T-Shirt slogans (#7)


Social Justice is my Trigger

(From ‘Anonymous Coward’ in — and triggered by — this thread.)

January 15, 2014admin 20 Comments »


20 Responses to this entry

  • Igitur Says:

    Meh. This place is 2-3 years behind reddit in mocking “social justice”.

    Division of labor, specialization, come on.


    Posted on January 15th, 2014 at 7:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • pseudo-chrysostom Says:

    and reddit is 2-3 years behind image boards.


    Posted on January 15th, 2014 at 11:55 pm Reply | Quote
  • VXXC Says:

    The Basilik will manifest at LessRuin.


    Posted on January 16th, 2014 at 12:21 am Reply | Quote
  • Piano Says:





    Posted on January 16th, 2014 at 12:41 am Reply | Quote
  • Igitur Says:

    Btw, seen this yet?



    admin Reply:

    That was interesting. Legions of strawmen, but accidental ones.


    Posted on January 16th, 2014 at 2:01 am Reply | Quote
  • VXXC Says:


    Many good points in Mises link.


    Igitur Reply:

    That Amos (I’m presuming that’s the same person from the “Amos and Gromar” blog) is actually pretty smart in debate.

    Neoreaction may just have a problem with smugness — and here I make a huge exception for our host, not out of politeness but of admiration for the whole of his output from the 80s to these very posts, and to Moldbug, who is a good writer — in blog output. Either a problem or a solution; I do understand it’s not trying to attract recruits or anything.


    VXXC Reply:

    NeoReaction is Anti-Prog weapon. Regrettably smug armor and savage snark with Hatefacts are a requirement, the equivalent of showing no fear on the street. Or having none even better.

    Seriously if this were an actual tool, weapon, platform ..anything with a requirements specs or RFC then those would be in the requirements. Examine the enemy’s tactics.

    In many ways NR is the Internet Engineering Task Force RFC’s of Anti-Prog.

    Moldbug also writes a certain long way so that low level progtard drones give up by the second paragraph. Too much to process for “Wow. Just…Wow” demographic.


    Diogenes Reply:

    Land’s philosophical work is indeed excellent. ‘Cybergothic’ is collected in a book titled ‘Virtual Futures’ which contains many other authors who were similar in style and post-human preoccupations. It was published in 1998 but still feels very futuristic, in a Ballardian way.

    Smugness, as I see it, is the inevitable price of Neoreaction. When you have the nerve to point out that the majority of people in a country are awful or at least mediocre, those that suspect they’re being referred to are of course mortally offended (because Sesame Street told them they were special no matter what) and project this onto the “smugness” of the one dealing out red pills.


    Igitur Reply:


    Before I knew about the Dunning-Krueger effect and such — I’d often noticed that smart people are (vastly) more often than not unable to conceptualize people who are not as smart or smarter than them. When they do, it’s not by a mile.

    (Dunning-Krueger, of course, says idiots don’t know they’re idiots. It’s the flip side to that observation.)

    Here’s the thing about red pills, though: it seems that really noticing and swallowing that there’s stupid people in the world has… some side-effects. Most people who can survive the red pill shouldn’t be taking it anyway.

    Diogenes Reply:


    I won’t touch glib and hasty generalizations from social science studies with a ten-foot pole. The results that Dunning and Kruger presented don’t entail that most or even many people who are incompetent think that they are competent, or vice versa. This is partly because the results don’t show that, and partly because results in the socialist sciences never entail anything. Your suggestion that I can’t “conceptualize” people who are smarter than I am is lost on me, mostly because you don’t know me.

    As for your other comment, you’ll need to expand on why you think people “shouldn’t be” learning the truth, before I can say anything further.

    Karl F. Boetel Reply:

    I loathe the “social sciences” as much as anyone, but I think Igitur makes a good point. Besides, he’s basing it (it seems to me) on his own personal experiences, which are merely *reinforced* by that research — and I happen to have had the same sort of experiences:

    Smart people generally don’t seem to comprehend how less-smart people think — or, more likely, fail to think. I believe this is mostly because smart people surround themselves, personally and professionally, by other smart people. I, on the other hand, sometimes like to go see how the other three-quarters of the bell curve live.

    Posted on January 16th, 2014 at 4:12 am Reply | Quote
  • VXXC Says:

    Smugness is justified as armor against Progs, God knows they’ve got it oozing from their repellent pores, soaking their onesies with vileness.

    He who has contempt for his fellow man as lesser beings is however not fit to rule. Especially in Hierarchy. We have that now. All we would gain is a faster Turing loop to the same cycle.

    Anyone can destroy the insane and the evil with a good conscience. Not so clean if you merely mean to be the next evil and insane Boss.


    Posted on January 17th, 2014 at 1:48 am Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    @VXXCIve been saying for years after for decades wondering how ostensibly intelligent liberals could be so hopelessly wrong, that they assume the world is composed of people like the ones they met in grad school blacks they know are brilliant and civilized, everyone is future timed oriented and altruistic so they seem so sure a world designed for people like themselves is universally applicable. Horribly wrong phenomenally stupid but short of conspiracy theories I can find no satisfactory explanation for their suicidal behavior


    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    Short answer: status whoring. (Don’t mistake a rationalization for a reason.)

    Long answer: http://home.earthlink.net/~peter.a.taylor/midrash.htm


    Handle Reply:

    I agree. But don’t underestimate ‘paradigm apartheid’ (post with that title coming soon).

    For instance, I work in an environment very much like Michael described. Most of the work is intellectual or professional. Not many blacks, but the ones that are there are extraordinarily well-behaved and intelligent.

