The Serious Problems of the Alt-Right (and SJWs)

The Alt-Right is not a serious threat to anyone in America.  It is growing, and if Progressives continue their ceaseless identity politics and race-baiting then perhaps decades down the line the Alt-Right will be a real force in American politics.  But for now it is a tiny movement of people who are in essence SJWs who put straight white males on a pedestal for being the best, rather than decrying them as the most oppressive force in human history – which is of course the “normal” SJW view.  Both suppositions are patently ridiculous not the least because ‘white’ is in and of itself a useless label.  But more on that later.  Because the truth is the Alt-Right has a serious problem, well many problems but I want to focus on one in particular, they seem to have failed school.

Having recently listened to several major debates involving major Alt-Right thinkers and figures I can safely say that most of them are retarded.  Not literally retarded mind you but they are at least as stupid as Progressive SJWs as they demonstrate a serious lack of command of the facts and issues.  Seriously the only Alt-Right figure of note I’ve been impressed by is Jared Taylor who, from what little I’ve seen of him, appears far less extreme and authoritarian than most Alt-Right figures.

It’s hard to know where to really begin because their seems to be such a dearth of knowledge and intellect in most Alt-Right figures but if I had to start somewhere I choose you – English.  These guys don’t seem to understand what words and phrases mean.  In his 4hr+ video on Andy Warski’s channel Richard Spencer describes the US as a corporation which it is not.  This is mostly relevant because the moderator turned debater JF cites corporations as examples of individuals being able to work with “collectives” (which I’m putting in quotes because they misuse that word a lot) without the “collective” oppressing the individual.  And Spencer claims that collectivism always wins out over individualism and cites how the governments of nation-state force you to abide by their rules even though you didn’t enter willingly into this agreement.

If that sounds autistic to you I’ll try to unpack all the issues with this logic.  At the most basic level Spencer is classifying all groups as collectives – and these two things are not the same.  For example the citizens of Syria are a group but that group has severe fractures over ethnic and religious differences and can’t be considered a collective at all.  In a collective all the people in the collective work for the collective’s goals, in Syria different subgroups of citizens are fighting for different goals.  The same can be said of any Western democracy, the citizens of the country constitute a group but they aren’t collectives because if they were none of them would have more than one political party, the point having multiple parties is to allow subsets of the group to form their own groups and argue for different agendas.  In the same sense Spencer associates individualists with individuals, and sure individuals can be individualists but that doesn’t mean individualists can’t form a group to advocate for individualism.  He also either ignores or doesn’t understand the benefits a nation-state’s citizens enjoy by virtue of being citizens (he just criticizes their obligations like following laws and paying taxes) and how citizenship is not a contractual agreement like you would make with a corporation.  How anyone can actually fail to understand any of these basic ideas while claiming to represent a political movement is beyond me.

In another debate Greg Johnson almost says freedom is slavery by arguing that if other people know what’s better for you than you do then those people dictating how you should behave, with the backing of force if necessary, is actually more liberating than having the freedom to try something which might be a bad idea and failing.  It should go without saying that freedom includes the freedom to fail.  In fact I recall an economic paper or book excerpt arguing that the strength of America’s economic system was that it allowed people to fail and try again, and that this process ultimately worked out as a net good for the market even if individuals suffered for their failures.  The idea that Greg thinks other people telling him what do to is somehow liberating is downright baffling.  First of all how do these other people know what’s best for me?  And  even if by some miracle they knew for sure what I was thinking and what would indeed be best for me, if I lived my life by their dictates how am I free?  Freedom from failure, which can’t naturally be achieved anyway but since that seems to be the argument I’ll go with that, is not freedom.  This is a common problem with Progressives too.  They use freedom in the sense of freedom from X rather than freedom to X.

For example a Progressive might argue they should be free from discomfort, in the same way Greg is arguing that he should be free from bad decisions.  But these “freedoms” are not only impossible to achieve but put extreme limits on individuals.  In the SJW case I would not be able to discuss an idea which made this person uncomfortable if their “freedom” was attained.  And in Greg’s case I wouldn’t be able to drive after one beer even though I wouldn’t even fail a CA breathalyzer test after 1 beer because technically even 1 beer would improve the chances of bad things happening when I was driving.  Now in Greg’s case I sure he would argue that the limits placed on people would not be so extreme, I mean he can’t know that unless he was the one setting the limits but ok let’s assume he’s right – why can’t we just have a law in a liberal system, like you can’t have Y% blood alcohol and legally drive, just do the job for us?  Will some people ignore the law and end up in accidents – yes – but will they be forced not to drink and drive at gunpoint (although again, it would impossible to enforce 100% of the time) – no.

Another serious issue with the Alt-Right and the SJWs is a complete lack of understanding of history.  The SJWs still want to build a Marxist utopia even that’s been tried many times in many places and it invariably leads to famines, huge increases in poverty, demonstrable reductions in personal freedom and a marked increase in state violence.  The Alt-Right are no better though.  Richard Spencer for instance argued that we should institute a hereditary aristocracy in his white ethno-state with his justification being that there will always be aristocrats.  When challenged on this he claimed that the aristocrats of history didn’t have any legal advantages over the common folk.  This is flat out wrong and I can’t believe he said it with a straight face.  As someone who studied history I can tell you that both in Europe and in Japan (which I’m including to prove that ideas are not bound to a race) there were laws in place which restricted how people could dress so that wealthy merchants were not mistaken for nobles.  That sounds petty but think for a second if the US government turned around tomorrow and said anyone who isn’t a billionaire can’t wear Ray-Bans or something – then you realize how remarkably controlling such a law is.  Aristocrats in the past would forbid you from wearing whatever clothes you wanted and their influence and prestige would get laws made to enforce their desires.

Another problem with Spencer’s claim here is that he’s equating the aristocrats of today, like the Bushes, Clintons or Kennedys with the aristocrats of history.  And sure he is right that there will always be rich families who have lots of political influence, but the comparison overall is still wrong.  A Bush has no more rights than an average Joe, he just has more money and connections, and while said money and connections means he can do a hell of a lot more than an average Joe, the Bush is not born with more rights just because he’s a Bush.  In the past it didn’t matter if you were a brilliant leader or a madman with a title, so long as you were a noble you had legal rights and privileges that the peasantry didn’t. To claim otherwise is to be woefully and/or willfully ignorant of history or to just be a liar to push your agenda.  And considering that Spencer literally said some men are born to be kings I think I’ll go with him being a moron.

