A Hatred Of School
I, like many kids, always hated school. Now I am not talking about a petty childish hatred of school, or the “I hate being cooped up all day and want to go out and play” kind of hatred of school. Nor am I referring to a hatred of 1980s and 90s school social culture—cliques, status, sports, bullying, hierarchy, etc—which was often criticized in my day in the wake of school shootings. No, what I am talking about is a serious and legitimate hatred of the structured, regimented, formal, and forced “learning” of school.
I absolutely hated the structured learning and grading of public school and formal education. In school, I generally despised being told what to study, what to read, what to write, what projects to complete, what assignments were due, as well as the assigning of pointless busywork and homework and then, to top it all off, being arbitrarily “graded” by some depressed divorced wino with a liberal arts degree and a chip on her shoulder.
Now I could understand and appreciate that a certain point of these tasks was to teach responsibility, and to prepare students for the deadlines and pressures of the workplace and “real world,” but that didn’t mean I had to like it. It also wasn’t that I didn’t enjoy or appreciate learning and knowledge. I was always an avid reader growing up, so I much preferred to read the fiction and non-fiction books of my own choosing, at my own leisure, while independently studying subjects of interest on my own time.
As such, I pretty much skated through school and college with minimal effort and an apathetic attitude. I rarely applied myself academically, and was generally an academic slacker, with the exception of select projects or classes that happened to hold my interest. Luckily, I was always intelligent enough to pull in decent grades with practically little effort on my part, so I made the rational decision early on in high school and college not to expend a lot of time or energy academically, when just “half-assing” it would suffice with decent results. The only reason I even stuck it out in college, despite contemplating quitting after every semester, was the military—but that’s another story altogether.
Now I am not special. I’m not sitting here trying to compare myself to Einstein, who was also apparently bored by school early on due to his superior intellect. The point of this brief anecdote is simply to say that I—like many kids—hated the structure and forced learning environment of formal education. Many kids, especially those that are academically gifted and of higher intelligence, hate the regimented structure of being told what to study, and how to do so.
This formal structure—by design—rarely does anything to encourage or promote independent thought and learning, or critical thinking skills. It only truly caters to the suggestible, the submissive, the conformist, and the over-achiever eager to please. And while the progressive “educators” still claim to promote individualism and creativity, it is only within their fascist guidelines of political-correctness and non-offensiveness.
Problems With Modern “Education”
Yet this article is not really about the problems with today’s educational and academia system–of which there are countless–and I therefore don’t want to get too off topic by elaborating on these issues. Suffice it to say, that these problems will only continue to increase as the educational system becomes even more progressive, feminized, centralized, and geared towards the lowest common denominator.
Essentially, it is a system increasingly designed to indoctrinate, not educate. And although this indoctrination is primarily found in the subjective liberal arts subjects, a generation of students neutered in independent thought, independent learning, critical thinking, and creativity skills will eventually bleed over into the sciences, tech, engineering, and mathematics fields as well.
Yet the “STEM” fields are also not entirely immune from the systemic indoctrination and social-engineering of progressive education. For as these fields become increasingly feminized in a ridiculous politically correct attempt to encourage girls, it will inevitably discourage young men, while also stifling the creativity historically attributed to men in these fields.
Finally, when the system isn’t busy indoctrinating children, the remaining time is spent acting in loco parentis for the problem children, or the children of parents who expect the system to raise their kids for them. This then further diverts time and resources away from actually “educating” intelligent kids who may actually have a real future. Therefore, is it really any wonder why children, especially young men, are becoming more and more disillusioned with school?
Seeking Self Enlightenment
So just because the modern educational system is increasingly forsaking intelligent young men, while catering to an ever-increasing population of lobotomized children devoid of independent thought, this is still no excuse for children and men to “lay down and die” intellectually. This is instead a call-to-arms for all men—especially those of you still in school or college—to understand that the educational system is broken, and to free yourself from the chains of indoctrination.
Seek and embrace the power of self-education. There is no excuse for ignorance. In fact, I view the concept of self-education within the larger context of the MGTOW movement as a whole.