    In fact, everyone is like that. Talented, civil, respectful, courteous, considerate, law-abiding, conscientious. Solidly middle class and very bourgeois. No one makes a ton of money, but no one is poor – the pay range is fairly compressed. Most people have very similar interests and are able to relate with each other. Overall, a pretty homogenous culture with a decent ethnic diversity.

    Except for the fact that the racial distribution numbers don’t come out quite right, it’s basically progressive paradise as a work environment. The similarity to the lives and interactions of the faculty of an academic institution is probably not coincidental. You could call either one a ‘microzion’ in my pet jargon. It helps if people also live together in the same neighborhoods and socialize almost exclusively with each other.

    The people that have that kind of geographic proximity and endogamous workplace-based social-network, and who live in that world for a long time, really do come to a kind of distorted weltanschauung paradigm of how the world works, and an abridged, almost ‘utopian’ model of human nature and potential.

    Above, Karl F. Boetel says that smart people don’t understand simpler ones because, due to class segregation and SES-IQ correlation, they almost never share the same social scenes with each other from womb to tomb. The military is one place that forces that kind of mingling, and it’s a pretty shocking experience for a lot of people.

    Of course, that kind of ‘lived experience apartheid’ and the divergence of classes in the country to the point of establishing rigid castes is exactly what Charles Murray was writing about in “Coming Apart” and which led to his infamous ‘elite bubble’ quiz.

    At any rate, returning to the point, i I think it’s not just rationalization or status whoring. People pick up cues and signals and generate their models of how the world works and could potentially work from their lived experience. I think that’s behind a lot of the enthusiasm for childhood intervention, “Everyone I know who is successful was raised the way I war raised. Everyone I know who is not successful suffers from the same deprivations and oppressions. Therefore, ‘all we have to do is’ make their childhood resemble my childhood, and voila!”


    VXXC Reply:


    Regardless of all the intelligent good people in Government and [gag] Finance [pace Handle] policy is set by people WHO.MEAN.HARM. They don’t just disdain lower status whites for instance, they HATE them with a deep MALICE.

    Only malice could carry one through these policies over decades.


    Posted on January 18th, 2014 at 6:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Porphy Says:


    I agree but that leaves open the question of “why, especially since most of those involved, especially at the begining, and especially in non-symbolic roles, are white themselves.” A question that, when put that way, often leads people off the rails: “It’s not really whites behind the policies – it’s Joos” is one way that goes off the rails. Another way is “self-hating. Progressivism is based around self-hatred,” an answer often given on one place but then contradicted by the same person who gives that answer when they notice the deep and abiding self-love that Progs have for themselves (and their smug status signaling).

    It’s a hatred for he wrong kind of whites. As indicated in Moldbug’s original 5 Castes. But that hatred wasn’t always there (or at least it wasn’t always so prevalent). What happened was, sometime around the mid 60s (we’ll go with 1965, the year the Kennedy Immigration Bill was passed. That’s as good a start point as any), what was (at the time) still explicitly talked about as “The Liberal Establishment” caught up with some select, er, intellectuals, who had realized that White Ethics/the White Working Class – was disapoint. Was (again) losing interest in remaining in their role within the “New Deal Coalition” (as the spearcarrying mass base, “The People,” on whose behalf the Liberal Establishment justified their perogative to administer society). Just as they had defected (if only momentarily) from earlier Progressivism during the Return to Normalcy period.

    So, being good Progressives, they looked to the (harder) Left for answers – people who had, in the 50s (and even earlier) been discussing how the proles were disapointing the revolution, and why. And the answer those intellectuals had worked out, which was adopted by the people who replaced the moribund “Liberal Establishment,” was that the white masses had wrongthink culture, and that a substitute proletariat was needed – it needed to be found, and, if it did not exist, it needed to be created. And used to displace (replace) the existing white mass-base.

    Of course, not nearly everyone who came around to this position did so explicitly (though, in that time-period: 60s and early 70s, many were quite explicit/candid about this), and Moldbug’s point about “Spontaneous Coordination” – no grand conspiracy, just like-minded people forming a consensus around Schelling Points based on already-agreed principles and ends – is correct.

    But this is certainly why the attitude of the Progressive Left towards Middle-America is naked contempt (and sometimes explicitly “joking” genoicide – “not to be taken literally” of course, because these are the “good people, the nice people, the civil people,” it’s just that they’d prefer not to have any of the un-nice people around and if they all died off or were killed off, more’s the better. Then the Progs can administer over people who are more worthy of their benevolent attentions).

    The hatred is certainly genuine. There is far more explicit hate on the Left for the people on the Right that they disagree with than there is on the Right for those they disagree with (Rightists tend to want the Left to see them as “nice people too.” Of course there are many, many exceptions – which of course any Prog responding to this will be happy to point out). But the contemptuous H8red they feel liberated to express towards the middle-American (or, in Europe, the “populist”) White masses as they actually exist (as opposed to “The People” in the abstract) is quite fierce. ANd it has its roots in the fact that these masses have disapointed the high-status progs aims for them time and time again by clinging in a recalcitrant fashion to the very cultural, social, and economic norms that Progressivism aims to replace in “fundamentally transforming society” on the basis of their vision of social justice. The fact that Kansans refuse to see – blinkered middle-American whites refuse to see – what is being done on their behalf as being done on their behalf infuriates Ecumenical Postmillenialists to no end.

    N.B. – this is an imperfect extemporaneous articulation of a point I have not fully worked out how to describe adequately.


    Posted on January 20th, 2014 at 5:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alex Says:

    The excavation websites at Olynthus, Pompeii and Herculaneum revealed proof of the
    existence of curtains.


    Posted on February 7th, 2017 at 9:16 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment