Quote note (#339)

Glanton:

You have to admire the Left for it’s clarity of vision. It has identified its enemies, and it does what it can to drive them from the field. The recent fireworks in Indiana are a perfect illustration. Team blue knows that Christians are hateful homophobes, and so it goes to bat for the right of homosexuals to sue them over wedding cakes. The Right, with its characteristic acumen, mistakes this bushwhack for a principled stand. “Ah!” they say, “But if you support the right of a gay man to force a Christian to make a cake then you must support the right of the KKK to force a black baker to make a cake!” The average liberal couldn’t imagine a more irrelevant rejoinder. They aren’t making any such proposition at all. In their calculus, Christians (of the Not-fans-of-Pope-Francis type at least) are the bad guys and thus their interests are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. The KKK are bad guys and thus their actions are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. You attack bad guys. You don’t attack good guys. Whence the confusion?

Must‘ is the most stupid word.

ADDED: From the other side of the culture war — “The Right hits low, so we hit lower, harder, and without mercy.” The 21st century is going to be a riot (at least).

March 5, 2017admin 40 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Discriminations

TAGGED WITH : , , ,

40 Responses to this entry

  • BMCI Blog Says:

    Fascinating to learn that it is only the left that thinks in such irrational, moralistic terms.

    [Reply]

    Ur-mail Reply:

    I believe you’ve missed the point. Arguments about rationality and morality are a distraction. They are tactics of convenience employed under unifying strategies on a ideological battlefield. The only true aim is hegemony.

    [Reply]

    wu-wei Reply:

    Those who rule, decide the ordering of the goods; what is good, what is bad. That’s true of all times, places and ideologies.

    [Reply]

    Michael Rothblatt Reply:

    If that were true, we would’ve had same-sex marriage back in the 50s already. Free your mind from delusions Fnarglology. No matter the system of government, rulers cannot decide for anything outside of public opinion (that is unless they don’t mind rebellion, and have sufficient firepower to drown it in blood), which is why they must influence public opinion first, i.e. shift the Overton window.

    [Reply]

    wu-wei Reply:

    I actually consider it rather obviously tautological. In a democracy, those who rule are those who control public opinion. Duh. And you exaggerate quite a bit. In the 50s, those who influenced public opinion most certainly did NOT believe in gay marriage. Even Hillary and Obama weren’t keen on it, at least publicly, until around 2012. Then 3 years later, SCOTUS ruled for federally-mandated gay marriage rights. Really makes you think, doesn’t it?

    The Cathedral ruled, and over time they influenced public opinion in the direction they wanted. I very much doubt American majority public opinion supported the “bake the cake” case, but they got fined anyway, and here we are. And if Americans don’t support it today, they will in 20 years. Unless the Cathedral burns down sometime soon, which is entirely possible. Were it not for the disruption of Internet technologies, the Cathedral probably would have gone on ruling forever.

    wu-wei Reply:

    The basic error in your thinking is to assume that “ordering-of-the-goods” is the same thing as “public opinion”. But that, it ain’t. If public opinion was strictly the only thing that mattered, affirmative action never would have happened. Furthermore, it never would have been considered “bad”, nor would it be effectively illegal, hire a racist. The Warren court legacy simply wouldn’t exist.

    For example, in the early 2000s, it was obviously “good” to be in support of gay marriage – even though it only had like 20%-30% public support – and “bad” to oppose it. Those who ruled had already decided on the ordering-of-goods; moreover, they physically enforced it by law (“bake the cake”), and more significantly in the form of “social consequences”, particularly salient in corporate HR culture. Funny thing, that “social consequences” can still be applicable, even when majority public opinion openly defies it! The ordering-of-goods was present already, and the rest of us just needed to catch up to our enlightened masters – as we eventually did.

    (Have to say, that RF guy really put some people on edge here! Fnarglology indeed.)

    collen ryan Reply:

    Not entirely true, they often use courts, anarcho tyranny,illegal immigrants,rigged election, civil service usurpations,fascist leaders and a false potemkin consensus to overturn majority opinion. But certainly mind control long and short term are the big plays.

    Posted on March 5th, 2017 at 6:08 pm Reply | Quote
  • collen ryan Says:

    It’s Worth Noting That by definition”Progressives” are the ones redefining nazis as recalcitrant bakers. No matter how middle of the road or far far left you are spend enough time with leftists and Progress will leave you behind enemy lines.

