A- the human desire/tendency to like protectionism from the political stump (especially in two party system where it is competing with go-it-alone-ism). (That was true even before female enfranchisement; now... forget it.)
Advanced techno society simply increases protectionism desire by keeping alive more NEW types; they desire and NEED protection(ism) (from the old / natural/ barbarian ways).
B- Only when the tribe is fighting other (or hunting) will better men be tolerated. Since conservatives can be seen as an echo of betters, they will always lose in time of peace and plenty due to man's _coup d eta INSTINCT._
1 people psychologically like protectionism
+2 people don't like top dogs
= Repubs always lose
That is multiplied by the fact that what we embrace as conservatism in the West is actually the backbone of liberalism:
Western "conservatism" both allows and _promotes as noble_ rebellion from underlings.
Western conservatism also is industrialism which inherently does NOT preserve the old ways. Rather it squashes them as its advertisement.
The "I create Industry" as top dog display ironically creates the plenty that allows people's inherent fear of top dogs to bubble to the surface.
And as said, industry is also breeding for new types that need new social customizations.
Then there is jebus cult which is thick with infantiles and retards-- ie underlings by nature. They really don't know what "the sides" are, being retarded. They would never tolerate a truly conservative world --which is most unjesus like-- being scared infantiles.
Western conservatism --capitalism and Christianity -- is at cross purposes with itself. This psychological knot developed over the long haul and is now a "non self aware" --ie not seen or grappled with-- expression.
Conservatives will always lose. So if one wants to stop feminism or race replacement (the only REAL/true issues of the day) new strategies and tactics need to be figured out. But since conservatives are locked in their non-self-aware knot of "useful idiocy" this won't happen. (Being useful idiots for the larger liberal zeitgeist--going on multiple centuries now-- seems to be the only thing conservatives want to conserve.)
Therefore the only thing left is to pull this whole breed down and let other try it all again.
=========
[Why isn't anything being said about soltuons? Why is just endless talk about how bad wimmins are?]
Well as I have said multiple times, the core goal of males is to keep other males from having power. And since civilization breeds for runt males, what is deemed power is any male with a backbone at all.
Now since it will take more than a little backbone to stop feminism... Once a man stands up with real solutions --and trust me: those solutions will wreak with backbone-- the other males will ignore or if necessary actively fight those solutions. We've seen this time and time again.
So what we get instead is a bunch of runts at sites whining but having no intention of allowing real solutions (tm) to germinate
_________________
==============
Eu and dys are relative.
Breeding always is happening; and... Once man is in charge of his own environment --his selection niche-- once he creates laws and the idea of crime and punishment etc-- he is a "genicist". It is just a question of what 'strain' he will breed for and whether or not he will be self aware of this while it happens. (And whether the end result will be called eu or dys when looked at by whatever prevailing rule set/ morality is in charge of the pen at the time.)
Eu- or dis- genics always happens one way or another.
Environmental syndromes (lead in water, mother/womb issues etc) just complexify all that and demand even more micro managing of the society than simple "Eugenics".
None of the above is debatable. It is not susceptible to your popular consent or understanding of it.
What the olde early feminists mean by eugenics and what I mean by it are two different things. (They conspire to hijack and redefine everything.)
Testing and sterilization based on childhood intellect and talent would solve most problems man now has. It is just a question of what tests are accurate in discerning what I want and how to get to place where all that is imposable.
If not eugenics, civil war will happen. That is a far less surgical cull and the results are not as predictable.
Again, it is not contingent on your popular consent or understanding of it.
===========================
RE: Voluntary euthanasia and especially abortion of the disabled.
Some agony aunt(dear abbey type) in Britain defending voluntary euthanasia said in response to an outrageous strawman about "killing disabled babies" that smothering a disabled baby would be the merciful and good thing to do.
I don't actually advocate the smothering part (or any post natal snuffing --even though the newborn doesn't know anything or sense much), because the symbol is too much for simple puritan mind. But the intent and point, is correct and good.
There is such a thing as life better off to have never formed.
And it helps "conservatives" to have small societies of healthy similar-typed people...
The more differences and dysfunctions(off the "norm") you keep alive, the more government that will form to provide for them and buy their votes, ultimately customizing culture to meet their needs --at the expense of customizations that comfort or placate 'you'.
This isn't that complicated. Ergo I conclude that you all can't put even a simple two domino long equation together:
More variants and dysfunctionals alive = more new social orders (potentially hostile to "yours") and protections (ie authorities /governments) to deal with that.
Duh.
Conservatives have no problem with putting people in jail. Ie inducing suffering. But a fetus? "We must keep it alive no matter what!" ...Even though the fetus doesn't know what is happening and doesn't contemplate suffering or any of that.
You are indoctrinated into a simple false dichotomy, where-in you can't process as said even two domino long equations.
=================
Am I correct in thinking you are saying that complaining about justice, consistency, and other such concepts, is a useless strategy for attaining power?
Well as propaganda for the dense, they are fine. But don't actually fall for your own Santa Claus trick.
Propaganda schpiel yes. But at the same time, the leaders of the coming storm need to demonstrate that they understand what happened to the anglo west. Ie how we did it to ourselves.
How did we do it?