Men should view the acquisition of knowledge, and the strengthening of the mind, as one of the key pillars in overall self-improvement. As such, there is a liberating freedom and joy found in pursuing your own academic interests and study. While the structure of formal education is often intellectually confining and stressful, self-education should be relaxing, cathartic, and enlightening.
Self-education can mean many different things to different people–and there is technically no wrong answer–but the way I see it, self-education is the pursuit of knowledge and learning, in areas and subjects of one’s own choosing, and at one’s own leisure. It is the pursuit of constructive and intellectually stimulating and strengthening endeavors.
I understand that not everyone enjoys reading, but I can’t stress enough the importance of reading as a foundation of self-education and improvement. I believe that all men should take the time to read, and to study topics and subjects of their own interest. I also believe that these topics should include a wide range of non-fiction, as well as current events, news, editorials, and classic literature, as a part of becoming intellectually well-rounded.
Yet self-education can be much more than just reading, it can also include pursuing constructive hobbies, learning new skills, or engaging in group conversation and debate. It may also include learning to play an instrument or music, or perhaps taking up other artistic or literary pursuits. Self-education can also include teaching yourself a new skill through trial and error, or learning a new skill or trade under the instruction of a qualified teacher or class.
Simply because the educational system is broken, that doesn’t mean that one cannot benefit from a formal class, or instruction under a qualified teacher or mentor. There are still decent and qualified teachers out there, as well as practical or informative classes—whether college, community college, trade schools, continuing education, or community classes. Self-education does not have to be solitary, it simply means pursuing your own intellectual interests at your own leisure, and for your own enjoyment and benefit.
I am also not advocating dropping out, or failing to complete your primary education just because the system is broken. This also does not necessarily mean that you should forgo formal education or college, if it’s something that you desire or need for a chosen career path, so long as you weigh the costs and benefits. In the end, all I am saying is to be the master of your own educational and intellectual destiny.
Conclusion
Self-education—and the pursuit of knowledge and truth—should be the goal of all men, regardless of how they may achieve it, or how they may perceive their own intelligence. There is simply no excuse for ignorance.
Although I personally have a college degree, I am not some sort of elitist snob who equates a degree or higher education with intelligence or knowledge. In fact, in many cases, a degree is nothing more than a very expensive sheet of paper. The pursuit of knowledge does not require a degree or formal education to validate it, nor does it necessarily require those things to achieve it. Self-education is liberating, enlightening, and is a lifelong pursuit, and it is up to you how you achieve it.
Awesome post! The Hallmark of Great Men hath ever been the pursuit of Virtue.
“[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.” -John Adams
“[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” —John Adams
Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains rather than do an immoral act. And never suppose that in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable thing, however slightly so it may appear to you. Whenever you are to do a thing, though it can never be known but to yourself, ask yourself how you would act were all the world looking at you, and act accordingly. Encourage all your virtuous dispositions, and exercise them whenever an opportunity arises, being assured that they will gain strength by exercise, as a limb of the body does, and that exercise will make them habitual. From the practice of the purest virtue, you may be assured you will derive the most sublime comforts in every moment of life, and in the moment of death. –Thomas Jefferson
“The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shalt not covet,” and “Thou shalt not steal,” were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.” –John Adams
[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. –Benjamin Franklin
“The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code; it contained many statutes . . . of universal application-laws essential to the existence of men in society, and most of which have been enacted by every nation which ever professed any code of laws.” –John Quincy Adams
“[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.” -Samuel Adams
“The most perfect maxims and examples for regulating your social conduct and domestic economy, as well as the best rules of morality and religion, are to be found in the Bible. . . . The moral principles and precepts found in the scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws. These principles and precepts have truth, immutable truth, for their foundation. . . . All the evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible. . . . For instruction then in social, religious and civil duties resort to the scriptures for the best precepts.” –Noah Webster
Thomas Jefferson on the Twilight series: “A great obstacle to good education (of women) is the inordinate passion prevalent for novels, and the time lost in that reading which should be instructively employed. When this poison infects the mind, it destroys its tone and revolts it against wholesome reading. Reason and fact, plain and unadorned, are rejected. Nothing can engage attention unless dressed in all the figments of fancy, and nothing so bedecked comes amiss. The result is a bloated imagination, sickly judgment, and disgust towards all the real businesses of life. This mass of trash, however, is not without some distinction; some few modeling their narratives, although fictitious, on the incidents of real life, have been able to make them interesting and useful vehicles of sound morality. Such, I think, are Marmontel’s new moral tales, but not his old ones, which are really immoral. Such are the writings of Miss Edgeworth, and some of those of Madame Genlis. For a like reason, too, much poetry should not be indulged. Some is useful for forming style and taste. Pope, Dryden, Thompson, Shakspeare, and of the French, Molière, Racine, the Coneilles, may be read with pleasure and improvement.” –http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-nathaniel-burwell/
His head would probably explode if he saw TV
Yes, it’s why I’m a ghost now, you see.
Several years ago, when the “Twilight” series had just begun to gain ground with
☭☭☭{{☭{{Google is <-paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
✒✒✒✒✒✒http://CatchworkFind78.com/Gove/1949jobs…
°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
☭☭☭{{Go ON to it and visit proof page—–
RICHARD FEYNMAN on “The heritages of Western civilization
Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One is the scientific spirit of adventure – the adventure into the unknown, an unknown which must be recognized as being unknown in order to be explored; the demand that the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered; the attitude that all is uncertain; to summarize it – the humility of the intellect. The other great heritage is Christian ethics – the basis of action on love, the brotherhood of all men, the value of the individual – the humility of the spirit.
These two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all; one needs one’s heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion, what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to a man who doubts God‑more, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church a place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So far, have we not drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two pillars of western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor, mutually unafraid? Is this not the central problem of our time?
I put it up to the panel for discussion.” –from: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/49/2/Religion.htm
And you can make these kinds of observations about the world without having to believe in christian woo-woo. In fact, not believing in christian woo-woo makes your task simpler: Theologians have wasted their lives trying to reconcile their arbitrary belief that god created a perfect universe with the fact that it looks radically imperfect now, hence this mythology about “the fall” and all that. If you reject the initial premise and just assume that we’ve always lived in a sloppy, haphazard universe, then the world’s condition makes sense.
God never said he created a “perfect” universe. He called it Good, not perfect. Huge distinction there. The Christian belief is that we live in an orderly and rational universe that can be known, leading to science, and the growth of logic and philosophy. A “sloppy, haphazard universe” is the foundational belief of the Pagan, who fears capricious chaos from an inscrutable, unknowable world.
The edifice of western civilization cannot stand without the values and philosophical framework of Christianity. The ongoing implosion of the post-Christian West, which built itself on that foundation of sand Godless Humanism, makes that painfully clear.
Christians don’t realize how recently their cult originated in the scientific understanding of history. If you can date the emergence of modern humans to, say, 100,000 years ago, then our species managed for 98 percent of its career without christianity. Even then, christianity never became the world’s majority religion, so over the past 2,000 years, billions of human lives have come and gone in ignorance of the christian message.
In other words, the preponderance of evidence suggests that humans don’t need to know about Jesus to perform their business in life.
Christianity could even disappear in a few more centuries through natural attrition. Think about the world say, 10,000 years from now. If humans survive, their dominant religion might have originated sometime between now and then, while knowledge of christianity has vanished, or nearly so, apart from the efforts of a few scholars who study the ancient world of the 21st Century.
“If you can date the emergence of modern humans to, say, 100,000 years ago”
Modern humans wouldn’t have taken 94,000 years to invent writing. “Evolution” was just a practice run for the Global Warming hoax:
At http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/49/2/Religion.htm, Physicist Richard Feynman stated: “Communism and the scientific viewpoint
I would like to remark, in passing, since the word “atheism” is so closely connected with “communism,” that the communist views are the antithesis of the scientific, in the sense that in communism the answers are given to all the questions – political questions as well as moral ones – without discussion and without doubt. The scientific viewpoint is the exact opposite of this; that is, all questions must be doubted and discussed; we must argue everything out – observe things, check them, and so change them. The democratic government is much closer to this idea, because there is discussion and a chance of modification. One doesn’t launch the ship in a definite direction. It is true that if you have a tyranny of ideas, so that you know exactly what has to be true, you act very decisively, and it looks good – for a while. But soon the ship is heading in the wrong direction, and no one can modify the direction any more. So the uncertainties of life in a democracy are, I think, much more consistent with science.