    [Reply]

    Goth Eiríksson Reply:

    The fools will only consolidate the Right.

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    not to nit pick but its themselves they consolidate while broadening or diffusing the right , we are all Charles Murray nazi bakers now.(well except Nick land who assures us he actually has Jewish friends who he promises no to use to get out of gulag free)

    Most of us will only defend about the middle of our values as long as there is hope for a compromise. But once the progressive train has moved on and left you a nazi you realize they kill nazis they dont negotiate with nazis they are not going to meet me halfway they are not going to meet me 99% of the way in their favor they are going to kill me. My position is no longer designed to appeal to a game theory compromise its designed to not be killed to klll them first because anyone who want to kill me needs killing those may be actual nazis to my right or left but I charles Murray fag hating baker dont care we are all nazis today lets go kill some commie jews then we can decide the next step

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2017 at 6:53 pm Reply | Quote
  • Dragon Says:

    They are the ones claiming they are free from primitive moralism while doing primitive moralism

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2017 at 7:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • Goth Eiríksson Says:

    It seems to me there’s been a rise in WW2 movies from Hollywood. 2 appear just now on my media app, Zona. One of them is Brad Pitt killing Nazis, and that’s the second Brad Pitt killing Nazis-movie in a very short time. Third one in recent memory. That’s 3 BPKN movies in recent memory.

    There’s also two recent movies about the Bolsheviks. It’s as if (((they)))’re trying to interject something.

    Maybe that Red and Brown Fascists are bad? But Femme-Progressivist Horrorism is good.

    [Reply]

    Goth Eiríksson Reply:

    I’m a big fan of Hollywood tho.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2017 at 7:14 pm Reply | Quote
  • Wagner Says:

    Mustn’t we say must?

    Is it just me or does criticism of “moralizing” tend to come off as a bit moralistic?

    6cd, I love the self-undermining nature of this claim:

    “Caucasians should be ashamed of their sanctimonious moral hysteria”

    http://www.xenosystems.net/racism-for-beginners/

    “(I hope that’s sanctimonious enough for everyone)”

    This meta concession is itself one with the sanctimoniousness. We cannot escape our genes!

    [Reply]

    Frank Reply:

    There’s nothing sanctimonious about discovering the limits of martial tools. “3GW tactics lose against 4GW tactics.” “Sermons won’t work on your enemies.”

    1. Coercion through physical violence.
    2. Coercion through economic and financial means.
    3. Coercion through rallying, shaming: weaponized gossip.

    “Must” is a linguistic interface of control, employed to achieve type 3 coercion. It doesn’t work if it’s not backed by type 2 or type 1 coercion. It’s a very inferior tool that distorts assessment capabilities of its employers by short circuiting skin-in-the-game control via decoupling of cost from command, thereby polluting command’s input channels. A consequent symptom of resorting to this inferior means of warfare is the common cargo cult belief that chanting is causally sufficient to transform reality. Women, on account of Gnon largely depriving them of alternative methods of coercion, excel at exploiting avenues of type 3 coercion, at the cost of having a looser grasp on reality.

    [Reply]

    Post Alley Crackpot Reply:

    And then we have someone chime in with “can implies ought”, another chimes in with “but that’s a naturalistic or deontic fallacy”, and then everyone in the know has rather certain doubts about this enterprise …

    Which is why there’s a healthy cynicism about the use of “must”: it’s not a big jump from necessitation and reflexitivity to some weird contingent possible world where we’re compelled to believe in someone else’s bullshit revolution.

    Rightly so (pun intended) that Our Benevolent Administrator’s first instinct is to mistrust the motive behind “you must” — it’s the muezzin that calls the penitent rationalists to order.

    As for me, I used to sleep through the muezzin, but I don’t pretend to be anyone’s model of devoutness.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2017 at 7:41 pm Reply | Quote
  • Cryptogenic Says:

    “It is, I believe, one of the few dangerous forms of eccentricity, a highly contagious mania, to be precise, of the rampant social variety! In your friend’s case, we may not yet be dealing with out-and-out insanity . . . No . . . Maybe his trouble is only exaggerated conviction . . . But the contagious manias are well known to me! . . . I’ve known a good many sufferers from conviction mania . . . Of many different types . . . And in the last analysis, those who talk about justice seem to be the maddest of the lot! . . . At first, I must confess, I took a certain interest in justice fanatics . . . Today those particular maniacs annoy and exasperate me more than I can tell . . . Don’t you feel the same way? . . . Human beings show a strange aptitude for transmitting this mania. It terrifies me, and we find it, mind you, in all human beings!” –Céline

