian state isn't pathetic whereas the ideal Anarchist state is.
In the example that I provided, the negative aspect of the ideal Libertarian state is that if the disabled citizen doesn't want to work at the construction site then no ramp is built and they can fend for themselves. There is no social welfare for non-contributors. It might be negative but some would say it's fair. Personally, I think life is unfair and that's why some people are stuck in wheelchairs. Nevertheless, Libertarians don't idly abide self-pity. Libertarians want non-achievers and non-contributors to get their just deserts of perishing - and this marks the philosophy as essentially a meritocracy, and not an anarchy.
There are new exotic factions in the Ideological Right such as the Identitarians. They are an odd melange of Nazi and Bolshevik. Personally, I don't understand how those philosophies can co-exist but I guess through micro and macro distinctions. At the macro level you hail only your people (Nazism) and then within that organization you do whatever you must to socially assist your people (Bolshevism). It will inevitably become an anti-meritocracy and so one can understand why some factions in the Ideological Right can't seem to unify (Libertarians desire fair meritocracy and Identitarians are against meritocracy).
Finally, the KKK guys are subtle within the broader landscape, but you can usually identify them pretty easily. In the past I have often referred to the Ideological Right as "Radical Isolationists", but after this report I may adopt the new title. The KKK were always at the core of what I considered radical isolationists. Contrary to what Hollywood would have you believe, the KKK are not predominantly a terrorist group but I don't doubt that they involve themselves in matters that end up becoming terrorist attacks. Personally, I believe that the Mandalay shooting (Paddock) and Oklahoma bombing (McVeigh) had a vague connection to the KKK, but only in that KKK members were reaching out to Paddock and McVeigh to reign them in, focus them, and then direct the expression of rage and destruction.
Paddock and McVeigh were going to do what they were going to do no matter and I feel that the KKK got involved simply to make sure that it was a little bit more organized and targeted (primarily for the purposes of political manipulation). Another thing to note is that the KKK are organized as cells or chapters, and if what I am saying is correct about Paddock and McVeigh, it may have been only a single chapter or even a single KKK leader who was involving themselves in those terrorist actions.
For the most part, the KKK is simply a club for people who believe that halting moral degeneracy matters, and that moral degeneracy is most pronounced when different races share a national or global culture. If no white kid ever admired and emulated black gangbangers, and if no white kid ever watched tranny porn, and such, then I doubt the KKK would even exist because their members wouldn't see the point and purpose of organizing. The KKK try their best to inspire new members through messages of hope and uplift. They promote good diet, respect, fitness, and family. They don't do this as a machination to bolster their membership but instead they truly believe in those values.
Yet, they have an absolutely impossible time seeing strong moral values in the everyday lives of non-whites. It takes a non-white being outspoken about strong moral values for the KKK to recognize it. The KKK have an expectation that non-whites races work harder to clean up their own act if they are going to share space with whites. And this is the chink in the KKK armor because unfortunately the truth is that poor whites have a terrible problem with alcoholism, and spousal and child abuse that results from bouts of alcoholism. It doesn't get admitted to openly because white nationalists/radical isolationists have a rule that you never criticize your own kind because it is divisive. The white nationalist/radical isolationist website Stormfront makes this one of their top rules. To manage the hypocrisy, KKK/white nationalists/radical isolationists have to disavow blaming themselves for their unique race-based degeneracy and instead ascribe it as having been caused by interaction with other races. But, when it comes to alcoholism, that's just disingenuous to put the blame on non-whites.
KKK/white nationalists/radical isolationists are extremely casual about their contempt of blacks and almost never refer to them as anything better than "niggers". There are worse slurs used. At the same time, this faction is the core and heart of the Ideological Right because they believe in brotherhood and bringing all white people together in order to fight moral degeneracy globally.
It is difficult to remedy the inherent intolerance when considering that it provokes a subsequent passionate sense of acceptance. It takes being white (and maybe male also) to understand this I think. There are three separate statements to consider: I am proud to be white, I am proud to not be non-white, I hate non-white. To be KKK/WN/RI you have to subscribe to all three statements. Well I can easily subscribe to the first, while the second statement becomes complex psychologically, and with the third statement being one that I willfully reject. I can't be a member of the core of the Ideological Right (and in my case of any part of it) because I can't satisfy the three statements essential to the core. I'm alright with the affirmation, but only partially with the negation, and not comfortable with the opposition.