There are still a multitude of problems common to both the Alt-Right and the SJWs but I will stop here for now.  Their consistent ignorance of the facts, characterizations of history and inability to use common English words without changing the definitions of the words to suit their purposes, is about all I can attribute to poor academic performance.  And despite my joke about how they all failed school it’s not that these people are all actually uneducated, they’re just really stupid because they’ve chained their world view to an ideology and can’t see beyond it.  That’s why they can say stupid shit like, a white minority in the US means the white race is dying – despite the fact there are more white people alive today than ever before, or that America is a white supremacist patriarchy despite the fact our previous president was black.  Facts don’t seem to mean anything to these people and they can’t face challenges head-on, they have to evade, mischaracterize what was said, change the definition of words to suit their meaning or just attack the person challenging them because their ideas don’t hold water.



Regarding Religion

I am an atheist and I have been since about 8th grade or so (I’m now in my twenties).  Like many Americans I was raised as a Protestant Christian, specifically a Presbyterian though our local church was always fairly non-denominational in spirit and it later became a non-denomination church.  I did not stop being religious because I dislike Christianity, on the contrary of all the major religions I think Christianity is objectively the best religion and the only real competition is from Buddhism.  Two things drove me from faith, a dry spell where I watched way too much Stargate which basically ascribed all gods to alien lifeforms, and one particular Sunday School lesson where the youth minister laid out the following hypothetical: You can be a good Christian your whole life and if you believe Jesus is the savior then you will go to Heaven, someone else can spend their whole life ignoring Christian values (I’m paraphrasing what was actually said) and so long as they believe Jesus is the savior they too will get into Heaven.  This really rubbed me the wrong way because, me being a tween, I thought it was unfair.  In retrospect though the reason I became an atheist after hearing that lesson is because I thought it taught the wrong message.

Christian values, like charity, are good values and Christian morals are good morals.  I still believe that and do my best to keep those values in my life.  But that Sunday school lesson seemed to teach what I consider to be the worst lesson a Christian can teach – that it’s ok to ignore the values and morals of Christianity so long as you ascribe to the purely esoteric rules of faith, i.e. the rules which have no impact on your daily life.  I still find it baffling that our youth minister gave that lesson because it is so counter-productive to me.  We should be teaching people Christian values.

I remember once seeing a stupid anti-religious meme on the internet about the difference in how people are described by Christianity and science.  The meme ascribed words like flawed, broken, sinful and so on to Christianity and words like limitless potential to science.  It was stupid and silly and it bothers me.  It bothers me because the reason Christianity describes humans the way it does is not to put them down as the meme implied to but to teach humility, another important value.  At it’s core, with regards to daily life, Christianity is all about self improvement, the rules and morals ascribed in Christian works are a guideline to being a better person, at least according to Judeo-Christian ideas of what a good person is, and being mindful of our flaws aka humility is central to this process.  And the idiot atheists who made that meme missed the fucking point.  That may not be their fault, they might not have ever been exposed to Christian teachings.  But I find far too many atheists are adversarial against faith, most notably Christianity as I will explain later, while in fact participating in a faith of their own – they just replace God with science and believe science will someday reach a point when we can explain everything.

I don’t share that sentiment.  I may not believe in God but I do firmly believe that there will always be mysteries beyond our reach.  Because I don’t really care about the esoteric stuff, I care about the way I live my life, and whatever my failings, I want to improve and to continue to be a good person to the best of my ability.  Because that what I think the greatest value of faith is, a guideline to being a better person.  With that in mind I want to explain why Christianity is good and why Islam is a terrible religion.  TRIGGER WARNING: Islamophobia incoming.

Getting back to the end of the paragraph before last, I said Christianity is bashed by atheists far more than any other religion.  I said that because A – atheists are most numerous in Western countries and they have less knowledge about non-Christian religions and B – due to their location many atheists are progressive types and progressives can’t attack Islam.  This of course is the most retarded thing about progressives and atheists alike, they will slam Christians and Christianity for things like not approving of gay marriage but won’t attack Islam even after an Islamic regime puts a bunch of gays in an internment camp.  Why?  The full answer includes a lot of insane logical gymnastics but the basics are that Christianity is the dominant religion where these people live and it’s seen as safe to attack because it’s associated with the white supremacist patriarchy that apparently runs our western democratic republic that had a black president in office this time last year (Oct 2016).  Also these people are morons who seem to think gay marriage and abortion rights are more important than things like the freedom to be gay without being killed.  I swear to the God I don’t believe in that these are the dumbest people alive.

This brings me to Islam, the worst religion of the modern day.  This is actually another problem, a lot of anti-Christians will try and paint Christianity as evil for because of things Christians did in the past or using Bible passages which mention slaves or other outdated ideas which in no way reflect Christianity as it is practiced today.  To which I say who gives a fuck, Christianity had it’s Reformation half a millennia ago, why are you attacking it on grounds which are no longer relevant?  And even if you did somehow justify this approach of judging religions on their past forms and actions Islam is still worse.  The Crusades, those lasted a few centuries.  Islamic empires were aggressively expansionist centuries before the Crusades and remained that way after the Crusades were over.  Islamic armies killed and enslaved far more than their wicked Christian counterparts did in the past.

What really matters though is the present condition of both religions.  Christianity is a largely tolerant religion and even in cases where it isn’t, like gay marriage, it has no power over the state.  About the worst thing you can accurately ascribe to Christian thought is that they might declare LGBTQ+ people as unnatural or sick.  Islam is a totally different story.  Islam is a supremacist religion which promotes sharia law, jihad, raping non-Muslim women and forming child grooming gangs, child brides, honor killings (where Muslim families kill their own daughters for not being suitably submissive or faithful to Islam), female genital mutilation, polygamy, real patriarchy (not the kind ascribed to Western nations which only have established gender roles – which are changing as I type this), the killing of gays and adulterers, preventing women from leaving the house unaccompanied by a male guardian, preventing women from driving, preventing Islamic women from marrying non-Islamic men and the killing of Muslim apostates.  Now some of these things vary by region, for example Saudia Arabia now lets women drive and Tunisia, a moderate Islamic nation, just let Islamic women marry non-Muslims.  Also I don’t want to imply that the majority of Muslims necessarily do all or any of these things, a sizable minority do but “not all Muslims.”