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2017 at 10:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • R.O.E. – waka waka waka Says:

    […] offer a hat-tip to Nick Land for exhuming this two-year-old passage from John Glanton at Social […]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 3:46 am Reply | Quote
  • wu-wei Says:

    >#altwoke manifesto

    “Alt-Woke Manifesto is the work of ANON. We are a collective of “Other.” Some of us are sex workers, some immigrants, many of us queer. There are even a few privileged white cucks amongst us.”

    lol

    {…} “Nevertheless, ANON is largely the work and brainchild of People of Color (PoC). Our social disciplines are as varied as our identities, from journalists to dominatrixes. ANON are the intellectual cousins of #BlackLivesMatter divorced from liberalism. All inquires should be directed to: xenochan@protonmail.com

    [Reply]

    Post Alley Crackpot Reply:

    Nota not so bene to Xenocrap: BEIGE IS A FUCKING COLOUR

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 7:33 am Reply | Quote
  • wu-wei Says:

    >”The organizational praxis of alt woke can be best exemplified by a dichotomous modal structure within the ideology. Right Hand Praxis and Left Hand Praxis. Or, The Hand That Strikes and The Hand That Repurposes. Right Hand Praxis disrupts the roadblocks established by our current hegemony. Left Hand Praxis progressively repurposes existing technologies to initiate a counter-hegemony.”

    >{…} “Left Hand Praxis {…} appropriating multinational corporate identity is a crucial first step.”
    >{…} “Right Hand Praxis {…} Alt-Right countersurveillance. Invade their spaces, disrupt their safe space. Break out of your filter bubble, learn their language. Learn who they are, and what they believe. Befriend them only to spy on them. Dox the doxers.”

    So, gramscianism + MLM (red guard) tactics? Does the praxis of aggro-leftism ever really change?

    >{…} “If nature’s oppressive, change nature. Normalize “deviance.””

    Declare war with GNON, in other wards

    >{…} “Reappropriation of globalism as a personal lifestyle. There are no sovereign nations, there are no sovereign citizens. Reappropriation of multinational corporate identity. The world is interconnected and capital deterritorializes its pathologies. Environmentalism is a global issue, after all.”

    Guess they still “want it all.” The monkey just won’t let go of the banana.

    [Reply]

    Goth Eiríksson Reply:

    I wonder if this is the work of Amy Ireland or some “Xeno”feminist.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 7:55 am Reply | Quote
  • Tsaekasith Says:

    Why even dignify these people with your attention admin? Its such a blatantly try-hard, cringeworthy pile of unoriginal standard-fare leftist talking points with a heavy dosage of post-Trump trauma. “Ooooh look at us! We’re hookers with the morals of puritans who regurgitate months-old internet jargon, we’re radicals despite blindly adhering to every moral and political dogma of Western civilisation since the 18th century! – Nazis watch out!”

    We all know the Left are irrelevant jackboots with pretensions to revolution while in practice serving as the faithful defenders of orthodoxy. We should start acting like it. Beating up on some absurd caricature of left-wing ideology today is just the high-brow equivalent of gamergate youtube-prophets spending six hours deconstructing the ravings of a tween feminist. The Left are dying, just compare everything from the intellectual leaders to organisational clout they possess today to what they had fifty years ago and you see how sadly tenth-rate they have become. That the force which could once get away with terror is reduced to throwing tantrums in their own backyards while loosing cultural hegemony to the fascist NEETs of the Neon Genesis Socialist Workers Party would make Alinsky and Lukacs spin so hard the stones would fall off their Hebrew-inscribed graves. They will either convert to Islam or have one last surge of Classical Marxism made frighteningly more real by mass automation, but unless they ditch Foucault and Butler 2016 will be the perpetual death-date of Western Communism.

    We’ve won the culture war. Trump won the culture war. The fact that ‘Social Justice Warrior’ is now a term of insult has won the culture war. Of course it will take some time for this to be realised, a dying force appears strongest before collapse, but what frenzied movements which follow are death-spasms, not blows of strength. Of course vigilance is vital, there should always be some part of the right’s rag-tag online coalition devoted to shitting on the Left in all its forms. But culture flows downstream of power, not the other way round. The Left are no longer our concern now, the people who enable the Left are.