Although science makes some impact on many religious ideas, it does not affect the moral content. Religion has many aspects; it answers all kinds of questions. First, for example, it answers questions about what things are, where they come from, what man is, what God is – the properties of God, and so on. Let me call this the metaphysical aspect of religion. It also tells us another thing – how to behave. Leave out of this the idea of how to behave in certain ceremonies, and what rites to perform; I mean it tells us how to behave in life in general, in a moral way. It gives answers to moral questions; it gives a moral and ethical code. Let me call this the ethical aspect of religion.
Now, we know that, even with moral values granted, human beings are very weak; they must be reminded of the moral values in order that they may be able to follow their consciences. It is not simply a matter of having a right conscience; it is also a question of maintaining strength to do what you know is right. And it is necessary that religion give strength and comfort and the inspiration to follow these moral views. This is the inspirational aspect of religion. It gives inspiration not only for moral conduct – it gives inspiration for the arts and for all kinds of great thoughts and actions as well.” Feynman, http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/49/2/Religion.htm
No it wasn’t. Proteins would not have homologous sequences between different species if they did not evolve from the same source. A few years ago, we simulated this process on a scale of a few million years to produce different colored fluorescent proteins. We would not have been able to do this if the theory was as radically unsound as you suggest.
“They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.” -Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, Sept. 23, 1800
“The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.”
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.” -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816
Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind.
-Thomas Jefferson to James Smith, 1822.
I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
About only thing Jefferson was right about was Calvinism, which took the Roman Catholic error of original sin and ran with it. We inherit a fallen nature from Adam, not his personal guilt/sin.
As an atheist, I agree with this. I get so tired of atheists naively talking about how atheism is the panacea to the world’s problems. It really won’t change much. Atheists, like liberals in general, put too much faith in the inherent goodness of human beings. Humans are inherently selfish, which is why every child has to be taught to share.
The truth is that the vast majority of the people are fickle, irrational apes who, and without some sort of guidance, are lost to how they should behave in modern civilization. Religion gives them a framework that provides a decent balance between benefiting the individual and benefiting society as a whole. Yes, it’s a bit cruel that they live their lives in fear of eternal punishment, but it’s probably for their own good. I think a big reason religions like Christianity and Islam became so popular is because they gave honor and respect to the poor. To a certain extent, poverty is even made out to be a virtue, which helps to stabilize the long and contentious relationship between the elite and the common people.
When you remove the self-policing behaviors that come with religion, you have to replace it with something else, and this usually becomes an authoritarian police state, and paying off the irrational herd with bribes so they don’t overthrow the system (welfare). Instead of God always watching you, the state is via surveillance.
I’ve since come to the conclusion that man can never be free. To free man is to revert to the primitive behavior that existed prior to human civilization. A free man is like a free and hungry lion set loose on a school playground.
“I think a big reason religions like Christianity and Islam became so
popular is because they gave honor and respect to the poor.”
Prophet Mo had about 20-30 followers, all family, friends of family, before he turned to violence and conquest. It didn’t convert an empire peacefully by starting with people who were often poor and marginalized and working up.
I’m not a fan of Islam in the slightest, but they do emphasize helping the poor. Christianity replaced paganism in the Roman empire by, in fact, waging war against the pagans. This detail of history is often overlooked by Christians, who want to believe everyone converted to Christianity voluntarily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-paganism_policy_of_Theodosius_I
The phrase from Thomas Hobbes’ “Leviathan” comes to mind, in which he describes the life of all men whose society has stagnated due to a perpetual state of war: solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
Unfortunately, it seemsthe American public is unable to elect the elite, the judicious, the honorable, even the basically intelligent to office to lead us out of this current state of poor, nasty, brutish existence: we as a people continue to elect Harry Reids or Ted Cruzes. Blithering talking–but more specifically, brainless–heads.