However what’s really scary is how permissive of these things everyday Muslims are.  In Egypt for example upwards of 80% of the population supports killing gays.  That doesn’t mean 80% of people do the killing but the vast majority of the populace approves when the killing happens.  Many Muslim countries have between 60% and 70% of the population supporting the worst practices of Islam.  Even in Western countries it’s not unheard of for 40% of Muslims to approve of some of Islam’s most backward practices and ideas.  Then we get to terrorism.  Name a Christian terror group.  Odds are you can’t, the only one I know of is in Africa and I’m blanking on the name.  By comparison Islam has Al-Nusra, ISIS, Al Quaida, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, the Taliban and the Tamil Tigers, which cover all of the Middle East, parts of Indonesia and Western Africa.  And those are just the ones I know off the top of my head, I know for a fact the list would be longer if I bothered to look, because I have before.

What I’m trying to say is that when you look at the data, the facts, and compare the results of Islam and the results of Christianity it’s not even remotely a contest.  Islam and the nations where it is the majority religion are both riddled with problems,most notably violence.  The most common complaint against Christianity on the other hand is that it’s not accepting enough of gay people.  I don’t think Christianity is perfect, I think in some cases Christian ideas have led to problems like how woefully inadequate American sex education is, and I’m talking about fucking not genders (there are only two it’s science and the few exceptions are vanishingly rare like when you end up with XXY chromosomes).  That being said Christianity has valuable lessons for anyone willing to listen and it can hardly be called a violent or oppressive force in the world.

Death to Islam! Why Islam needs a Reformation

Fuck Islam.  Islam is the worst religion on planet Earth no matter how many liberal apologists claim it’s a religion of peace or how Mohammad was the first feminist or environmental activist.  They are full of shit because Islam is, to a far greater degree than any other religion in the modern world, a religion of violence.

This goes beyond terrorism which admittedly is carried out by a small percentage of Muslims.  This is about cultural and religious attitudes that allow many Muslims to think it’s ok to behave like absolute monsters to non-Muslims, hell even to other Muslims that they disagree with.  Unlike Christianity, or Buddhism or Hinduism, Islam is a supremacist religion.  Many Muslims believe that because they are Muslims they are better than non-Muslims and that means it’s ok to be demonstrably evil and bestial when dealing with non-Muslims – though again the same kind of behavior is often applied to Muslims of other sects because Islam is a religion of conflict like no other.

Seriously can you think of a religion with as long and storied a history of violence as Islam?  Because I can’t.  What about the Crusades you say?  Yeah that was a series of wars covering a couple centuries, Muslims were constantly conquering peoples in North Africa, the Middle East, India, and multiple areas in Europe (Balkans and Spain) for roughly 1000 straight years.  Muslim expansion only stopped because the Turks, who were the last great standard bearer of Muslim expansion finally slowed down and weakened while Europe industrialized and started throwing it’s weight around.  And thank God they did because they went on to spread industrialization and Christian values around the globe and Christianity is an objectively better religion than Islam.

I say this as an atheist by the way, I’m not a fervent believer in Christ.  I do however have a deep appreciation for the moral values which Christianity teaches because they are good values and they don’t produce widespread violence, terrorism or persecution of the non-believer.  Islam does all these things.  In fact Christians often persevere in spreading their religion and values, in the non-Western world, in the face of those things.  And my heart goes out to them, they are doing good work because Christian values are good values.  The last time Christians fought each other over religion was 1600 and 1700’s, religious persecution is a thing of the past.  By comparison Islamic religious persecution, of both non-Muslims and Muslims of different sects, continues with alarming regularity.

Think for a minute about Muslim terrorism.  About how many terrorist groups are there and how widespread they are.  In Syria and Iraq we have ISIS, in Palestine we have Hezbollah, in Afghanistan we have the Taliban, elsewhere in the Middle East we have Al-Nusra and Al-Quaida, in Indonesia we have the Tamil Tigers, in West Africa there’s Boko Haram.  Those are all the ones I can remember OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD – imagine how many more there actually are.  By comparison I knew of no active Christian terrorist groups until someone pointed me towards the Lord’s Resistance Army in Africa – which is a continent so rife with violence that I suspect the LRA is born more of the nature of its surroundings than religious extremism.  So far that’s a 7 to 1 difference between Islam and Christianity with regards to terror groups – and if gave the Islam the same treatment and actually looked up terror groups I’ve no doubt that difference would widen considerably.

But like I said above this isn’t just about terrorism though.  This is about grooming gangs, gang rapes, the mass sexual assault in Cologne, the skyrocketing rate of sex crimes in Europe coming disproportionately from Muslim immigrants and migrants, the disproportionate amount of crime in general coming from Muslims in Europe, Middle Eastern tribal courts which often ascribe revenge rape on a women as a punishment for their husband’s or borthers’ crimes, honor killings (where Muslim families can and do kill their OWN CHILDREN for not being good enough Muslims), the execution of gays, the stoning of adulterers, the serious oppression of Muslim women, the persecution of non-Muslims including local ethnic groups like the Kurds, the deeply ingrained anti-Semitic and anti-Hindu attitudes of Islam and the violence that results because of it – the list of problems with Islam goes on and on and on and on.

If there was ever a case to be made that we should suppress or ban a religion then Islam is the prime example.  It is the worst religion known to man.  But it doesn’t have to be.  Islam is not all violence and evil it has plenty of good message mixed in the bad.  What Islam needs is its own Reformation, it needs to adapt to the modern world and do away with all notions of Islamic supremacy.  What moderate, modern Muslims need – and to an extent what the world needs as the world would benefit from it – is to reform Islam.  It needs to brought out of the Dark Ages when it was formed and be reforged for the modern era.  It needs to – to the best of it’s ability anyway – actually become the religion of peace so many apologists claim it is.  This will not end Islamic violence, certainly not in the short term and maybe never given how awful some strands of Islam are.  But it would be a step in the right direction and it might give young Muslims who are unsure of their faith and what to do somewhere less violent to turn to, and in the long term a Reformation would bring about a serious reduction in Muslim violence.

