Tag Archives: Culture Wars

How fear of being seen as racist stopped social workers saving up to 1,400 children from sexual exploitation at the hands of Asian men in just ONE TOWN

Cultural Marxism has created a world in which it is worse to be a racist than a serial rapist.

How fear of being seen as racist stopped social workers saving up to 1,400 children from sexual exploitation at the hands of Asian men in just ONE TOWN

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2734694/It-hard-appalling-nature-abuse-child-victims-suffered-1-400-children-sexually-exploited-just-one-town-16-year-period-report-reveals.html#ixzz3BYn6pWwV

On a friend’s post about the “Heart of Whiteness”

Reaction to a friend posting the Tobias Wolf Essay Heart of Whiteness:

ME: Ridiculous. Enough Cultural Marxism, please.

HIM: no idea, frankly, what cultural marxism is or is supposed to be, but since you’re asking so nicely and politely, i’m sure tobias wolff will heed your request for him to cease sharing his personal thoughts and feelings with you.

ME: Cultural Marxism is a secular religion in which straight white men have been assigned the role of satan. It aims to weaken the pillars of Western Civilization through obscurism, cultural reletivism, and pseudoscience.

Look, I’ve met Tobias Wolff several times while I was at Stanford and I like him. Maybe it’s hard to stay away from this ideology when your in academia. Universities are the new churches. Professors are the new priests. Heretics (like me) are denounced with the same fervor heretics have always garnered.

Wolff’s essay asks Europeans to feel guilty for impure thoughts at a time when targeted, deliberate physical violence toward whites is surging. Where are the racism police when there are “knock out games” or “polar bear hunting” or “get whitey night” or when Zimbabwe forbids sale of land to whites or when S. Africa’s President appears on television singing a song about killing white people?

I’m happy to respect anyone who respects me, but this is a big load of BS.

HIM: To put it very simply — he’s just telling you or anyone who would like to listen, as to the way he feels on a certain important issue. I’m not sure you or I or anyone who are not them are in any position to tell other people how they should feel. I don’t see him asking me to believe him or share his feelings. I, for one, don’t share his feelings. I wasn’t born and didn’t grow up in America. I just understand and appreciate people’s impulse to tell other people honestly what they think or how they feel. As for your definition of cultural Marxism — with all due respect, this, to me, is just a shallowly loud and largely meaningless, Rush Limbaughesque word combination. Religion? Whose religion? Where’s the church and who are the adepts? Who assigned white men the role of satan? Who’s aiming to weaken Western Civilization?.. Look, with all due respect, and I know you are a smart man, but — this is so imprecise and murky and label-bound and, in all, intellectually weak, I don’t quite know how to continue this conversation. All I can sense is that you feel put on and aggrieved, and that is your right, of course: to feel that way. Anything goes, so long as we don’t start telling people that the way they feel is dishonest or insincere or a product of some weird cultish brainwashing, etc. We — you, I — shouldn’t be telling other people to shut up about how they feel. They deserve the right to feel differently from us. To deprive them of their right to express their feelings on some certain salient issue would be totalitarian of nature. You don’t have to label anything with some meaningless booming catchphrase (cultural marxism, emotional fascism, psychological confucianism, sexual stalinism, culinary calvinism — come on; that’s a bit juvenile). You can’t argue with people’s honest feelings. All you can do is say — look, I don’t share your feelings, I don’t feel the same way — and then move on.

ME: :) You use a lot of words to calls me wrong and stupid. And to call him legitimate bc his are ‘honest feelings’ –as if mine aren’t.

At least I presented evidence of what I perceive as gross hypocrisy. You could have addressed it in between calling me wrong and stupid. :) I’m not offended btw. Honestly. Just amused, disappointed. This is how heretics are always treated by the priests.

If anyone wants further reading: www.amazon.com/Explaining-Postmodernism-Skepticism-Socialism-Rousseau/dp/0983258406

HIM: Roman. This is not the kind of talk I can engage in: heretics, priests… That’s on you. Let me be as succinct as I can: your feelings are just as honest and valid and legitimate as any other people’s — just so long as you don’t question the honesty and validity of other people’s feelings. Do you see the difference? Tobias Wolff was talking about his own feelings. Your feelings were about his feelings being dishonest. Ok, Roman, signing off on this conversation now.

ME: I question accuracy — whether this essay accurately represent the real world or not. :)

Your comments lead me to another point, however, one straight out of Stephen Hick’s book — does truth exist? Does language have meaning? Or has post-modernism finally achieved Focault’s vision that language is devoid of meaning and merely a struggle for power.