With cult like need to believe in the impossible, shutting out nature facts, head under blanky. (Bred-for simpleton-ness helps in shutting out nature facts.) _And our ignorance of the snowball of coup d eta Man is on._ Feminism is a straw on a camel's back; it did not just materialize out of nowhere.
(...Alpha beta gamma snowball-- the way men compete in groups, always looking for strength in number support which usually comes from "below"; our ignorance of eg eugenics (eg it does NOT mean death camps); christian bred-for infantilism/fear (head under blanky stuff) and dunc-i-fication (anti science/nature politics); Not thinking the techno snowball's implications through. [Tech snowball is Man's way of competing over status --the "great leveler" ...for underlings to use.] Like deer have antlers, men have tools... snowballing along into a bonobo-like economy/food supply.)
[Note eu and dys are relative; by "Eu-" I mean intellect and some self sufficiency. That destroys cities though. And that won't just happen. So it is 'catch 22.']
In order to prevent feminism from happening again we definitely need to grapple with the real causes. Blaming 'feminism' is like blaming the water for a leaky roof. We --the anglo west --built a bad roof. My evidence?
Other cultures and periods in history have been able to avoid these problems even though rain (female yapping and game playing) has always been happening.
Only a wet fool reasons with the rain.
All of that will generate confidence in leaders' abilities and draw more support.
----
As for details...
Hmmm.
We need high tech military support. Not those meat head "boots on the ground" guys; rather satellite naval/ air. A sabotaging minority would do. Then revolution coup --ala Chez Gurrera[sp], Adolph Hitler-- with communications (TV radio etc) and some political venues as target.
If military sabotage is effective that buys time to re-indoctrinate the Pavlovian horde. (I believe the polite term is "the people" but that always make me wretch when I say it.)
If most military high tech is on board then Chez-like coup in streets would not be necessary obviously. But military types are notoriously thick headed Pavlovian dogs. Ie well indoctrinated conformists.
In order to get military support, communications power is needed first. ...So it is a catch 22.
So here we flounder.
=================
The "equalist" solutions... None of those solutions would work. Those types don't understand biology or reality accurately. Few do. Tis the Anglo/christian curse on man.
Ultimately the moderates have as much chance of getting into power as "extremists" (ie realists /the educated). Possibly less, since they don't inspire anyone into the civil war hopelessness necessary to get real regime change. Though _on the SURFACE_ moderates do appeal to more majority.
If the majorty is going to pick between apples and apples-lite they most often just pick apples (especially if apples-lite has been "exposed" by propaganda as a "history of oppression").
=================
Why we don't have leaders to stop oppression from and in civilization often.
"Expertise".
Born leaders often don't have that, since "expertize" means specialty and specialty is the focus of/trick of the runt male. Specialty is like when a 50 year old man buys a corvette: "he is compensating".
How is specialty like that? Well weak men compensate by hyper-focus in a category they think they can finally win in. `E voila: specialty. (Precociously self aware --eg jews-- or lucky men focus their compensation-for-weakness energies in "power node" specialties, such as law and media.)
Expertize. Men who have it, already made it through the selection pressures of civis' upwardly mobile caste structure pressures and are profiting. Ie no reason to oust the status quo anymore. A status quo that can really only be ousted by "Expertise"/hyper-focus. (Those profiting types need to be convinced that their short term victories are long term dead ends. But that entails those winners having more aptitude than your common specialist possesses.)
Specialty is what civilization breeds for. Civi is a bunch of runts from childhood in a coalition getting back at the males from childhood who are "normal".
Then caste structures naturally form even between that brotherhood of runts after they cull back the normal males.
What we are left with then is "feminism". Ie women; the creatures that poison their men, steal inheritances from their children, act as frustration inducing mindfucking sub-intellectual spiteful children, act as the catalysts for competition and those stresses and problems, the creature that is more desired than the reverse, decietful, secretive and often vicious (as compensation). But only now that creature isn't as balanced out by more robust men, since those robust men have been culled back by the coalition of runts that create and run civilization.
The motor of that runt ascension-dependent-on-culling-back-"normals" is the "alpha beta gamma dynamic". A runway train of underling coups.
(Civilization: a literate caste structure from the near east, diffusing out culturally then genetically, like ripple rings from a coin in fountain, with the central gravity itself moving north west. ...A female hive as an inevitable side effect of the universe and its multi cellular emergent properties itself.)
----
Also note why MRAs don't have leaders... the message board here has gone way down hill once the plug was pulled on the vibe that brought the competent sane men --leaders-- to the front. The men most other males are afraid of...
---
These are all testosterone issues. That and oxytosin/vasopresin. If Testo was at higher and more consistent levels in and between the male sprogs pooped out by the whore holes that make up civilization, we wouldn't have feminism anymore. Hell we wouldn't have civilization either. So there you go.
(Freewill isn't real; just determinism is -- bio/carbo-nitro or otherwise. You may now thumbs-down this post; that'll make you feel better.)
Don't get me wrong. I personally want more oxytosin and less "meanness" and competition in society and I understand and agree with the point about following a leader with competence. But facts is facts.
We need to solve the problem by understanding what the problem really is not what our delusions or hopes think it is. ...You can't build an aeroplane if you deny gravity is real. That plane won't fly, even if you denounce or ignore gravity as yucky.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.