Imagine if instead of banding together to defend Islam whenever a Muslim is caught being a monster, the wider Muslim community openly reviled the bastard and called for him (because let’s face it Islamic men are the main problem) to face justice instead of apologizing for Islam and crying Islamophobia.  Imagine if cops could do their jobs properly and crack down on criminal Muslims without the fear of being labeled racists by lots of people.  That would be a better world and it’s one everyone – besides the piece of shit Muslims who are the problem I’ve been discussing this entire time – would benefit from.  Fuck Islam as it currently exists – the world needs an updated version and Muslims have to bring about this change.  In the mean time I say it’s time we stop worrying about being called racists and Islamophobes  and come down on criminal Muslims like a ton of bricks because who the fuck cares what Progressives call you – they toss out terrible insults like it’s cheap coin and as result these insults mean nothing.  Hell these days the people being called Nazis are often BETTER AND MORE INTERESTING PEOPLE than the ones calling them Nazis.  What a world we live in right?

CNN Must Pay for It’s Crimes

Well done guys, I salute you for revealing your true colors.  I am still barely able to believe this is real.  10 years ago if you’d told me this would happen I would’ve filed you under the category of lizard-people conspiracy theorists.  I’ve not had much faith in the media for the last 10 years but I didn’t think they’d ever stoop this fucking low.

In case you aren’t aware CNN found the Redditer who created the GIF of Trump beating a guy with a CNN logo on his head into submission which apparently someone else added sound to – and more importantly which Trump tweeted.  When CNN threw a little hissy-fit about being attacked by The Donald I shrugged and thought “you pathetic pieces of shit.”  You attack the man for over a year straight and he tweets out a meme – a fucking 30 second meme, the most insignificant thing in the entire fucking world by any reasonable standard – and you feel attacked.  Let me let you in on a secret CNN: Even as someone who distrusts and in many cases hates the media that meme didn’t make me want to attack you… it made me chuckle for a few seconds before I got back to work.  But I thought the story would end there.  CNN gets butthurt about a meme despite slandering the President endlessly like the weak-ass hypocrites they are and that’s that.  But no – CNN wasn’t about to let this meme go.  On the 4th of July, our Independence day celebration, CNN tracked down the Redditer who made the GIF and threatened to doxx him – outing his information to the public and more importantly to the crazy Far Left loons who would totally attack this person.

At the time of this writing the Redditer’s information has not been released but CNN “reserves the right” to release his information if he posts anything offensive again -which is by any definition FUCKING BLACKMAIL!!!  This after they already extorted an apology from this poor guy.  As a side note there are conflict reports as to the age of the Redditer but the most credible reported age is  around 40.  Let that sink in for a minute.  One of the biggest new networks in America just blackmailed a man, who probably has a fucking FAMILY, over a goddamn meme.  This from a network which thinks memes are hurtful – these same pathetic assholes think it’s ok to blackmail a kid making a fucking joke.  This is unacceptable and CNN should be held to account for this crime – not to mention the violation of the principles this nation holds dear.

As you might imagine the internet did not take this lying down.  The Redditer may have been forced to apologize but CNN action’s has seen the internet explode with anti-CNN memes and GIFs – this is called the Streisand effect, any attempt to silence criticism will only amplify it.  Twitter has hours worth of posts condemning CNN and it’s still going as I type this.  CNN of course denies the allegations of blackmail saying the “right to release” line was included for transparency’s sake – an effort to show CNN didn’t make any deals with the Redditer and didn’t force an apology out of him.  Given that the Redditer apologized and deleted his account I doubt CNN is telling the truth – and given that’s CN-fucking-N which was going on about a fake Russian conspiracy farce for months I believe wholeheartedly that CNN is lying through their teeth.   Even in the off chance – i.e. the almost non-existent chance CNN is telling the truth (lol) – it’s still a bad look and has earned the network the ire of all kinds of Americans from anti-Trump liberals to the founder of fucking Wikileaks.

Moreover there are archived screenshots of CNN personnel asking if they should doxx the Redditer because he had a lot of “offensive” posts on his profile.   And again the way the CNN is phrased the whole affair is that they found a lot of offensive shit, the Redditer apologized but CNN has the right to reveal his information if he misbehaves again… In the wake of all of this, when major new networks are seriously blackmailing citizens –  minor or not – over a meme, A FUCKING MEME, it’s time for the Left to ask itself some hard questions.  And there’s no doubt the Left has to ask the questions because the media is overwhelmingly Left and of course plenty of Leftists are defending CNN because… why?  This is not a partisan issue.  This is a major news network threatening a citizen over a meme – if anything should unite the people of America it should be this, a giant corporation attacking a random dude over a joke.

But nope, not in America 2017 –  here everything is partisan.  Fuck off, there should be principles that all Americans can agree on – like don’t threaten to doxx people over memes.  CNN’s behavior is unacceptable I sincerely hope it takes yet another hit – after firing the three Russia conspiracy hacks – and maybe, just maybe sits down and does some self-reflection.  The Left has done nothing but insult or block out all of it’s critics for a year and a half  at minimum but suddenly thinks it’s ok to blackmail people who insult it.  And to be honest CNN it wasn’t even much of an insult – it was an apt metaphor for what happened after the Russia conspiracy fallout.  I’m guessing that stung – it struck a nerve – and you felt compelled to shoot back.  I understand the feeling, but you don’t get to blackmail people over memes.  Frankly you don’t get to blackmail anyone over anything.  But going back to the double standard laid out above – this can’t continue Left America.  You can’t throw endless insults and not be able to take a few in return – let alone respond with criminal or borderline criminal behavior.

And it’s catching up to you.  Whether it’s violent Antifa fucks now being met violence and getting fucking pwned in the Battle of Berkeley or CNN getting trashed with the #1 trending hashtag on Twitter being #CNNBlackmail for 12 straight hours and multiple people threatening to doxx CNN staff in retaliation – the rest of us, be we Right wing or more moderate, sensible liberals are tired of trying to be reasonable in the face of your insanity and blatant double standards.  You wanted to start a culture war and you like to say you’ve already won it – but you seem to be continuing the war anyway and you will be destroyed just like CNN will pay for what they did on the 4th.  Fuck CNN it needs to die in a fire and be replaced with real journalism.  It’s time to grow up, learn to take a joke, and think – seriously think – about the consequences of your actions.  You might think it’s bad now but keep it up and I guarantee that the kid gloves most of us are wearing will come off.

The Dangers of Narratives

I love stories.  I love fantasy.  I love fiction.  I spend a a lot of time consuming, analyzing and even writing my own narratives.  Narratives are important to me, and given their prevalence in cultures across the globe, to humanity as well.  We love our stories.  But narratives are just what I described, they are fantasy and fiction.  It’s not uncommon for a narrative to be created out of real events or out of a real person’s life and deeds, but there is no story guiding those events or people.  These narrative subjects are the result of human agency and natural phenomena.  This is to say that narratives do not exist in reality, certainly not as concrete entities, and therefore trying to use a narrative to justify your ideology and behavior, particularly reprehensible behavior, is nothing short of lunacy.

This is of course one my main problem with Progressives.  They have a narrative backing to their ideology and by God do they stick to it.  The Progressive Narrative however doesn’t actually exist and it’s a problem because it colors the way these people see the world, and by extension how they interact with the world.  For example, blaming everything on white men.  There are so many problems with this assertion, one which is central to the Progressive Narrative and something they repeat with the mindless dogmatic fanaticism that ought to be reserved for fictional characters trying to play a trope, that I hardly know where to begin.  But if I had to start somewhere it’s that there is no such thing as “the white man.”  Yes there are men who have white skin and there is a “white” Caucasian skull type, one of four major skull types discussed in forensics.  But it doesn’t matter because as soon as you make a claim about white men I can and will point to numerous exceptions to the rule you’ve proposed.

For example, “white men are awful because the Transatlantic slave trade.”  Sure there were some awful white men involved in that.  But what about the Balkan Slavs?  Do they count?  Because they didn’t have great imperialist empires or much, if any, stake in the slave trade.  Should they still be thrown under the bus for it?  What about the white men who ended the slave trade in various European nations, do they count as bad white men too?  Because it seems like they fixed the problem and thus should be praised for doing so rather than being accused of being just as bad as the slavers.  What about white slaves, are they evil white men?  Slavery as an institution predates the Transatlantic slave trade by thousands of years and many white men were traded as slaves by various powerful countries, some of them white and some of them Muslim.  In fact the word slave comes from Slav, because at one point so many Slavs were being taken as slaves by the powers that be.  Not to mention that no one alive today was involved in the slave trade, why should I feel guilty about what one of my ancestors did hundreds of years ago and what do I owe you for what they did?  Nothing cause I ain’t guilty.

Moreover why are white men specifically the bad guys for the transatlantic slave trade.  I once took a West African history course from a nice liberal college campus in California.  The main thrust of that course was showing African agency, proving that Africans weren’t just victims to the white man, but people who could fight or take part in the slave trade and Imperialism as they saw fit.  Which is of course one of the dark ironies of history so often overlooked because of the Progressive Narrative.  Africans were enslaving other Africans and selling them to Europeans for their own personal gain.  Likewise Africans had sold other Africans to Islamic kingdoms for centuries before the Transatlantic slave trade, much like how various white cultures enslaved other white people.  Peoples of all nearly all races and cultures have been enslaving each other since the dawn of civilization.  This is not a white man problem, this is a human problem.  And luckily for us today, it’s a problem that has been fixed to a significant degree, because slavery is no longer recognized as an acceptable institution in most of the world.  And white men, the source of all evils or so the Progressive Narrative would have you believe, were one of the key players in fixing the problem and keeping it from coming back into style in modern times.  Don’t believe me?  Well I encourage you to look to Libya, a country where fucking open air slave markets have resurfaced since the fall of Gadaffi.  If not for decades of Western, Christian -white- hegemony in the world, we could have regressed back into the days of slave trading.  But please, tell me again how white men are the problem.

I did not say any of the things I just said because I’m a white supremacist, a racist, an Islamophobe or a Christian.  I am none of those things, though I was raised Christian and while I am not among the faithful I still hold the teachings on morality I learned growing up in very high regard.  I said what I said because those were the facts.  Facts which have been ignored and omitted in the name of pushing a narrative, which is by its very nature a fabrication.  Even when the Progressive Narrative means well it so grossly oversimplifies so many issues and refuses to reconcile facts which call it into question that it does more harm than good.  For example, “America is a deeply racist nation.”  No.  It. Fucking. ISN’T.  Are there racists in America today?  Sure.  Does America have a bad track record with racism in the past?  Sure.  Does that make America a racist country?  No.  In fact you need look no farther than last year’s President, a black man in the nation’s highest office.  For a racist country that’s all about keeping blacks down we’re doing an abysmally poor job aren’t we?  Or maybe America has progressed in the decades following the civil rights movement and we are no longer a deeply racist nation.  Yes pockets of deep racism exist but they don’t represent the larger group.

Wait a minute where have I seen that argument before?  Oh yea that’s what Progressives say whenever Islam is under attack, that the small radical minority isn’t representative of most Muslims.  Funny how racists in America aren’t given the same treatment.  Especially when one considers how much more consistently violent Islamic fundamentalists are and have been for over a thousand years.  Islam became prominent when the Arabs exploded out of Arabia and conquered huge swathes of former Persian territory, made inroads into India, rampaged across North Africa and warred with Christians in Spain.  However the Islamic cycle of conflict persisted well after the Arabs fell, their successors the Ottomans continued an Islamic campaign of violence which savaged eastern Europe for centuries before the Ottoman Empire weakened and eventually crumbled after WWI.  But even throwing the past out the window, Muslim violence in Europe is a consistent problem.  In America the Left likes to make it a point that a white man is more likely to kill you than a terrorist, which is true because white men are a majority population here and terror attacks are mercifully few.  Terror attacks over in Europe however are far more frequent, as the UK reeling from a concert bombing that happened last night can attest.

Some police sources indicate that British police are making terror related arrests on an almost daily basis despite past evidence showing that the police were reluctant to arrest certifiably guilty Muslims for fear of looking racist.  France has suffered multiple major terror attacks and countries all over Europe report skyrocketing rapes and sexual assaults, crimes which are being committed at a disproportionately high rate by Muslim immigrants and refugees.  Not that most of you would know that, because the media does a terrible job reporting it.  Why do they suck at reporting it?  Because it goes against the narrative, and that narrative is so central to the Left’s ideology that the media, of which 10% or less leans right wing, would rather report on how many scoops of ice cream Donald Trump eats at dinner than the fact that Muslim migrants have a disproportionately high tendency to be violent and rapey.