I would think and hope that writers would be offended by Focault’s idea, but judging from how you seem to prefer feelings over truths, accusations (Rush Limbaughesque – ha! good one!) over evidence, from how you denounce heretics without addressing their concerns, I fear the worst.

STEM disciplines aside, academia has abolished truth. There is only a power, and whatever bullshit anyone wants to spout in its pursuit.

White People Create App To Avoid, Um, ‘Sketchy’ Areas

“Shame on you for not wanting to get mugged, car-jacked, or assaulted. Bad whitey, bad! If those things tend, on average, to happen in “diverse” areas, well then you’re just required to accept that risk to demonstrate your commitment to “diversity.” What are you, some kind of bigot?”

www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/08/sketchfactor-app-white-creators_n_5660205.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

The Spread of the Caliphate

1. The Enlightenment’s great error was the assumption of universalism. We still suffer from it. Profoundly.

2. The ISIS situation is exacerbated by the brain drain of Arab professionals into the western world. They left behind a critical mass of mouth-breathing knuckle draggers. If you want to spread western values, do it by example, not by opening the borders.

3. Jews have and continue to aggressively advocate open European borders, plus cultural relativism because they themselves have needed to infiltrate European cultures. They’ve gone too far in lowering the ramparts and upending the culture of their warriors with post-modernism. If Europe is colonized and its culture diluted beyond recognition, they will all be killed, and their killers won’t feel bad about it either. They won’t build monuments and museums as Europeans do.

***

What do I mean by universalism?

Much of the world neither wants nor is capable of individualism, logic, reason, I would also add “high trust” which is a European phenomenon though probably not an Enlightenment discovery.

The west, both in Britain’s colonialism and today in its open-border policy, continues to act as if everybody is a member of the family (high trust society), continues to act as if peoples living mysticism and superstition can be governed by our greater reliance on logic and reason.

This is a mistake. Many (most) people want collectivism, mysticism, superstition. The Enlightenment will reassert itself by nationalizing it’s values. A fence will be put around it. I hope this happens before a bloody clash of civilizations, and not after, thought it may already be too late.

Much of the rest of the world has been unwillingly and ungratefully dragged out of ignorance poverty and disease by the fruits of the Enlightenment. Their best chance at continuing civilizational progress would be if their intellectuals remained there, instead of joining the western civilization, and voluntarily became a sort of aristocracy.

***

Trusting outsiders and using ethical code with them. Expecting them to do the same. Only Northern Europeans do so.

^^ as exemplified by the idiotic statement of some Swedish politicians “we have to be nice to the Muslims now so that they’ll be nice to us when we are the minority.”
(www.lostrepublic.com/archives/14590)

***

Am I anti-semitic?

WTF!

First of all, let’s discuss whether something is TRUE. Not if it’s racist or anti-semitic, or mysoginist. Truth has been lost in the era of post-modernism. It’s Foucault’s vision — language is devoid of meaning, it’s just a struggle for power. As a writer, you should not accept this.

Secondly, the first paragraph above described an error of Christians, the second an error of Muslims and the third an error of Jews.

No more empty accusations, please.

Cultures vary and I won’t be intimidated into silence.

Here’s the scholarly work from UC Long Beach professor Kevin MacDonald: www.amazon.com/The-Culture-Critique…/dp/0759672229

***

Let me restate this because I have a bad feeling that I offended my friends xxx and xxx.

I’m hypothesizing about the cultural degradation which lead to little girls being beheaded . . . in 2014!!!!! Want to see pictures? www.catholic.org/news/international/middle_east/story.php?id=56339

Here is my hypothesis:

1) Christian Europe universalized familial trust — especially protestant Europe, less so Catholic Europe, and I’m not sure but I think Orthodox Europe (my ancestors) are just a border-land civilization. Especially in protestant Europe, every person was considered a relative. This is the high trust society. It’s the only part of the world in which tribalism was defeated. This became the foundation for modern civilization.

But Christian Europe also has a psychopathic altruism which led them to incorrectly attempt to universalize its norms.

They opening Europe’s borders to millions of tribal people and expecting them to reciprocate European universalism. Expecting them to contribute the commons (social norms) by forgoing the opportunity cost of good behavior.

They expecting universalism to spread, along with the Enlightenment triumphs of logic and reason over mysticism, pseudo-science. They take truth for granted. They didn’t guard truth as it needs to be guarded.

They’re making a mistake. Western values will neither be adopted or preserved under these assumptions.