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    Those of us of a certain age have had our hopes dashed too many times to get our hopes up but hope springs eternal.
    Ill say this Unlike many i think left ratchet is the only direction a fully optimized civilization can turn, upcoming elites see no glory in mere maintenance of civilization have no lived experience of the fragility of civilization and so take a flyer on wild left ideas.
    At a certain point there is really no farther left to go and more glory in building a civilization than deconstructing one and new talent puts it shoulder to the wheel. so maybe.

    but picking a bottom is hard bottoms tend to have trap doors. the madness of crowds and all , “theres a lot of ruin in a nation”- was said a long time ago but it was according to NRX describing this same cycle.

    [Reply]

    wu-wei Reply:

    >The Left are no longer our concern now, the people who enable the Left are.

    Wait, are you saying there’s a difference?

    [Reply]

    Goth Eiríksson Reply:

    Sort of like between the womyn running wild and their enablers.

    Or Negroes running wild and their enablers.

    Some of the niggers be capitalist.

    Even their enablers may be.

    Pseudo-capitalist.

    At least.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 9:24 am Reply | Quote
  • Goth Eiríksson Says:

    » acte

    Lacan draws a distinction between mere ‘behaviour’, which all animals engage in, and ‘acts’, which are symbolic and which can only be ascribed to human subjects (S11,50). A fundamental quality of an act is that the actor can be held responsible for it; the concept of the act is thus an ethical concept.

    However, the psychoanalytic concept of responsibility is very different from the legal concept. This is because the concept of responsibility is linked with the whole question of intentionality, which is complicated in psychoanalysis by the discovery that, in addition to his conscious plans, the subject also has unconscious intentions. Hence someone may well commit an act which he claims was unintentional, but which analysis reveals to be the expression of an unconscious desire. Freud called these acts ‘parapraxes’, or ‘bungled actions’ (Fr. acte manqué); they are ‘bungled’, however, only from the point of view of the conscious intention, since they are successful in expressing an unconscious desire(see Freud, 1901b).

    [Lacan opposes this to ‘acting out’, which are, as it were, subconscious or false acts.]

    ‘Acting out’ is the term which is used in the
    Standard Edition
    to translate the German
    term
    Agieren
    used by Freud. Lacan, following a trad
    ition in psychoanalytic writing, uses
    this term in English.

    One of the most important themes running throughout Freud’s work is the opposition
    between repeating and remembering. These are, so to speak, ‘contrasting ways of
    bringing the past into the present’ (Laplanche and Pontalis, 1967:4). If past events are
    repressed from memory, they return by expressing themselves in actions; when the
    subject does not remember the past, therefore, he is condemned to repeat it by acting it out. Conversely, psychoanalytic treatment aims to break the cycle of repetition by helping
    the patient to remember.
    Although an element of repetition can be found in almost every human action, the term ‘acting out’ is usually reserved for those actions which display ‘an impulsive aspect relatively out of harmony with the subject’s usual motivational patterns’ … From a Lacanian perspective, this basic definition of acting out is true but incomplete; it ignores the dimension of the Other. Thus while Lacan maintains that acting out results from a failure to recollect the past, he emphasises the intersubjective dimension of recollection. In other words, recollection does not merely involve recalling something to consciousness, but also communicating this to an Other by means of speech. Hence acting out results when recollection is made impossible by the refusal of the Other to listen. »

    If this doesn’t explain some of the goings-on on this chat board, I don’t know what will.

    http://www.davidbardschwarz.com/pdf/evans.pdf

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 5:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Seth Largo Says:

    Accelerationism in its left alignment acknowledges that capitalism is the common denominator in all global conflicts which all affect one another in a complex schema.

    I want to be there when global capitalism collapses and these neckbeards wind up killing one another over who gets to sit closest to the fire when winter hits.

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    LOL neckbeards wont be anywhere near the fires they will be doing chores if they are lucky they will be doing chores for white men

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 6:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Tsaekasith Says:

    @Tsaekasith
    @coleen ryan
    Yep I can see that. People thought Nixon and Reagan were both the end of the Left and yet the Left just crawled back to its fortresses in academia and entertainment to churn out a new brood of ideological foot-soldiers somehow both disturbing and dull. My point was precisely if this time is to be different the raw veins of power need to be uprooted.

    Desire for novelty is the greatest and most dangerous human drive. Reach the End of History and the only prestige left to gain is through sadomasochism.

