We get imprisoned more than a capitalist in China.
The bacon mosque guy was murdered.
For a prank.
There’s suppression and then there’s a literal threat of death.
Various people have tried to doxx me (and been wrong, like no I’m not a Russian, not a man, etc etc) but while being illegal itself (both finding that data and disseminating it) would also be incitement to violence, up to and including death. So add on aiding and abetting GBH, murder. And you wonder why women aren’t online talking about any of these topics? Please. Most of them cave into vanity or hide behind a husband from cowardice, also limiting their topics…. then what’s the point? They’re afraid to offend. You should be offended, it’s good for you. Bruce Charlton’s got a lot of good material on this. It’s metaphysical, people shouldn’t take it so personally. Either there’s proof (like the China food theft thing that cucks tried to twist into All Asians when no, China is not even most Asians) or there’s other information like a train of logic that can be debunked and if you can’t…. why do you still want to dismiss it? When women mention these things it’s different than when men do it. Men debate for fun, women for survival. When a woman brings up an issue, that’s the time to worry. It isn’t a joke and joking about it is foolish. Women are people-pleasers so to bring up anything, least of all an uncomfortable topic, you sit up and pay attention. The Vikings trusted the wives with the family money, thinking they could see into the future. Women do have an intuition about the environment, to raise a family in it. We still entrust women with the family purse, to buy the food and other supplies. This is not a game.
PC is a cult and it’s death to the sane. You can’t even ask to be left alone. The Race Relations Act (UK) revoked our right to hire by merit LONG before ‘equality’ targets. Meritocracy died with that legislation, targets of obedience for show came later. You don’t wanna be the first corporate to stop clapping that rainbow flag. Track GDP since the RRA came through, it’s quite something.
Diversity is our strength, look at GDP! So good for companies, it must be enforced by the State!
But yeah, evil, evil data. Communism happens to other countries that… tell you… who you can… hire….
Yes. I went there.
The Orwell wording is the worst part.
The IQ ceiling in hiring is just silly. Every occupation has an IQ minimum to perform, there is no maximum but employee demand. Surely discriminatory companies are a good thing, since discrimination means to parse quality? Surely companies prejudiced against talent would fail? This credentialism is trying to get around the system while also profiting from tokens, have no pity when they lose their shorts.
Anti-competence laws, anti-competent managers kowtowing to them.
Isn’t the purpose of state schooling discrimination based on the academic IQ? Why have grades? They’re an IQ proxies. If all students are equal, do away with sets, have ONE exam board for ALL schools (even Eton) and ONE exam paper of equal difficulty (since we’re all the same, mentally). There should be no psychometrics, so education majors should be locked up for tracking ‘progress’, which is 100% of the thing they do.
The status quo is intellectually dishonest. It’s okay when they do it, since you’re evil.
Hollywood is 100% propaganda. Why else would it exist? A slice of America that evades ((taxes)) and doesn’t represent either higher art or Americans? Why does it get tax breaks while evading paying the taxpayer public?
Cuckservatives annoy me more than libertarians pretending to be centrists because at least the latter admit their beliefs are entirely selfish. Cuckservatives act like family men but also like the idea their daughter might become a hooker or their son might grow drugs. Obviously family values.
Making things up so nobody can falsify it. Gibberish.
We used to put deluded psychotics in asylums?
Taking power from the right then lowering standards until it’s run into the ground.
We won’t step in and save it (at least, I hope nobody cucks).
Difference of power but no biological differences? Haven’t read Darwin, huh?
It is impossible, they do write fairytales and get angry with the common man, his privilege of living in real reality with objective results compared to their unreality of how things “should be” according to their religion, where Governments are God and NGOs don’t exist.
National debt triggers them because it shows their God isn’t omnipotent.
Their Satan figure isn’t who they think: it’s fractional reserve banking.
They genuinely believe (snort) that a dollar in their hand (snort) is actually worth (snort) one dollar!
Should’ve mentioned the classism, hegemony is too civil.
Hegemony from whom?
Here, the White Working Class. It is exclusive, but where it used to be race or sex, it’s now class and whites.
Unis might as well have signs up saying No Whites No Poors No Hotties
all forms of “privilege” as cited justification for human rights abuses.
The indigenous people who pay their taxes and maybe pensions. The foreign students won’t bail them out, they’ll be long gone. Not their debt though.
Later it’ll be “I was just following orders”… nope!
If they care about the poor, why not outsource MOOCs for intro level courses, age-restriction free? (since ageism is wrong)…
They don’t want to teach you, they want to own you.
It’s a debt Ponzi with a veneer of prestigious “education”.
However, the curriculum is totally different than when they stole the institutions with that prestige and now their status is tanking, it’s deserved.
The purpose of Marx, for example, isn’t to help the poor. He aims to use the poor like a tool. Capitalism has helped more poor people if you actually look. The purpose of Marx is to justify theft (including rape, if you think about it, to take anything “needed”*, entitlement to any resource from a blood bond**) and because humans rebel against rights violations for continued survival, eventually mass murder (since only the many can provide for the few in the Party***, like a large field is quickly overtaken with a very small number of locust). The appetites of man vary and some are insatiable, whether they call them needs or urges.
*This explains all the lefty rape scandals, including the SWP.
** Technically, you can’t get more racist than Communism. They deem humans a race and then try to rob you to death for belonging to that race (including robbing you of the right to flee or disagree, for example). Heads I am entitled, tails you owe me. It’s a death cult.
***Anyone who wants to become a politician, in a logical society, should get shot instantly. It’s akin to saying “I’m a psychopath, let me in your kitchen with all the knives!” It should be a minimum wage, secondary job with no prestige whatsoever.
Nobody has profiled the true basis of modern thought. They are consumerist but more sensory, purely hedonism than owning things to look at it (abstain from destruction). If they can’t eat it or show off with it or fuck it, the left wing doesn’t want it. It’s the most consumerist position available because they want to make it a part of themselves or remove it from the world.
I can’t be bothered to detail why or how I came to know this so I’ll throw it here for others to look.
The core of Marx’s works and all who came after.
Look into the Marquis de Sade.
“Nature, who for the perfect maintenance of the laws of her general equilibrium, has sometimes need of vices and sometimes of virtues, inspires now this impulse, now that one, in accordance with what she requires”
If I attributed that to Marx, you would’ve believed me. The original moral relativist, he hired a maid and tortured her.
Her rights were relatively unimportant to him. A rope would be relatively applied to his neck if he weren’t rich.
Anyone who deserves the death penalty is a “relativist”, ever notice that?
They aren’t balanced and passive as you’d expect from the theory (that’s Buddhism and has many absolutes) but actively destructive and immoral for the thrill and novelty (r). How can they “explore” a line, as they often intellectualize, if the line does not exist?
He was a monster who should’ve been hanged and we are living in his philosophy, gone mainstream.
There is the source of your degeneracy.
Man has always been consumed by his appetites individually but never so encouraged, socially, never bailed out consequentially, never forgiven publicly (only by the MSM, look at the DM’s attitude to adultery or any use of “romp”) and never so indulged financially at the expense of others.
We don’t let the losers lose. We treat every degenerate like a prince of old, coddled into a mess of chaos that consumes us with them. Pathological altruism. Russell Brand should be mocked a la Harlot’s Progress.
Do the SJWs ever bring up de Sade? This would be telling, he’s the poster boy of male privilege.
Let’s go through a handful. I’ve had a spike in traffic this past week from people too spergy to know sarcasm when they see it. I don’t mind accommodating humourless prigs but then they try to order me around like I should seek their approval and that’s… that’s a thing, apparently? Mrs Grundy supported Hillary, they’re just projecting onto us as the Cause of their Problems (but what of the Final Solution)? I’ve seen them in the past week blame black people, white people, men, women, gay people, straight people, illegal people, dead people, Obama, old people, young people and Third Party voters, for their failure. It isn’t about any of us, and the divisive tactic is hardly surprising, it’s totally about them and it isn’t cricket. Trying to order your fellow voter around is what deservedly keeps losing you elections and referenda. The people saying we’re equal shouldn’t be patronizing or hiding certain material we supposedly aren’t smart enough to read and question. The real world isn’t a safe space. The opposite of democracy is tyranny, where you must vote for Saintly Candidate or Satan wins and Armageddon happens (concern trolling).
You aren’t 100% totally serious all the time, therefore, I can ignore you!
It’s art if I say it is, and if you don’t like that comedian you have no right to judge.
Let’s break out the rape jokes. Or maybe some of Eddie Murphy’s 80s materials on homosexuals.
You aren’t legitimate.
That’s the point. That is quite literally the entire point. Either I’m right or wrong. Nothing to do with approval or consensus. I’m not being paid. I don’t run adverts biasing me. That is quite literally the point and I’m impressed to see people who try and turn those into a bad thing. Calm down, everyone knows most blogs are crap. If I’m totally wrong, why does it trigger you? Only the truth smarts. Ah, but you see the hit count, don’t you?
It bothers you I don’t need to show my tits like that tramp Laci Green to get people to listen to me.
Listening to a woman? Based on her…. her, opinions?? No sexual appeal whatsoever?!
Shocking, I know.
I can discredit you personally based on Opinion A. No person worth listening to would hold Opinion A.
No True Scotsman would reject free beer.
Obviously socialization factors are important.
Not as important as genetic ones. The harder science wins.
Also see the reproducibility crisis for how the sociologist’s fallacy works out.
Your opinions are mean.
Have you looked at the reasons? Nobody likes being mean.
I’ve even tried sympathizing with parts of Marx, but nobody Leftist complains about that….
In a democracy, most people will think you’re wrong. Deal with it.
You used a word I didn’t like (ex: usually cuck).
That’s the purpose of an insult, well done, dear.
We wouldn’t use it, if it didn’t work.
If you feel it applies to you, perhaps examine why?
Why don’t you show your face?
Monstering mobs, the scummy people who come after entire families and other large groups. From the people who want me to show my face. Also I’m not vain and text is easier to search.
I can’t tell if you’re joking.
It’s an intelligence test. You fail.
You aren’t tall enough for this ride.
Why did you do this? All this.
Don’t you support a woman’s right to independent thought if she isn’t left-wing?
You’re a terrible person.
You come to my house…
How dare you question Government/company/charity/campaign!
Who’s the conservative now? Look at you far-left liberals defending The Man. Warms the iron of Horseshoe Theory, dunnit?
Never question your betters, is it? Know your place? Is it, perchance, the kitchen?
You shouldn’t be allowed to have an opinion (if it’s different from mine).
This is the internet. You people adopted it, mine made it worth inhabiting. I thought everybody was entitled to an opinion?
You’re (dehumanizing insults).
I thought we were equal, comrade?
Dehumanizing makes you like Hitler. [that was sarcasm]
This is wasting my time.
You act like I care. Your time, your business. However, if you were half as open-minded as you like to signal, you would read around from time to time, as I clearly do. You all have exactly the same brainless objections, thinking you’re so clever. It’s like the redditfags who parrot clever-sounding words and phrases “correlation is not causation”. You have plenty of websites of your own. This isn’t your safe space. You don’t own everything.
Why can’t we talk?
You mean, why can’t you manipulate me with feeling?
You can open up a Youtube channel for all I care. Talk to them. As it is, I’ve progressed through those simplistic arguments years ago and it takes up too much time to explain to ingrates who come here in droves every so often. I don’t owe you a reply or recognition. This is not a milquetoast cocktail party.
For the serious audience that tries to think independent thoughts:-
Why do so many young people now think Appeal to Authority is an argument?
Are they still brainwashed into obedience from school? It’s like crimestop. There’s no such thing as a dangerous and unacceptable idea. If others want to self-limit, sure, that makes it easy for the rest of us. Less clog in the drain.
The internet is a swirl of ideas. You don’t get to pick who gets to post. It’s democratic.
I mention things because they seem interesting, not necessarily true, I don’t presume. They are intended to challenge you. If you cannot reject it, there must be some truth to it, however unpleasant.
For people bitching about the ‘truth’, because I use that word in the header tongue-in-cheek, as if parts of it aren’t subjective in places (the personal is political places), they sure don’t sound like the moral relativists… Your truth is not my truth. Our experiences differ and the evidence says at least one of us must be wrong. Common sense, surely?
You don’t expect me to do time-travel telepathy do you? Let’s write all the opinions I don’t have for some reason, held by a person who’ll read this in the future and doesn’t really care about objective truth. OK.
They want to feel secure that their opinion is politically correct, the latest evidence be damned, and to feel safe, ignorant (nothing ‘mean’ in their pure little heads, they don’t feel the full spectrum of human emotion like the proles) and comfortable in those opinions, unthreatened by people who don’t even take selfies and post hashtags to Twitter. Oh, the horror!
It’s the adult equivalent of ‘I saw one thing I didn’t like (inevitable with honesty) so lalala I’m not listening to all the rest.’
There are no excuses to ignore valid evidence. I’ve ceded plenty of times my opponents had a point. Derailing and straw-manning to totally different points isn’t fooling anyone. The truth is not simple or easy and never nice and PC. PC is a facade of lies to deliberately hide the truth e.g. beauty is on the inside, reject computer models. We oppose the intellectual dishonesty, as did your fellow pinko George Carlin. Classic liberals are thinking this has all been taken too far in the name of coddling adults who expect respect without comporting themselves above the level of a temper tantrum. The people in this part of the internet know all about logical fallacies and SJW tactics. Name the beast and it can’t bite you, we’re immune. In fact, we should thank you, because if you didn’t set so many people against you with your repellent personalities and rude discussion disruptions, over many years, we would never be replacing traditional media. Infiltration doesn’t work either, since our debates tend toward cerebral theories you either get or you don’t. None of this is our fault, we leave you to various fruitless campaigns and it’s impressing nobody to start on people who for the most part mind their own business in their own parts of the internet.
One rung up is the fascist temptation to censor. Liberal until tyrannical. Hey, I want all those people I disagree with to have free speech. It’s free comedy. I link to them. I say, there, look, go and see for yourself I’m not making this up. They really are that dumb.
You can’t discredit someone who doesn’t value your opinion. We just laugh at you. It’s like a schoolgirl starting a rumour, it changes nothing and you’ve proven you don’t have a substantive reply. Is that the best you can do? Is that your level?
You can’t de-legitimize someone who seeks a totally different metric of legitimacy (nothing to do with traditional authority or MSM/Baby Boomer approval, more like a Wild West anarchy approach to the truth). Sometimes it’s rude, to shock people into waking up and smelling the shit around them. The new rebels are right-wing, get over it. It’s been fifty years of Red, you’ve had your time. The pendulum is swinging back, various elections are proving it. Either stick around and learn something or go back to your bubble and keep wondering why your polls are out of touch. I won’t start on the economic models and QE out of clemency.
Why can’t we open a dialogue?
You don’t want open debate. If you were ever capable of following the rules. You platform ban people in public for trying to dissent. You try to get them arrested for peaceful protest.
That isn’t liberal.
You want to preach, except there’s no basis for this. There is no legitimacy. If we’re all equal, you have no more value than I do. Including moral authority.
It’s like an atheist in the pulpit. You’re what’s been dubbed many things: the New Church Ladies, cultural regressives, rabbits, degenerates (happy to sin, like Satanists), all sanctimonious and Shame-on-You-ing. This is why you get nowhere and nobody listens to you. We’re all adults here. You have no right and to put it in your lingo, you speak from a position of privilege. Or at least liberal privilege. You demanded identity politics and now you have it. You can’t complain you got what you wanted, now it’s all people see because you told us to.
Think of the rich celebrities in gated communities telling all the poor people they’re bad and need to reject the segregation of gated communities. People are not stupid. They’re angry and totally validated.
The Left is dead. Its globalist spin, the rampant supranationalism post-war, is a cultural artefact of the 20th century Empire-building, the ‘Unions’. Accurately, wing politics is dead too.
It’s now about issues and identity. National and genetic competition (what you dub inequality).
Get over yourself.
This blog and those like it are not for you. They are not for pinko approval, Princess.
Finally, the best slight because it exposes you for who you truly are.
You’re gaslighting me. Typical mansplaining. It’s never the women who try that means of dismissal and self-doubt.
Someone who doesn’t hate themselves irrationally for being born, or being white, or whatever else, it must be triggering to you.
In your language of child memes.
“Why aren’t they listening to us? We called them crazy Nazis, didn’t we?”
If you don’t see the problem in insulting people you need to persuade, you’re retarded.
Real retards are actually very nice people with far more common sense.
Do not click: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/19/cultural-marxism-a-uniting-theory-for-rightwingers-who-love-to-play-the-victim <SEO>
I waited almost a year to go on about this. I wanted to see if anything would come of it. This is going to be as short as I can make it, so yes, I will miss things out. You can add things yourself and link them in the comments. I’m broadening out the topic too, for a laugh. Technically way OT in places but funny with it. Fun with it. Hopefully.
Welcome to The Magical Mystery Tour of Cultural Marxism.
<joke about holes>
Child Molester? Chief Manager?
Acronyms can mean many things. The usual meaning for CM online in these times, thanks to gg truthers, is Cultural Marxism. What is Cultural Marxism? It refers to an undemocratic system of political control via media brainwashing. It refers to an undemocratic system of political control via media brainwashing. It refers to an undemocratic system of political control via media brainwashing. Because pop culture never gets stuck in your head, that’s just crazy.
But never throw away your TV because reasons.
Why is advertising so expensive, eh? The limited number of channels excuse doesn’t fly anymore.
n.b. This is uncannily similar to the notion of the Cathedral btw: comprised of Academia, Media and Government, who often tend to mimic one another somehow in a harmonizing array of vacuous lies to keep you docile and arguably, falsely conscious.
Hey, if they’re going to mock us….
Despite all the studies on how subliminal messaging is BS yet its brother priming is totally real, and the effect of barrages of propaganda on real populations, somehow this is still considered a conspiracy. In a world where adverts blare over loudspeaker in public and your phone is watching you. As if the sociopaths with power (pick a Poison) were to look at those findings, shrug them off and proceed to do nothing with them. Sounds legit.
If you were to ask 100 people: do you believe in conspiracy theories, most would say No. When pressed, they’d evoke a media image: with an aluminium hat. Hmm. Whereas if you asked: do you believe in abuse of power, the underlying premise of every single conspiracy theory, you’d achieve astronomical amounts of agreement. Same people, same topic, different questions. Different words. It’s almost like the media output shapes our ability to consider certain subjects. Restricts us to talking points from cognitive load. Like a mild version of PTSD, engrained from a young age, we have visceral visual responses (flashbacks) to something we have seen, not in real life, but on a screen.
Aawww yeah, that’s the stuff. Mock me baby, mock me, you can’t satire a satire!
But sitting your kid in front of the TV is good for them, despite that pesky evidence. Kid’s shows never have any subtle political points, memory tactics or adult humour. We freely admit to flashbacks of pleasant things, like beloved cartoons. Remember when…? That reminds me… Who else saw…?
It’s become the new cultural touchstone, above national heritage symbols and stories. It has replaced history. As a friend of mine said: We are all Americans now.
If it’s illusory, it begs the question, what’s the harm in discussing it? Like the sociopolitical implications of Elrond’s Rivendell.
The usual ad hominem ensued in the up-top article. You don’t debate AH (rhetoric) with dialectic (logos). That isn’t the way to kill it. You must mock it. I can do both so… fuck it.
You see, every time these words are now spoken, even in jest, the SJWs can link to that article, and remain oblivious to what the theory is about. Think about that – a group obsessed with definitions. So I’m here to fuck their shit up, 9 months later, like the demonic spawn of their critical ideology, since who TF is going to check for feedback on that article this late? Let alone mess up its SEO? We know most of their interns probably studied English, right?
First, note: They keep referring to the ‘conspiracy’ as CM, instead of how it is commonly referred to: The Frankfurt School. Because if they called it that, their readers might think, wait, does that school exist? Did it ever exist? We could easily disprove these obvious hateful bigoted xeno-Nazis!
The title alone is intellectually dishonest. I haven’t seen anyone pick up on that for starters.
This is why I speak last.
CM is actually a division of The Frankfurt School’s works. A sub-division. Lesser than the whole of their theory.
Visual AIDs. Made with ecoterrorist Green, Commie Red and Lib Dem yellow. I really wanna get this cited. The black was being inclusive. It hurts my eyes.
When the thicko Guardian reader would care to look up the term “Frankfurt School building” on image search in rabid anticipation of finding precisely FA, the first hit is…
That doesn’t prove anything! We don’t know who occupied these buildings during that time!
Thankfully these people liked to brag about their involvement.
Here’s what comes up from the same Marxists’ site under, I shit you not, group photo:
Let’s look at the wikipedia page currently headed Cultural Marxism (the subject was almost deleted previously from the entire site but in Reddit uproar was reinstated).
“Although sometimes only loosely affiliated, Frankfurt School theorists spoke with a common paradigm in mind, thus sharing the same assumptions and being preoccupied with similar questions.…The school’s main figures sought to learn from and synthesize the works of such varied thinkers as Kant, Hegel,Marx,Freud, Weber, and Lukács.
Yet under Early Influences, Marx is clearly listed. Making them Marxists.
“The Institute made major contributions in two areas relating to the possibility of human subjects to be rational, i.e., individuals who could act rationally to take charge of their own society and their own history. The first consisted of social phenomena previously considered in Marxism as part of the “superstructure” or asideology: personality, family and authority structures (one of the earliest works published bore the title Studies of Authority and the Family), and the realm of aesthetics and mass culture. Studies saw a common concern here in the ability of capitalism to destroy the preconditions of critical, revolutionary political consciousness. This meant arriving at a sophisticated awareness of the depth dimension in which social oppression sustains itself. It also meant the beginning of critical theory‘s recognition of ideology as part of the foundations of social structure.”
And what did they wish to do with that structure, pray tell? Lower down;
“During this period, Frankfurt School critical theory particularly influenced some segments of the left wing and leftist thought, particularly the New Left. …Their critique of technology, totality, teleology and (occasionally) civilization is an influence on anarcho-primitivism. Their work also heavily influenced intellectual discourse on popular culture and scholarly popular culture studies.”
And they tried the Stalinist tactic of dismissing criticism by calling their opponents crazy: “criticized the Frankfurt School’s initial tendencies towards “automatically” rejecting opposing political criticisms on “psychiatric” grounds:” If you see anything wrong with this in Government-funded academia, I guess you’re a crazy conspiracy nutjob. As if to describe all champagne socialists in one fell swoop, the ‘academics’ were said to suffer from “bourgeois idealism” by people who knew what the hell they were talking about.
We’d never see anything like that today: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071634/
At the bottom, way down the page, it tries to be balanced;
The history of the Frankfurt School cannot be fully told without examining the relationships of Critical Theorists to their Jewish family backgrounds. Jewish matters had significant effects on key figures in the Frankfurt School, including Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal and Herbert Marcuse. At some points, their Jewish family backgrounds clarify their life paths; at others, these backgrounds help to explain why the leaders of the School stressed the significance of antisemitism. In the post-Second World War era, the differing relationships of Critical Theorists to their Jewish origins illuminate their distinctive stances toward Israel. This book investigates how the Jewish backgrounds of major Critical Theorists, and the ways in which they related to their origins, impacted upon their work, the history of the Frankfurt School, and differences that emerged among them over time.
Why might this concern people? It isn’t as if they wish to control us or cause us harm in our homeland. After all, we wouldn’t dream of bossing around Israel or hurting their way of life. Take it away, the adroitly named Barbara Spectre!
Narrator: She believes Jews have an important role to play in a country undergoing profound change.
BS: I think there’s a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned to be multicultural. And I think we’re gonna be part of the throes of that, of that transformation, which must take place, Europe is not gonna be (smiles) the monolithic, uh, uh, societies that they once were in the last century. (brief cut) Jews are gonna be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make, they are now going into a multicultural mode – and Jews will be resented because of our leading role (nose in the air) but without that leading role and without that transformation Europe will not survive. (a small nod of approval, as camera cuts)
You know you can tell a lot about a person’s inner world by their body language. Micro-expressions in particular. When I said nose in the air…
Face of a leader.
Lest you think I’m being unfair, many non-Jews are supporting this goal to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity” with multiculturalism and mass immigration. source In Europe only, of course. The rest of the world doesn’t require ‘enrichment’ for some strange reason.
There are many accusations along the lines of a ‘Master Race’ levied at Jews (calling yourselves the Chosen People doesn’t help) but I’m sure the passages stating for example, that non-Jews aren’t human? I’m sure that sort of thing is just a misunderstanding, a mistranslation: http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/man.html “There are those who infer from these passages that the Talmud considers gentiles to be sub-human. After all, if the Talmud says that gentiles are not called man they must be considered sub-human” that does seem rather logical though. Given the context of the Chosen People bit? It isn’t as if they want to lead us like a flock of sheep, wherever did you get that idea?
Marx himself heard so little on the front of Jews in academia that he wrote this: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/
That’s right, the so-called Jewish Question is a Marxist invention! It’s so post-modern! We may only wonder at what he’d have had to say to the German Jews of the Frankfurt School.
“…You Jews are egoists if you demand a special emancipation for yourselves as Jews. As Germans, you ought to work for the political emancipation of Germany, and as human beings, for the emancipation of mankind, and you should feel the particular kind of your oppression and your shame not as an exception to the rule, but on the contrary as a confirmation of the rule….”
“What is the object of the Jew’s worship in this world?” Marx asks. “Usury. What is his worldly god? Money…. What is the foundation of the Jew in this world? Practical necessity, private advantage…. The bill of exchange is the Jew’s real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange.”
It is ironic that the most acceptable white male in the curriculum for “diversity” on many campuses is Karl Marx, a world-class bigot. At one time, Marx referred to a Creole man who married his niece as a “gorilla offspring.”
Imagine the letters if he’d been pen-pals with Che G.
Other Marx/Engels quotes are to be found here, and they are well-sourced from the materials open to correction.
Bear in mind, we see many example of Marxist thought in everyday language. Objectification, for instance, is a Marxist idea borrowed by feminism. Originally called reification, it encompasses the process of a subject becoming an object.
“But what is most important in the music of the Gang of Four, and those groups who share their approach, is that for the first time since Brecht’s plays received wide attention in the 1920s, we are seeing a conscious intervention by socialists to fuse advanced Marxist theory with widely popular culture.”
“All such Marxists fail to see that potential exists to channel such expressions in a progressive direction.”
Point scored, I think.
Why multiculturalism, you ask? Why is that a social policy weapon? It’s a polite term for multi-racialism. It oppresses the working class (in revenge for not rising up before, the reason the school was founded) by driving down wages, living standards and outnumbers them for State assistance a la Cloward-Piven Strategy. Divide and conquer.
Public incitement of such genocide is also a crime.
Could this be Exhibit A at your trial for treason?
Moving on, Standpoint theory is a post-modern theory also used in feminism (this is a lot of coincidence) to lend credence to the opinion that minorities have the most or only valid perspectives, their word is always true (as their experience is never false) and a literal majority of people are probably wrong, because the density of their sheer numbers blind them with power or some vague excuse like ‘privilege’. It’s as silly as Magic Dirt and completely undemocratic, as a point of fact, it’s anti-democracy. Whenever you see these people trying something like the Progressive Stack and banging on like their opinions are important and can never be questioned because of what they were born, you see Standpoint Theory in action. It’s their pass to everything. They can do no wrong. The theory is also complete tosh. Applying it to Africa aka the most densely populated continent, white Africans would have more legitimate opinions on the structure of Government. They aren’t willing to apply this theory against anyone other than white, straight normal people who just want to be left alone by this PC stuff. Ironically, white people are a global minority, making them the most important people if we apply it …fairly. It gives rise to infographics like this.
[they took it down, fuck’s sake…] But whites are a minority!
It’s alright to exist, yes. To continue to live. In peace.
When name-calling is all you’ve got, you’ve lost the argument.
Critical theory (also used in feminism) is a similarly flawless means of derailing and dissembling a possibly productive conversation. It is defined in practice by never listening to evidence and never offering a solution to the social problems, and they’re always social problems (never quantifiable). ALL IT DOES IS COMPLAIN. It’s a license to nag you under the guise of the credentialism’s overeducated moral authority.
The only solution to social problems on the Left? Government spending! Despite national debt.
Let’s go with the Frankfurt School theory for a second. HYPOTHETICALLY.
How would you hide it?
Cultural as this consolidation of ideological power is, it requires cultural defense of itself. As it is undemocratic (so the idea goes) it must hide this institutionalized power structure from the populace by cultural denial. Deny or die. In the same way it suppresses other ideas. Ideally, it should blame its enemies for everything evil in the world. It must find a scapegoat for the hegemony, something easily recognizable as cultural shorthand for evil, especially when those people are dead and can’t argue or sue. If they fail to deny any truth to the matter, the whole house of cards will collapse. Elsewhere, there must be a dumbing down of culture, to the lowest common denominator.
Hm, what does the media see as shorthand for evil? We know from lab experiments that uniform carries a number of social role implications, which uniform could possibly become the trope for unquestionable evil baddie?
Naturally, if you repeat these cultural memes enough, you will run out of novelty. After a few decades. It will seem as if the main peddlers of this media are running out of original ideas. Hey, you could even make a meme out of it. Parodies and gags. Trope inversions. Make it self-aware. That’ll work for a while. However, you couldn’t possibly do anything about it, because that would be off-message. You must stick to the Party Line. The official Narrative. The Politically Correct version of the truth in this subjective postmodern reality, where all perspectives are theoretically true simultaneously. Don’t let them take that to the logical conclusion and side with your diametric enemies, better to outgroup them for the crime of… rejecting the outgroup? …What does the PC line do, exactly? Why follow it? Why must we? What does it accomplish for us? Who decided and told us to? Where does it even come from? We must never ask this question, Comrade. Sign this petition. Go to this demo. Buy this t-shirt. What question? There is no question, I thought we all agreed?
After all, it’s called Public Relations, not Public Information.
Gee, that Guardian article is looking like a real shoot in the foot, ain’t it?
It might as well have been titled;
Cultural Marxism: a uniting theory to explain why left-wingers love to play victim
Deny this because it’s stupid and lies but also dangerous enough to us somehow to cover in the first place and we need rhetorical excuses, enclosed.
You know the easiest way you can tell you’re being brainwashed? [aside from blatant over-reliance on logical fallacies]
When the person talking to you tells you to never look up the other side. You must never go there, Simba. Never read their materials. Never listen to their arguments. Close your ears, Sweet Summer Child, because you have no mind of your own and your uncritical thinking abilities will be overwhelmed by their Satanic silvertongue! We’d never hide anything from you! We love you! We’re all about the love! Gee, this is beginning to sound like a church sermon.
Frankfurt School Denialists, continue. The Streisand Effect means all your work are belong to us.
This requires a hegemony of culture to work – what would this look like? Liberal privilege in academia, an overwhelming bias in the humanities and social research, upon which government policy is based? Media suppression of conservative ideas, even in comedy, as hateful? How many right-wing comedians are there to left, as a ratio? The Government supporting public sector workers in their partisan causes e.g. SWP?
Naturally, we’d never see this type of propaganda launched at children, in media aimed at children, say, in comics. That would really screw them when it comes to the people saying they’re undemocratic, by targeting future voters and influencing them before critical thinking kicks in.We’d never see the Modern Left target comics. Never at all: http://www.captaineuro.eu/ Actual quote: “Europe without Britain is incomplete. Like a pizza without tomato sauce.” – Captain Euro, source How am I supposed to parody that? In light of recent events, this one is my fave: http://www.captaineuro.eu/comic-strips/angela-merkel-learns-to-bluff/ http://www.europarl.europa.eu/euroscola/en/how_to_prepare/classroom.html http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/01/creating-a-feminist-classroom/
In the Long March Through the Institutions, there was an emphasis on New = Good, which is very convenient when you’re the new kid on the scene. When the right wing were dominant in these fields (and we got many classics out of it) they said to them ‘be open’ as the appeal to get their ideas in, and once they were out of power they seemed to dance with joy about how ‘out’ those notions were and remain. It’s disturbing how they fully believe they have an exclusive claim to moral authority imparted by this power and taxpayer cash. The rise of obstructive fascism (a left-wing invention uniting Stalin up to the National Socialists) currently uses suppression techniques at Universities that are beginning to be used for in-fighting (such as TERFs vs. other feminists) as the Left eats itself. They’re also taking steps of questionable legality by ‘no-platform’-ing a public space, a Government-funded public institution. Rules for Radicals would condone these type of acts. There are extremist factions wishing for trouble, like the UAF, hoping their Communist utopia will rise from the ashes. I haven’t seen them comment on Holodomor.
https://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/jay/ch01.htm “How problematical that goal…”
The linguistic use of domination-suppression techniques can be expert by CMs, and they use the excuse of teaching how to avoid it to simply… teach it: https://organizingforpower.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/forms-of-domination.pdf As reliable as crying wolf and crocodile tears when you doubt their sob story.
There’s the Diamond technique for swaying opinion at public gatherings without public consensus, because what democracy? https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/09/05/the-communist-diamond-tactic-at-public-debates/
The ‘spiral of silence’ and ‘chilling effect’ on freedom of expression (look them up yourself) exert effects too.
What’s all this mean combined? Self-censorship is the goal, if they can get you to lie to yourself, it’s over and they can gain control over personal, private relationships with it. We see this already with various judgements of personal relationships beginning with sexuality and now moving into preference. Sexual tastes are immutable by their doctrines (LGB+) yet men are being shamed for rejecting fat women (fat acceptance) and white men for finding non-white women less desirable: http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/11/racial-preferences-are-racist/ Slowly it creeps and intrudes further and further into the most intimate parts of our life. Who do these people think they are? No wonder there’s a pushback forming to the Little Hitlers. Stay out of our bedrooms, you nutjobs.
Subverting democracy (by direct action and monstering mobs) like this are within the range of tactics admissable in a culture war.
Recall, Marx himself said “the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terrorism.” The technological censorship comprises partisan community guidelines, surveillance, monitoring and includes Twitter block lists – and suddenly the user base of normal people (non-SJWs) is leaving in droves.
The very phrase “Political Correctness” is no longer PC, Kosher or ‘polite’ – because people are asking too many questions about it. The historical revisionism into an identity politics lens is blatantly dishonest i.e. (group) in (time period) rather than studying (time period). In context, demographic division is an IRL distraction from these moderated influences over decades, drip-fed through the media machine every day like soap operas and we usually pay them to do it. They say “___ is a myth” in reply as if their mere pronouncements ended all debate, as insanity only need occur once (based on cognitive dissonance) before it becomes permanent. If you ignore the reality of a situation once, that’s it. If you take up the doublethink or crimestop or Narrative, they’ve won. You aren’t questioning them because you gave them the authority of acceptable thoughts they presumed to have. And people wonder why print is dying and Alternative Media is picking up….
There is the feminist link to Communism and overlap naturally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_feminism http://socialistworker.org/2013/01/31/marxism-feminism-and-womens-liberation http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/103231/marxist-roots-feminism-spyridon-mitsotakis
Social Justice (a recent branch of feminism) also takes its origins from Communism and its torrid history: www.jstor.org/stable/591359
The post-war economy needed more workers, including women, to carry on growth patterns (and suppress average wages by sudden booms in supply) and telling women it was more fun to work than stay home contributed to the novelty of low happiness scores ever since:
The active propaganda of polls (see: groupthink, minority influence, Asch’s Lines etc) is leading to a sharp disconnect between what we see predicted pre-GE and the real result (see the past two General Elections in the UK). The democratic mandate for the unions and other Reds or their lackeys to call themselves the instrument of the People has dissipated with it. Given their hegemony, we see them neutrally deride this as a Rise of the Right.
Who came up with ‘culture war’? Kulturkampf. It’s as German as the Frankfurt School academics. Then why is it false to discuss the notion, according to CM denialists? It predates the place by some decades. If it isn’t real, why is their fear of the topic very real?
In this century, most Marxists are middle class Champagne socialists waiting for Mumsy and Daddy to snuff it so they can collect the inheritance they believe is evil when right-wingers claim it (in all forms, including cultural inheritance) and the common suspects pushing a CM Narrative are rarely exceptions to this rule. As quoted above, they are idealists – what they expect is unrealistic. As for family money, their Boomers parents have probably spent it all regardless, going by the trends I covered for excessive debt and cruising.
It’s funny they push a Hollywood image of battle, good vs. evil despite rejecting religion, as Horseshoe theory in the face of moral relativism has produced the philosophically novel outcome: nobody is evil. They’ll blame anyone but the human being who did the thing. It was society! It was his background! He was forced! The agent? Barely a whisper. Where were the feminists after Rotherham came out? Councils and other governmental bodies are shredding abuse documentation to prevent this embarrassment again, the feminists don’t give a shit about children or girls. Sacrifices for the Narrative. Ignore the MAO genes’ link to aggression and other behavioral genetics coming out.
As leaps into subjects like a unified crime theory have posited, r/K selection explains much of this partisan behaviour; evolutionary theories make liars uneasy because it’s hard to argue with Darwin or testable hypotheses without seeming like an anti-science bigot. There is also suppression of social studies that make Conservatives look good or skewing of results (what hegemony?) in favour of the Left wing when covered by MSM e.g.: https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/09/09/rk-mindsets-in-psychology-liberals-more-weird-than-conservatives/ https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2014/11/12/study-conservatives-are-smarter-than-liberals/
Terrified of true opposition as they are (even in the form of Trump) they are already falling back on Godwin’s Law and crying Nazi simply for being the opposition to the dominant Narrative. Without real opposition, what is the point of elections again? Which means they lose the argument (the lesser known meaning of Godwin’s Law). http://www.cracked.com/blog/how-90s-pop-band-secretly-sold-nazism-to-america_p2/
If we assume this were true, it begs questions. Doesn’t brainwashing work? How many musicians were Communist again? What about the Holodomor, worse statistically than any fanciful evaluation of the Holocaust? Why don’t these cultural outlets ever turn on the Left? Why don’t we use other figures like Stalin too? No enemies to the Left? They gloat about Overton Window shifts like gay marriage (the we’ve won/we’re winning articles like they’re trying to convince themselves laws can’t be repealed) but it’s never enough (‘there is more work to be done’ robots). It’s bizarre to watch from outside the media bubble. I guess from that Far Left, everyone else does look like a Nazi by comparison?
As Carlin said, we’re ‘circling the drain’ of their BS, the pendulum is swinging rightward overdue. They understand and acknowledge the Slippery Slope, it isn’t a political fallacy, especially when applied to moral trends (‘gay marriage’ polls taken in urban areas, anyone?) or any of the ‘changing attitudes’ that always seem to work in the Prog’s direction. We must be imagining it.
They forsake quality to chase equality. They’ll never get it, it would be as futile as stumping tall people and giving short people stilts. The result is ridiculous and forced.
Irony is a hip response to PC. We might follow it in public, because we don’t believe it. The act of submission becomes one of rebellion. An object of mockery ceases to be an object of fear. Trust nothing from the machine and it loses power. This is building.
You can deny some of this, but you can’t deny all of it.
What does this all mean?
I don’t know. You don’t either. I guess we’re equal.
Why else would the internet be talking about it, dipshit?
Since when do we agree on anything?
The true face behind the recent PR effort is as mentally defective as they are physically.
Autogynephiles become intensely violent and aggressive (this is now Exh. A) when you threaten their sexual exhibitionism, which you are compelled to take part in, without consent (whether you like it or not) from merely viewing them in pantomime to verbal roleplay (Pronoun Police).
Bet: refusing a tranny for sex on those grounds will become a hatecrime, or they will want it to be.
Tolerance = tolerance for Cultural Marxism.
Whom is the bigot?
Gee, what a shocker. If people are allowed to enjoy the rewards that accrue from serving the needs of others in the marketplace, they’ll have more incentive to be productive. That sounds like a good system, particularly compared to places where success is penalized.
So, capitalism works. Just read the whole thing.
In other news, social sciences are left-wing biased; (over 90% liberal researchers, ya think???)