2) Arab Muslims, like everybody else in the world, wanted to live among the riches of modern civilization, under rule of law and private property rights. There has been an enormous brain drain from the Muslim world into Europe. The very people who were most likely to champion logic, reason, universalism, exactly what the hugely tribal, superstitious Muslim world needs, have abandoned their civilization. You’re left with people finding virtue in the beheading of small children, in the destruction of millenia-old monuments, in the genocide of Christians, Yazidis.

The aristocracy of the Muslim world who has fled to Europe is making a mistake, assuming its goal is to improve the prosperity of their own civilization. If their goal is abandoment of their civilization, or worse, destruction of the European civilization, then they’re probably proceeding correctly.

3) For millenia, Jews have been out numbered and far from home, relying on their intelligence for survival. To maintain their place among the warrior cultures of Europe, they’ve promoted, especially in the past 150 years, open borders and cultural relativism (we all bleed red, what’s the difference who your neighbors are?). Because they’re the smartest people in the world, they’ve been very successful. But the Frankfurt School ideas of multiculturalism, relativism have taken on the fervor of a secular religion. Heretics (like me) are mercilessly denounced.

They are also making a mistake. This strategy has not and will not keep them safe. The more they tear down the gates and the social norms of Western civilization, the less safe they will be.

That’s my hypothesis. The obvious omission is the political turmoil the west and Israel has created in the Muslim world which has created a vacuum being filled by ISIS.

***

Orthodox Christianity — I don’t know. They haven’t really exported any cultural norms as Protestant Europe has. They’ve sort of learned some rationalism from the Enlightenment, but are still very superstitious. I see them as middle shade in the cultural gradient. What are their defining characteristics?

1. Keeping the Mongols / Ottomans away?
2. Being a cultural buffer?

***

Incidentally, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the enormous contributions of Jewish thinkers all came from individuals at least two generations out of the insular ghettos and into the Western, Aristotelian paradigm.

***

We should all concern ourselves with how to spread good ideas. I think you’ve answered it with “giving people responsibility before they prove capability is asking for trouble.”

I think Europeans fail to recognize the fragility of their civilization. They assume that everybody universalizes trust. They don’t regard this as a norm that needs to be defended with violence. Enforced.

This is the “European miracle” that dragged the whole rest of the world out of poverty, ignorance and disease. It’s an anomaly. It didn’t happen anywhere else in the world.

Hell, it’s not even a European norm, but a Northern/Western European norm.

Only the nuclear family cultures achieved this. The extended family cultures of southern and eastern Europe remained more tribal. They have a dual loyalty — one to your kin and one to society. It’s no coincidence that the extended family cultures of southern and eastern Europe are much more corrupt than the nuclear family cultures of northern and western Europe.

Southern and Eastern Europe just had an excellent, nearby example to follow.

I’m rambling. The point is:

1. Recognize norms as something special and defend them — with violence.
2. Doing so — protecting your culture — will serve as an example for surrounding culture.

The State of Marriage in the US

“The problem? This new phenomenon has changed the dance between men and women,” Venker wrote. With feminism pushing them out of their traditional role of breadwinner, protector and provider – and divorce laws increasingly creating a dangerously precarious financial prospect for the men cut loose from marriage – men are simply no longer finding any benefit in it.

As a writer and researcher into the trends of marriage and relationships, Venker said, she has “accidentally stumbled upon a subculture” of men who say “in no uncertain terms, that they’re never getting married.”

“When I ask them why, the answer is always the same: women aren’t women anymore.” Feminism, which teaches women to think of men as the enemy, has made women “angry” and “defensive, though often unknowingly.”

“Now the men have nowhere to go. It is precisely this dynamic – women good/men bad – that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry.”

“Men are tired,” Venker wrote. “Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. Tired of being told that if women aren’t happy, it’s men’s fault.”

www.lifesitenews.com/news/young-men-giving-up-on-marriage-women-arent-women-anymore

Inglehart Welzel Culture Map

www.businessinsider.com/inglehart-welzel-culture-map-2014-7

On the y-axis, traditional values emphasize the importance of religion, parent-child relationships, and authority, according to WVS. People who embrace these tend to reject divorce, abortion, euthanasia, and suicide. These societies usually exhibit high levels of nationalism and national pride, too. In the U.S., these values would likely align more with conservative ideologies. Oppositely, secular-rational values represent the other extreme and tend to relate to liberal ways of thinking.

On the x-axis, survival values revere economic and physical security and safety and are linked to low levels of trust and tolerance. On the other side, self-expression values give high priority to protecting the environment, promoting gender equality, and tolerating foreigners and gays and lesbians.