This is one of the reasons the Progressive Narrative is down right dangerous.  Progressives will allow other people to suffer the consequences of progressive policies and ideas and make no effort to address those consequences so that they can continue to push their narrative.  Another reason the narrative is dangerous can be found in the behavior of SJWs and Antifa.  Because Progressives paint their narrative’s villains, white people and more specifically white men, as so thoroughly evil, Progressive feel justified despite their demonstrably vile behavior.  By blaming white men for everything, progressive are literally being racist and sexist, despite the fact they claim to fight those things.  Of greater concern though is Antifa and other militant SJWs.  These people are violent and they suppress other people’s rights.  By law they ought to be deemed terrorists.  They destroy property, hit people on the head with bike locks, squash the free speech of others and somehow think they are still in the right and above reproach for this.  I saw a letter once, take it with a grain of salt because it’s just an internet photo, but I think it’s genuine, where an Antifa member was bitching at /pol/ the 4chan board which exposed some of them.

In the letter the Antifa member talked about how hundreds of Antifa members were going to prison, something which didn’t happen before this point.  The writer whines about how it isn’t fair because they are the good guys and they’re fighting the Nazis.  I admit that sounds so ridiculous it almost has to be fake, but we live in a time where liberals call everyone they dislike Nazis, racists, sexists etc. and will even go so far as to say thinks like milk, PB&J sandwiches and the fucking “ok” hand sign are racist… WTF?  What the actual fuck?  How does this even happen?  Oh right people get so invested in a narrative that they will do anything and everything they can to justify it, no matter how far into criminal behavior they fall or how far beyond the bounds of sanity they roam.  They will go to absurd extremes because they believe in a narrative, and believe it so strongly they make flagellants look like reasonable human beings by comparison.

To conclude, narratives and especially the Progressive Narrative are fiction.  They aren’t real.  Believing they are real is stupid and insane, and taking violent action based on them makes you a rabid pawn.  Stop it.  Any cause would be better served by looking at the facts, and striving to keep the cause a civil one.  Violence and slander will not help you, especially not when you’re so lost you take fiction for truth and shy away from anything and everything which challenges that fiction.  We can all do better than that and we should all be better than that.  Be a moral person before being an activist.  Be a critical thinker before being a zealot.  Talk to those who disagree with you like they are your equals and have wisdom of their own before you label them as beneath you and attack them in the streets.  Do. Not. Become. Devoured. By. Your. Own. Narrative.  It’s not but fantasy after all.


We Need to Talk

The other day a family member of mine pulled me into their room to show this Tucker Carlson segment.  It was boring as shit.  Not because of Carlson and certainly not because of the subject matter, in this case state courts ruling Trumps threat to withdraw federal funding if California wouldn’t comply to federal immigration policy and desist their sanctuary cities nonsense.  It was boring because Carlson asked the other guy some very straight and fair questions about what kind of precedent this would set, about how when states had refused to comply in the past the National Guard got sent in.  These were not questions with a lot of political spin.  But the other guy stonewalled Carlson by NOT ANSWERING and repeating the same non-answer over and over regardless of the question.

Political news is bad enough when you consider how hilariously skewed it is in the Left’s favor, with some insiders saying conservatives make up only 10% of the media.  And it’s not even that the guy tried to put a positive spin on his answer.  I’ve spent most of working life doing work on political campaigns in some form or another.  I know full well that putting a spin on any situation and any answer is par for the course even though I hate it.  But just not answering the question at all and responding with ideological crap that isn’t relevant over and over is unbearable.

This is not just a call for the Left, both sides seem to have forgotten what it means to compromise.  To many people toe the fucking party lines and the few who step out of line are punished too regularly for any to try.  And we allow it.  Because so many of us are in echo chambers, because for some reason compromise and admitting you may be wrong have been shamed.  It’s preventing us from talking about anything and working through the problem together.  An independent journalist named Tim Pool just did a great video about fake news and the news industry and one of the most interesting thing he brings up are how biases can form a total blind spot or lead to outright lies being reported.  The example he gave was about an incident where a woman (I believe it was an Antifa protester) attacked a man and he struck back.  Left leaning news outlets reported the incident as a man attacking a woman and a sign of misogyny.  Right leaning news outlets reported the incident as crazy protesters attacking innocent people.  The two sets of content produced were talking about the same incident but were reported as though they were talking about two different events.

Now if we lived in a time and place were we could have civil discourse, where we could just fucking talk to one another regardless of party and treat the everyone with equal courtesy, then the whole incident would’ve been reported and the woman likely would’ve been found in the wrong because she attacked first, which is a running trend where Antifa is concerned.  They typically get violent first and if and when other parties respond with violence they make a big deal about it.  But we don’t both parties are trying so hard to appeal to the extremes and the extremes are being so vocal and insane that everyone else ends up losing.  Alt-right people look bad enough that the Left thinks it’s ok to call all Republicans racists.  And SJW’s are so insane and cancerous to the Left while the Left is pandering to them that the Right is calling all liberals cucks.

This is not just a US issue though.  This rising polarization and lack of discourse if pervasive in Western politics.  Don’t believe me?  Well here are some examples.  Gibraltar called the President of the EU a cuck for trying to get Spain some control over Gibraltar in the upcoming Brexit negotiations, this is not a joke the leader of Gibraltar said the EU president was “behaving like a cuckolded husband,” this is a thing.  I find that particular instance kind of funny because I’ve never heard of a state calling someone a cuck before.  And do I even need to get examples from the Left?  They’re fucking everywhere, there are so many cases where liberals have dismissed people and entire groups of people out of hand by calling them racists and calling it a day.  It’s fucking everywhere.  Hell, in my last post I got into a polite argument with a guy in the comments who, even as he implied my criticisms of the Muslim immigrant communities were in fact correct if applied to Germany and France, the problems I brought up didn’t exist in Sweden and anything I heard or saw telling me Sweden had a problem was the result of neo-nazi propaganda, despite the fact I pointed out that this was real news and you can tell it’s real because the same kinds of articles are springing up all over Europe.