    @wu-wei
    The Left are the ultra-conservative, reactionary branch of Democratic Universalism, within which their structural role is the suppression of dissent and destruction of enemies. The people who actually run the system and hold the power are different. Even if they believe the same shit. The Left only hold practical power when things go wrong. Otherwise they’re just the most fanatical mullahs in the temple and usefully militant meatbags.

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    You know during the 60s and 70s the left again became violent and goodwhites couldnt stomach what had to be done so the badwhites who countered violence with violence were villainized the left won and proceeded to take over. As long as the opponent is willing to be violent or you are not violence or implied violence wins. WAR SWIMS RIGHT means violence in the service of order is not anarchy or revolution its a refusal to be overthrown forced to exit submit or return to disorder.war violence is what establishes a space for civilization. exit is faggotry a form of leftism, if men exited every time mere anarchy was loosed civilization would soon lose its footing in the world and there would be no place to exit- and yeah thats exactly where we are at

    [Reply]

    Tsaekasith Reply:

    Revolutions don’t happen from below, that’s a democratic fable.

    Exit is less running away and more getting to the ground from which fighting becomes something more than noble, forgotten suicide to a mute laugh-track of John Oliver ABSOLUTELY DESTROYING you in a HILARIOUS collaborative sketch with Leslie Jones featuring Joe Biden.

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    There are lots of ways of fighting and certainly one is wise to pick the field but eventually battle will come down to violence or implied violence.
    Exit is not outflanking exit is running. Now if destruction is assured and exit is possible exit is a wise choice, If heretics want to exit a theocracy why not, if half the world is unoccupied and their co ethnics left behind will thrive though in error. if exit is not possible then you have to fight or submit. If exit means abandoning your entire race and civilization to genocide while you try to live a decade or two longer well thats nothing more than faggotry.

    I know nrx like to pretend exit is possible but they are full of shit or larp the cathedral does not even allow sovereign nations with nuclear arsenals autonomy. There is no seastead or elysium,soon there will be no blogosphere. So I find it amusing that a lot of millennial neckbeards that have never had a bloody nose think sarcasm about fighting is an answer.
    Where will you exit to Sith? where is this place where you will maneuver into position or simply watch the decline from you high castle? how long can you hold out what size of a population can you sustain to repopulate? you are not exiting you are denying reality not the same thing I know you kids with your noses in the phone all day have a hard time seeing the difference between reality and the internet

    collen ryan Reply:

    and who the fuck is john oliver and those others?

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 6:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • Tsaekasith Says:

    @coleen ryan

    Exit has its glaring problems and I’m sceptical about whether it can answer them and be more than a nice phrase, I just don’t see how those problems make violent revolution a more tenable course of action.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 6th, 2017 at 8:58 pm Reply | Quote
  • Goth Eiríksson Says:

    » We have interpreted the first rules of morality and moral restrictions of primitive society as reactions to a deed which gave the authors of it the conception of crime. They regretted this deed and decided that it should not be repeated and that its execution must bring no gain. This creative sense of guilt has not become extinct with us. We find its asocial effects in neurotics producing new rules of morality and continued restrictions, in expiation for misdeeds committed, or as precautions against misdeeds to be committed. But when we examine these neurotics for the deeds which have called forth such reactions, we are disappointed. We do not find deeds, but only impulses and feelings which sought evil but which were restrained from carrying it out. Only psychic realities and not actual ones are at the basis of the neurotics’ sense of guilt. It is characteristic of the neurosis to put a psychic reality above an actual one and to react as seriously to thoughts as the normal person reacts only towards realities. » [Freud, Totem and Taboo, 1913.]

    How much is leftism neurosis made politics?

    Or OCD?

    » There exists a wide literature detailing the parallels between normal anxious–intrusive thoughts and harm-avoidant behaviors and obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), from both anecdotal and empirical perspectives. Most normal rituals are believed to address problems, avert bad luck, or facilitate transformation. Tribal cultures cast spells to ward off evil spirits, Westerners knock on wood to avoid bad luck (ref?), and many societies require ceremonial rites of passage from childhood to adulthood. Just as normal individuals engage in ritual to make things “right with the world, either in alignment with a past, present, or future desired state of affairs,” individuals afflicted with OCD perform compulsions to “bring the world back into alignment” (Smay, working paper, p. 14). Winnicott (1953) argued that culturally sanctioned rituals occupy a curious middle ground between the internal and external world, serving as transitional phenomena: positive, constructive, reparative acts that mend or fill an absence or lack.