I have felt like Darwin on an expedition. I have done my survey and learned a lot (and made a lot of speculation) on the makeup of the Ideological Right. I know a lot about the Left already from having been in the university system for so many years. I feel that this adventure through Voat was important. You can't solve problems it you don't properly understand the positions of the groups that are fighting. And all workable solutions are mediations. I feel that I now understand better what the stakes are and what the possibilities are.
The real solution is to do as Cato the Elder did in ancient Rome. He shut down and crushed feminism (he proved it isn't hard once you have the resolve and have actually gotten started on the process). He also flagged Hellenistic tendencies - namely, he set up policies to stop the promotion of assimilation of foreign cultures into Roman/Greek culture, and discouraged the export of Roman/Greek culture to foreign peoples. Our future is in engineering and linear thinking. We must realign our culture accordingly. Immigrants should integrate to the host culture or leave. They can enlighten the host culture with their unique cultural sensibilities but they must recognize the host culture as dominant.
Jews must not continue with their fear and subsequent unconsciously motivated agendas to neuter Gentiles. There is a happy medium between Christian pyjamas and child cross-dressing. The inflammatory adversarial nature of the current relationship is unsustainable. We must reassert family values which protect children from moral degeneracy and media and entertainment must stop pushing moral degeneracy regardless of whether it is for capital gain or as part of a cultural initiative to neuter a peoples that provoke a powerful fear response. Socialists must be beaten into submission in the political arena. We require teeth put back into anti-trust law and an end to the laissez-faire aspects of our capitalist economy.
Those are some doable initiatives despite all of the other problems that don't have any solutions yet (such as personal debt and a lack of new jobs). The first step is to crush feminism. That doesn't mean taking away the rights women have gained. Feminism is about female superiority and right now a relative minority of women are trying an unprecedented thing that they were never able to attempt in the past - they want to be top dog. It isn't going to happen because the final shift for human-based industry is to launch the epoch of engineering. Even projected 10,000 years in our future it is still the epoch of engineering. Women will not be the top contributors in engineering overall and so we mine as well nip this feminist coup in the bud.
It was a valiant effort but more than half of women aren't sold on it. A quarter of women are formally resisting "4th wave" feminism or "fascist feminism" or "matriarchy" if you will, while another quarter are trying to pretend it isn't happening, another quarter have been wrangled into the racket through feminist bullying, and the final quarter are responsible for the whole mess. All we really have to do is crush one quarter of female bullies and liberate the other three quarters to live the way they want to live - taking the man's lead sometimes and respecting the man's judgment sometimes. Egalitarianism is about sharing leadership roles, not usurping the other half of the authority and claiming all of it to yourself. Cato the Elder recognized this and acted through taking away the showiest symbols of female privilege. I think that in our society we could achieve this by not hiring matriarchs and not publishing and celebrating their work. They don't believe in egalitarianism and they don't deserve our support.
The truth is that right now more than half of women are pervasively stuck in a fantasy mode of thinking. The quarter of women who would be matriarchs are really living their lives believing that this is war and they are going to win. We have to snap them back fast and in a public way.
Look at this video displayed below... and realize that I don't support physical violence against men or women, but still look at how quickly this woman got snapped back to reality when the man decided he wan't going to put up with the abuse. Her fantasy world of being the boss and the authority came crashing down. Now we all know that if women had the absolute authority they wouldn't share it (because of the matriarchs), but we also know that men will share it (and will relinquish being patriarchs). So then we must reassert that authority is going to be shared from now on. It is true that for most of history men had total authority (because industry was physical-based), but things have changed and the profile of work changed to allow women to be equal to men in production. But, that is as far as it goes - equality. Snap her back to reality with harsh, true words about what she is trying to do and how it is not going to pan out. There will be no Matriarchy.
This is what I want because I feel the gravity of the situation. If the would-be matriarchs continue with their push, then I can imagine the men and women who want equality will be pushing back very hard. Bashing on men has gone on long enough. It was never cute, but it was understandable. However, men are not the enemy and heteronormativity isn't an adversarial relationship. Matriarchy will not prevail. The Smackdown is coming because it is not just men that are fed up but also three-quarters of women.
LowBrowsing News Blog
I lost interest in Twitter back in 2012. I tried "free speech" platforms recently but found them wanting.