We’ve gotten so dismissive of each other and it’s easy to see why.  We’ve been equating people on the extremes of their party as representative of their party, which is ironic because people on both sides seem to argue “not all men” and “not all Muslims” saying the small extreme sector of a population is not representative of it’s whole.  So why is that suddenly not ok in politics?  For example, I’m a Republican, but I support gay marriage, though no church should ever be forced to marry a couple against if that goes against the church’s beliefs, and abortion.  But I don’t support sanctuary cities, anything vaguely resembling affirmative action and I think there are only 2 genders because that’s our fucking genetic makeup.  Like stop and think for a minute and ask yourself, why use the label trans-woman as opposed to woman (sorry if I got that wrong and trans-woman means woman who became a man, I mix them up sometimes because they are unhelpful labels).  It’s one thing to say “I’m trans” when talking about the problems affecting the majority of all trans-people but if someone asks you what your gender is and you’re a trans-woman why not just say “I’m a woman”  Adding the trans- just adds a division between people who now consider themselves the same gender and whom I would treat equally as women.

Moreover cut this genderfluid shit.  A lot of it seems to be based around masculine and feminine but these words aren’t genders, they are descriptors based on social norms.  Do you know what the old word for a girl whose more masculine is?  It’s tomboy.  Tomboy is not a gender it’s a description of someone who doesn’t fit into the broad cultural norms we apply to a given gender as well as the majority of people.  Because while norms are widely applicable they aren’t deeply applicable, if you put a moments thought into it you will find a label which describes you but fits you poorly.  For example when it comes to music I most consistently described myself as hard rock/metal fan, but I’m big into folk instrumentation and electronic stuff in some cases, sometimes when they are paired with metal.  Seriously, pagan metal and Baby Metal are amazing shit.  It’s why I can have a Dutch sing-along rock song and a poppy electronic Japanese song play back to back when I put my iPod on shuffle, because I do a poor job fitting the label of metal fan, but it’s way more convenient to say than explaining everything I’m into.

The point is that we aren’t engaging each other on a deep enough level in a broad enough context.  When speaking in broad terms we call each other names and get on with our day, and I think that needs to change if America is to return to a place where discourse and compromise are valued, and that’s a far better place then a country ruled by extremes.  Just look at the fucking rampant two-facedness in news and politics.  Look at the presidential golf trips.  When Obama was in power the Right made a big deal about those and the Left ignored them.  Now Trumps doing the same and the Left is throwing a fit while the Right is ignoring it.  That’s a relatively lighthearted example but that kind of nigh-comedic two-facedness is the fucking norm these days when talking about all kinds of issues.  It would be funny if it wasn’t so disgusting, shallow and damaging to finding any real solutions.

We all have to stop rejecting and dismissing others out of hand for thinking differently and having different priorities than us.  Because so long as we don’t we can’t have conversations about real problems.  We can’t talk on the big stage about the problems of allowing thousands of third-world Muslims into first-world Western nations because anyone criticizing that community will be shouted down as an Islamophobe and the other side will just talk about how Islam is a religion of peace.  In the interest of resolving that discussion and trying to bridge the gap here I go.  The Quran does indeed have many messages of tolerance and peace.  And a westernized Muslim family is less likely to get involved with violence and terror than a fundamentalist Muslim from the Middle East.  However the Quran has a bunch of companion texts collectively known as the Hadith and in the Middle East if you do not believe in the Hadith as well as the Quran then you aren’t a real Muslim.  It’s not hard to understand, Christians and Jews share the same Old Testament but the Jews don’t believe in the New Testament, so Christians don’t think of them as Christian.  The problem with Islam is the Hadith, it forms the basis for sharia law and nearly every passage ever quoted which shows religious approval for violence in Islam comes from the Hadith.

Do you see the problem?  Muslim communities which take the Hadith seriously are communities which condone, approve and in some cases demand violence.  This is one of the main reasons why terrorism is so much more prevalent among Muslims than other faiths.  It may not be in the Quran but many Muslims believe the violence is justified and can look to the Hadith for support.  And if we stopped screaming insults at each and just sat together to look at the evidence and discuss it, we could see real progress.  I say that because in response to Macron’s presidential win in France Bernie Sanders tweeted out something like “France just voted against racism and xenophobia by choosing Macron” which ignores one of Macrons major weaknesses, he has no plan to deal with the violence caused by large Muslim immigrant communities.  And he doesn’t have a plan because in order to plan something he would have to first admit there was a problem and he can’t because doing so would be considered Islamophobic by his own party.  How many more have to die to terror attacks before both sides can agree that the problem exists?  How long before they recognize that other problems, economic problems for instance, which affect peoples of all races and parties, exist?  I don’t know because Hillary and her supporters are still busy saying misogyny and the patriarchy were to blame for her loss even though there have been news stories of and news clips of minority Democrats saying the voted Trump because they want fucking jobs.

Obviously there is a right leaning slant to this whole thing because I lean right.  But I like to think I’ve illustrated a problem with both sides and why we need to fix it.  Name calling and violent protests will no accomplish anything, we need discussion, debate and compromise to move forward.  And that should be self-evident because that’s what America’s political system was designed around, but for some reason way too many people on both sides have lost sight of that.  So next time you see someone say something you disagree with, consider talking to them instead of dismissing them altogether.  Contrary to popular belief most people are not racists, sexists, cucks or idiots.  We just have different ideas and priorities and that’s fine.  That’s how life is supposed to work.  We just need to talk through our differences to find the things we can agree on.  And it’s sad as fuck we are in a climate so bad I feel I have to explain this.  Thanks for reading.

So Can We Talk About this Islam Thing?

Islam is not inherently evil, in fact depending on the sect it’s entirely possible that’s it’s followers can be modern, relatively secular and otherwise functional people.  That’s not the kind of Islam I’m going to talk about because Muslims from that Islam are not a problem.  Muslims from the Middle East and North Africa are.