    OCD attacks an individual’s most personal space—close interpersonal relationships and the intimate home environment. Though the compulsions associated with this disorder may seem random, the individual may perceive them as the only way to bear anxiety about family, romantic and interpersonal relationships, self-esteem, and privacy. Given that most people cope with stress through ritual and reliance on interpersonal relationships to differing degrees, we surmise that the anxiety-relieving function of these behaviors may be an outgrowth of an evolutionarily useful mechanism.

    We proceed to review evidence from epidemiology, ontogeny, ethology, and neurobiology and trace the patterns of normal ritual through childhood, romantic love, family life, and religion. Integrating findings across disciplines, we suggest that OCD is a dysregulation of evolutionarily conserved behaviors and mental states critical to human survival. »

    Or how much is it the reappearance of primitive social arrangements? Indeed—the drive of the re-assertion of previous types of human or prehuman evolutionary creatures?

    » Primitive communism, according to both Morgan and Engels, was based in the matrilineal clan where women lived with their classificatory sisters – applying the principle that “my sister’s child is my child”. Because they lived and worked together, women in these communal households felt strong bonds of solidarity with one another, enabling them when necessary to take action against uncooperative males. Engels cites this passage from a letter to Morgan written by a missionary who had lived for many years among the Seneca Iroquois:

    ▬ ‘As to their family system, when occupying the old long-houses, it is probable that some one clan predominated, the women taking in husbands, however, from the other clans; and sometimes, for a novelty, some of their sons bringing in their young wives until they felt brave enough to leave their mothers. Usually, the female portion ruled the house, and were doubtless clannish enough about it. The stores were held in common; but woe to the luckless husband or lover who was too shiftless to do his share of the providing. No matter how many children, or whatever goods he might have in the house, he might at any time be ordered to pack up his blanket and budge; and after such orders it would not be healthful for him to attempt to disobey. The house would be too hot for him; and, unless saved by the intercession of some aunt or grandmother, he must retreat to his own clan; or, as was often done, go and start a new matrimonial alliance in some other. The women were the great power among the clans, as everywhere else. They did not hesitate, when occasion required, to ‘knock off the horns’, as it was technically called, from the head of a chief, and send him back to the ranks of the warriors. The original nomination of the chiefs also always rested with them’.

    —— Morgan, L.H. 1907 [1877]. Ancient Society. London: Macmillan, p. 455n.

    According to Morgan, the rise of alienable property disempowered women by triggering a switch to patrilocal residence and patrilineal descent »

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 7th, 2017 at 12:45 am Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    I thought I was having a fucking heart attack and that we were back to just our god damn darkest hours, but nay it has not been that we have been brought back to that accursed time. I have to remember that this was before NIO made his transition to his other self. Anyways, let me deal with the matter in question.

    Actually let me comment on something else, the entirety of the election late last year did something that we probably didn’t expect to happen, it was a lite-falsification attempt or a moving of the overton window back in our direction, however this has occurred with the unfortunate little situation that has made Moldbug’s work have the issue of perhaps becoming outdated, so we could have waited for him to finish his little company back then, and that was the modus operandi that we sort of expected that we roughly expected this mania but also panics to occur as it was back then and we would wait for him to arrive, however a lot of things have happened that have rendered our rough sentiment false…. so the question is what to do with Moldbug’s writings and how we can get him to reformulate tactics cuz he might have little to come back to, he will not be making the same thematic return….. tl;dr the sequel’s plot is screwed but we’re still acting like it’s back in the day….. at least the few of us with any cognition of what we sort of quasi-realized. This also makes the people who are blogging in their little corners without interfacing with some central part of the activity Nexus of our thing sorta poor operational skill. TL;DR we might need a convention, meeting in the dark lair, caves with fire pits and hooded robes as we meditate on whatever affair. And meditate on the mysterium xarxes.

    [Reply]

    D. Reply:

    Oblivion was decline.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 7th, 2017 at 1:58 am Reply | Quote
  • cyborg_nomade Says:

    to be honest, I kind of liked the altwoke thing. it’s better than sheer shrieking and panicking about Trump.

    it remains to be seen if its strategics are going to be carried out successfully. (ain’t putting my money there)

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 9th, 2017 at 10:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Xoth Says:

    The left are by now quite used to always escalate, always play hawk, then after a while they win.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 9th, 2017 at 5:43 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment