The big pop

Whatever happens, the future’s going to be funny. Red swans galore.

Good luck having a Pride Parade with a black flag over London.

Without political correctness, we’d be allowed to discuss and solve these issues.

Aw well, I guess the smart people have to just shut up and whatever will be, will be?

Every time they gun down a socialist area, we needn’t lift a finger.

It’s what they would’ve wanted.

I’d rather see a million white Guardian readers strewn out in chunks over the pavement than harm a single hair on a precious Muslim’s head.

How did PC happen?

Political correctness (PC) is the dominant ideology of the Western intellectual world PC is what the West has instead of a religion. PC is a thing of the political Left in its origins and central constituency, yet has in recent decades been embraced by the mainstream political Right and Centre. Political correctness therefore represents the triumph of the Left. Nonetheless, political correctness very obviously violates both common sense and logic, and is destructive of all that is good, beautiful and true*. So, at one and the same time, PC is marginal and mainstream, ridiculous and mandatory; crazy and normal. This book explains how something so bizarre and wicked could become so ubiquitous and unremarkable. Political correctness obviously dominates its core territory of politics, public administration (the civil service), law, education and (especially!) the mass media. But PC also substantially shapes everything else: foreign policy, the military, policing, the economy, health services, and personal life: the mating game, friendships and even family life.

While you’re all sucking on Peterson’s dick, maybe take a break and read this?

For a psychologist who doesn’t feed you with the baby spoon?


The Left are tolerant of Peterson, they’re shit scared of this guy getting popular.

one review writes

However, as far as specifics in the other review are concerned, I should like to point out that Thought Prison is neither a “rant” nor a “diatribe”; it’s pithy, yes, but there’s no tirade here. And as for the charge that the arguments within the book are “simplistic”, I have to disagree. The book may be fairly brief, but it is as thorough an analysis on the subject of political correctness as one could hope to read. How could it not be? Dr. Charlton is, after all, a very high-IQ chap, which means that he is able to think deeply in the abstract. As a result, there are many ideas and arguments in Thought Prison, so there’s a lot to take in, yet the author presents his thoughts in a succinct, punchy manner.

Charlton’s trajectory has been an interesting one, since he happens to be a man of science, a Christian, and a former secular leftist. The result of this shift in metaphysical outlook, which has taken him from the secular left to Christianity, means that he’s better placed than most to analyse PC, I believe.

May I suggest this relates to the Semantic Fog of mentacide?

What is mentacide?


In 1933 Meerloo began to study the methods by which systematic mental pressure brings people to abject submission, and by which totalitarians imprint their subjective “truth” on their victims’ minds. In “The Rape of the Mind” he goes far beyond the direct military implications of mental torture to describing how our own culture unobtrusively shows symptoms of pressurizing people’s minds. He presents a systematic analysis of the methods of brainwashing and mental torture and coercion, and shows how totalitarian strategy, with its use of mass psychology, leads to systematized “rape of the mind.” He describes the new age of cold war with its mental terror, verbocracy, and semantic fog, the use of fear as a tool of mass submission and the problem of treason and loyalty, so loaded with dangerous confusion. The “Rape of the Mind” is written for the interested layman, not only for experts and scientists.

based on



Whenever I hear that weasel word, I can’t help but think of this.

And surely, there is no such thing as a community, if we’re all One? Like the Borg.
Why does one group get to freely associate or not, freely express or not?

It’s an unusual usage, tensions. Tensions can only build, they never dissipate.

I find it odd they don’t choose a more typically PC word because conflict is shorter lived.

Tensions last centuries.

The interesting thing about IB, of all Tarantino’s films (yes, critic mode, sorry)

it goes to show that a manhunt is more psychological than physical, in both attack and defense.

Illuminating one question that preys on the mind.

Why does Diversity + Proximity = War?

If you left many types of bird in a large field, they’d slowly pick one another off. They’d steal food, cannibalize, wait until the longer sleepers were sleeping. They’d take advantage of psychological differences and temporary power, the upper hand. If they can predict you, you’re dead. Stereotypes can damage in the same way.

I was watching a show the other day, it covered Manchester Police. The man in charge was so proud of himself as he gave orders to round up a small protest like cattle, with the excuse of “it might provoke tensions”. Like saying to a rape victim, they were asking for it.

After a little feedback from the scene, he said “I don’t care how peaceful they are.”

And that’s that.

This was the show, I didn’t get the episode.

You can move as a group, like a flock of birds. However, humans are a little more complex. We move in ideological flocks, infinitely more precious than standing in a town centre for an hour and then going home, doing the exact same things – nothing – the rest of the month.

The mistake

Who’s to blame?

Inspired by

My money is on Queen Victoria.

Feel free to steal the photos by the way.

Multiculturalism has ‘utterly failed’ – Angela Merkel, 2010.

Update: I deliberated whether to include this but, you know there’s really no such thing as multiculturalism? It’s pure idea. It is referenced like a deity you must appease. Think about it. Multiculturalism forbids anyone their identity, since individual identities would congregate to a cultural standard en masse. We can’t have that. Diversity, on the other hand, is the complete opposite. It is forcing the foxes into the chicken coop. Everyone has their identity, it is stable and unchanging. There are many different ones. They conflict sometimes. All the evils of the world in one place, many peoples. Multiculturalism allows only one culture: materialist “addicted to distraction” pop culture. It blurs and prevents expression or personal liberty, authenticity. However, humans have a legal right to their identity (race, sex, cultural heritage) so multiculturalism is impossible. There is no way to make it practical. It isn’t even a theory because a theory needs consistency. Postmodernism has no concrete theories. This plus another thing is the best it can do, there is no foresight, hindsight or deeper agency or reasoning. There is certainly no critical thinking.

What multiculturalism? Where? All we see is compulsory diversity, totally different.

Suppressing the people’s identities for a Guardian reader’s vision of “polite society” is causing most of the social unrest. It makes them feelgood, cue another revolution…

The materialism mentioned can only be supported by wide debt enslavement. The good times are over, we’re running on the fumes of fumes. This is how Empires die. The socialism rewards those who socially conform (or people without jobs couldn’t afford the goodies and they’d riot out of envy). Equal in misery, equal in poverty.

The poverty of culture is the tragic loss. We had so much and let idiots throw it away.

The most rebellious thing you could do is express your heritage.

“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” Camus