In fairness there all kinds of violent groups in those regions, not just Muslims.  However there is a clear pattern of violence and crime among Muslims from that region, even the ones who fled it.  Over the past few days I’ve seen a lot of news about Muslims in Europe, any guesses as to what that news might be about?  Integration, peace and multiculturalism perhaps?  Of course not you progressive optimists.  It’s been terror attack after terror attack, huge surges in rapes, mutilations, beheadings, and rioting.  Now just to reiterate, this not about all Muslims, it’s about Muslims from certain regions and generally speaking fundamental Islamists.  Because these people are a fucking blight on the entire fucking world and if anyone deserves to drop dead apropos of nothing it’s these fuckers.

Yes you can call me a racist and an Islamaphobe for that, I don’t fucking care.  Another set of insults I get anyway for being Republican is hardly a trial, it doesn’t change what I’m saying, it has no bearing on the facts.  And the facts are that crime, particularly violent crime, is skyrocketing in Europe, especially in countries which opened their borders willy-nilly to Muslim immigrants.  Looks like that was a mistake now wasn’t it?  Looks like maybe this liberal dream of world where everyone is peaceful and wants multiculturalism is fucking absurd.  If you think we can all get along, especially now with ISIS fucking things up everywhere, you’re a moron.  If you think Muslims from third world countries where rape is ok, killing atheists and gays is a cause to be proud of and beheading people is usual style of execution, will suddenly wander into the West and suddenly become modern, tolerant, functional people, you are a fucking moron.

I’m half tempted to say these liberal morons, not all liberals but the ones I talked about in my last post, who quash all dissent and refuse to acknowledge anyone who thinks differently than them, are getting what they deserve- but no one deserves the kinds of things Muslims from the violent regions of the world are doing to people, and anyone, certainly any country, which defends Islam and conveniently ignores the slew of awful crimes coming from the immigrant communities should be bowing their heads in shame.  Get woke, to quote the memes, and realize that no one deserves to die or be raped so you can show the world how progressive you are.  These people might have run to West for shelter but the are not ready to conform to our ways, and so long as we have to appease them to be progressive they will not give and inch and European citizens will suffer for it.

My advice would be to push them out en masse.  It would cruel, difficult and non-progressive but when liberal “utopia’s” like Sweden become rape capitals as a direct result of welcoming thousands of Muslim immigrants, I’d say the time for being progressive has passed.  Government doesn’t exist to espouse an ideology, it’s foremost function is the protection of it’s citizens.  If a government won’t acknowledge, let alone prosecute, the crimes of Muslims to avoid appearing Islamophobic then that government should by rights be booted from power for dereliction of duty.  Not to mention paying the support for thousands of refugees, many of whom can’t or won’t get jobs in modern Western state is ruinous in the long and short term.  These people are not interested in becoming secular, modern, tolerant people.  They want the world to be Muslim.  There is plenty of evidence which demonstrates this, a plethora of interviews, polls, surveys, videos, and you know, acts of violence, which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Muslims hate non-Muslims and non-Muslim institutions.

To which I say fuck’em.  Seriously, fuck’em.  If they don’t like us and our ways they can go back to their Islamic world overrun by violence and barbarism.  We have no duty to take the refugees in, despite what liberal pundits may tell you, and we should not put up with serious increases in crime and violence in our communities.  If Muslims want to flee to our world then they need to learn to abide by our rules, if they can’t they need to go.  It’s that simple.  We don’t need them and we don’t have to save them.  That might sound harsh, and to be fair it kind of is, but it’s also realistic and lawful.  Moreover harsh words and strong principles don’t hurt like being run over by a truck do they.  Too many Muslim immigrants aren’t ready to fucking progress, they want the world to bend to their social norms and religious wishes and it’s working because too many liberals and liberal elites are willing to capitulate.  Fuck’em if they want a Muslim world they can go back to their land and bask in it’s glory.  Or they can fight for their own home, rather than cause trouble in ours.

Honestly I’m thinking Imperialism needs to come back.  Well not quite.  I do think that if we are ever going to try and fix the problem of widespread Muslim violence then we will have to do to the Middle East what we did with Japan and Germany after WWII.  We need to administer the territories and transform them into modern, functional states.  But honestly that would take a lot of time and money, so I’m ok letting that part of the world be the violent shithole it is.  The Muslims from that region can fucking keep it.  Just leave the rest of us alone.  Thank God I live a whole ocean away, if I lived nearby then I’d vote for a Trump-style wall in earnest.

Look I get it.  Reaching a place of acceptance and understanding is a fine approach to peace.  It’s civilized, rational and less likely to result in war.  But understanding is a fucking two way street and right now liberals are bending over backwards to appease people who won’t take first step down that street.  If Muslims aren’t willing to conform to our laws and our values while seeking shelter in our countries, they should go.  We can make some accommodations sure, but they have to make an effort to make accommodations to our values as well if they want to stay.  Because that’s how compromise works, that’s a process which could bring peace.  But especially these immigrants need to remember that beggars can’t be choosers.  If they don’t like our ways they can go elsewhere, and liberal leaders ought to remember that.  I guarantee that if things continue to go badly thanks to the Muslim immigrant populations in these countries then the entire West will see a surge of right wing politics.  The parties which are anti-immigration are already gaining more traction across Europe.

“But that’s discriminatory!  It’s unfair and racist!” the liberal screams.  That’s debatable.  What’s not debatable is that Muslim violence against non-Muslims in the countries which took them in is totally unfair and quite discriminatory.  These immigrants aren’t ready for the West and until they get good, to quote more memes, they don’t deserve to be here.  We should not be burdened by their costs if they create nothing but violence in their wake.

I don’t really care what Islam teaches people, be it the violence and child brides or peace and tolerance.  I’m not religious and if people want to believe something I think is backwards that’s their choice.  I care about the kind of actions Muslims take.  A lot of Muslims in the US think mocking their prophet should be a punishable offense but most of them aren’t going to get violent and demand we prosecute it.  These immigrants are already being violent.  That’s what matters, that’s why they need to go.  No country’s people and citizenry should suffer violence because of refugees who came begging to them for safety.  Those refugees should go.  Will that put many innocents and good people back in harm’s way?  Yeah.  Will it keep more of a given country’s populace safe? Also yeah.  But that’s the price Muslims pay for being violent and backwards.  I do feel sorry for the immigrants who haven’t done anything, those who are seeking to integrate.  But that’s the price all Muslims pay because such a large proportion of Muslims are violent and backwards.  These refugees are guests, here on our dime, if they can’t behave like good guests then I see no reason for us to continue being good hosts.