Atheists assume that truth can be a product of rationalism following ideology (just like most leftists), while hardcore christians assume it is a product of rationalism following fideism. In practice, all of our knowledge comes not from pure thought but empiricism informed/guided by rationalism.
God created a perfect universe that became fallen by the fall of man. Then the nature of the universe fundamentally changed.
Hence there will be a recreation of the universe in the future free from the flaws of the former.
Great post. Stuff like this is why I read this site.
I give you permission to hereby claim Emerson.
I don’t understand the criticism of Chomsky on this website as I find his views and ingenuity quite red-pill.
Not only is he a self-made pioneer in modern linguistic theory but he is also a benchmark in theory of propaganda and population control.
Does he have a far-left endgame philosophy or something?
Its because he is left wing in our present two party dichotomy…and most people here lump feminism with left wing and P.C. and tend to disregard anything that isn’t Rightwing.
Noam Chomsky is a self-admitted Anarchist or rather a Anarcho-Libertarian. I enjoy reading Chomsky but he has a habit of attacking straw men, I assume to avoid biting the hand that feeds him. This might be why there aren’t too many Chomsky fans in the manosphere.
I agree, but there is a level of racism in the manosphere many times they cover it up with language like “Anti-White” “white-Guilt” and other key words. Its ironic because blacks and other groups have faced real inequality in the law, and massive whitewashing of history, but new age review of history in a more complete reading is also lumped in falsely with the larger “P.C.” argument which actually has negatively impacted not only Whites but Blacks and other communities.
I personally like Chomsky because he speaks out against Zionism not to be confused for “Anti-Semitism” because Palestinians are Semitic people. Although I don’t agree with him I don’t think he would be “Blue Pill” in the least. The Manosphere has some interesting topics that can be discussed openly and I like some of the material but there has to be an overwhelming love for “Right Wing” ideas no matter how biased and false it might be. To me that can be considered “blue pill.”
Are you sure you’re just not seeing history that way because you’re black, and you have something to gain by claiming victim-hood at the hands of whites? Blacks want to keep the image of the white slavemaster alive for the same reasons feminists want to keep the image of the abusive, raping, patriarch alive. Dispossession of resources.
Actually that’s not it…I do not have “something to gain” by claiming “victim-hood” I just states FACTS. Truth is history was whitewashed for many centuries. The Slavemaster is a real historical occurrence along with real Dispossion of resources from Blacks and Natives people for centuries..and still occurs subtely today. I agree things are somewhat better but to deny that would be dishonest.
I personally believe in hard work and getting what you deserve based on your talent and drive, which unfortunately does not occur today. I can claim that you also use “victim hood” mentality when bringing up Affirmative Action which at its beginning was actually used to counter the systemic inequalities faced by black and brown people in this country….going up against that is truly Red Pill and carries more weight than simple annoyances states by some here. However I DO NOT believe in the abuse of Welfare and I do not believe in the abuse of Affirmative Action.
No one wants your “guilt” or to dispossess someone of their resources as this country has done to certain groups of people since its beginning…to include England Span Portugal Italy Australia etc…and that is the real tragedy.
Feminism is a different animal it was mostly started by White Upper Class Women, who had no idea of REAL STRUGGLE as Black Brown and Native women truly face. I have stated I agree with some of the basics of Feminism at least at its onset, but I disagree with most of THIRD Wave Feminism. I actually believe in women’s rights in other countries such as in Extreme Islamist countries.
Yes, but you admit that modern blacks have much to gain by keeping the perception of racism alive, correct? A few of the biggest aspects of slavery that were whitewashed are (1) Africans sold other Africans into slavery to the Europeans and (2) white men starting in Britain were responsible for ending countless millennia of slavery around the world. It was an unprecedented move in world history. Sure, some white men owned slaves once upon a time. Name a people that didn’t? That it keeps being thrown in modern white men’s faces is because a large number of blacks want to extract resources from white men, because that’s much easier than doing the work it takes to get to where they want to be.
We have nothing to gain by glorifying inferiority. Perhaps the low-tier prizes of a fat White chick or “handout”, which a Black male probably won’t even get in this day and age, but the real prizes of global prestige, orgies with beautiful Chinese women, money, power, the halo effect, none of that comes through the glorification of inferiority.
First of all don’t talk about “extraction of resources” with me please lol. Western Nations have been doing that well for many centuries now one with free labor (slavery/lower wage/sharecropping… and the THEFT of NATIVE LANDS, also the EXTRACTION of RESOURCES from the Colonies and by Government sanctioned Drug Pushing like England did to China. This extraction continues today. Like I have said before your response is just a rehashed continuation of whitewashing…or deviating from the subject. Picture over 600 years of False Pseudo Science the creation of Racial Hierarchy and Racism by Colonialist European nations to justify their questionable practices. Now question a few decades of looking at that same history more completely and people saying its “P.C.”
“Africans sold other Africans into slavery” has been greatly exaggerated to deviate from the simple fact that is was a demand system installed by the high demand of Europeans…secondly Slavery as it was practiced in the Americas by the Europeans was infused with RACISM and a life long servitude including it expanding indefinitely for all blacks born into slavery. Next you will say the first “Slave Owner in America was a black man right?” lol There were already White Slave Owners in America prior and Black Slave Owners were a insignificant minority.
Secondly no one is throwing it in your faces…however if an ignorant white person or any person tries to say something ignorant I believe I have the right to know my history.
Again you keep talking about “Work” you sound like Fox News which is the biggest joke in News, Comedy Central is actually respected more. Anyway I have lived with all types of people and races and have friends from all of them…the hardest workers I have seen have actually been so called minorities whether in tough physical labor or in white collar jobs. From the Mexican or Filipino working in the field for 16 plus hours with no benefits, to the Indian Immigrant at the office.
Again you keep pushing Conservative ignorance about work I always tried to work harder than the white guy simply because I was aware that the white guy might get a pass..because my name is not “James Preston.” Blacks worked during slavery and many whites could not perform under the hot sun the way black people performed. But yet this “lazy” false narrative is pushed in your head. Also remember Im more likely to be culturally aware than over 90% of White’s in America and secondly I’m from the most diverse City this country has. So I have seen ALL RACES in action since I was born and actually the hardest working people I have seen have been so called “minorities.” So please don’t bring up the word “lazy” with me. We know what REAL WORK IS!
Extraction of resources is exactly what it is. Incentive, incentive, incentive. Keep bringing up the past, as if anyone alive had anything to do with colonization. The collective punishment blacks want to inflict on whites is ridiculous, although they wouldn’t dream of being punished for something black people did hundreds of years ago. There are some of us who are actually living in the present. Blacks can’t leave the past in the past, and the reason is because the past is the only thing they’ve got.
Bullshit. Slavery still exists in West Africa, and Europeans haven’t bought slaves for hundreds of years. It was the ARAB slave trade. Europeans weren’t the only people buying slaves, nor were Africans the only people who were being enslaved. Blacks still enslaved other blacks. Nice ethics, enslaving your own people for money. These are the facts. Are drug users ONLY guilty, or drug users and drug dealers?
The fact is, if it wasn’t for white people, blacks would still be slaves. I doubt blacks will ever thank whites though.
Black Americans make up 32% of welfare recipients, even though they comprise a mere 12% of the US population. Do the math. Black Americans are more than twice as likely to have been on welfare than White Americans.
I’m not living in the past lol It is also a present day phenomena which I also stated. The thing is that you get defensive for certain realities its a way of mentally relieving yourselves of historical facts that you simply do not like. I actually notice this with many whites not black actually. Because the Black community always has to be questioned and judged on the negatives of their community. Cops kill unarmed blacks sometimes with them not having criminal records the media and especially conservative media wants to deviate and talk about Black on Black Crime…also not noting that White on White Crime is also 86%. Don’t bullshit me please.
Who the fuck wants to thank you? lol thanks for providing me a chuckle tonight. Im not giving a pass to the Arabs but you didn’t help anyone…you just expanded the Slave Trade and EXTRACTED human sweat and work without providing wages which is slavery…this is more than your typical Indentured Servitude. As well as the CURRENT extraction of resources from Black and Brown countries. So don’t give me the living in the past bullshit neither. I also do not excuse the negatives of the Black Community but I also understand the realities of the external factors. The realities of how blacks are not given the same opportunities if they are qualified as a white man, how the whites are more likely to get hired or stay on if the fuck it up. How blacks are most likely to get arrested and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The British just took slavery and expanded it and made a killing along with the Spanish, Dutch, and Portuguese by using their technological advantages and their divide and conquer strategy to EXTRACT resources from Societies far older than them. And most of the European countries after 100s of years of EXTRACTION of resources still manage to Fuck it up. No one is “thankful” for your bullshit.
Stop with the red herrings. You’re trying sooo hard to derail this debate. You keep trying to change the subject in your ridiculous screeds, which are filled with ad hominems. Stay on the topic. Are you able to acknowledge the facts, yes or no?
1. White men largely ended world slavery in the 1800s.
2. White men were not the only people who owned slaves.
3. Relatively few whites actually owned slaves.
4. Africans sold other Africans to the Europeans for money.
5. Slavery still exists in West Africa.
6. Blacks in America have it better than blacks in Africa.
If not, I have to wonder if YOU are the racist.
I dont think I derail the subject its people such as yourself who are very good at derailing the subject.
1. Blacks were the first ones to end Slavery (Haiti 1804)
Followed by Latin Americans…When Simon Bolivar liberated La Gran Colombia from the hands of the Spanish he made an Agreement with the Haitians that he would eliminate Slavery. Mexico had already ended slavery…as witnessed when the White Immigrants into Texas kept bringing Black Slaves into TEXAS, PART OF MEXICO.
2. I know Whites were not the only ones who owned slaves, slavery is an ancient institution everyone knows that I stated that Whites made it specifically RACIST.
3. Minority of Whites owned Slaves but the majority of Whites were still racist, including poor Whites who had trouble working because of the Free Black Labor. In fact it was encouraged for Poor White Trash to be racist…(another tactic of divide and conquer). Nevertheless even poor whites were above the Black person, and many whites found employment at the Plantations and did not have to be Slave Owners to profit and make a living of Black Slave Labor.
4. Again Africans selling other Africans was not a major practice and I have already addressed it , and it doesn’t work to deviate from the issue. Also many Africans RESISTED European encroachment into Africa and the practice of Slavery.
5. Slavery can be applied loosely all over the world, and yes the situation in some parts of West Africa are a problem, just as child prostitution is in parts of Asia fueled by the DEMAND of mostly rich white men from Europe…again here is that word “DEMAND” part of Push and PULL Economics. Also Eastern European poor who are used AS SEX SLAVES…etc Also a form of Indentured Servitude has been applied largely to Generation Y at a high degree in terms of student loans and higher education. Most people in America have below 0 dollar “Value” as they live on credit and have high debts some have several hundred thousands dollars in debt. Money isn’t everything but it sure is bad when you have debt. http://thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/15/slavery-in-europe-how-big-a-problem-is-it/
6. Black Americans do have it better than many West Africans but that does not deviate from the conversation that Black Americans have a worse lot on average than White people. Also there are places in Africa where the quality of life is much higher and not as they portray in our media (which is also propaganda ironically conservative media being the worst).
Also realizing day to day patterns and occurrences is not “victim mentality” its understanding reality, and understanding history is very important because to know where you are going you need to know where you come from. Also I believe in working hard and setting goals for yourself no matter your lot in life.
You’ve actually completely proved my point. Blacks are generally unwilling to acknowledge any good whites have ever done, as well as acknowledge the role their own race played (and continues to play) in slavery. Acknowledging these facts would disavow their victim mentality. It’s the same kind of victim mentality feminists have. If you were actually over the past, you’d be able to acknowledge ALL the facts, even the inconvenient or embarrassing ones. Instead you exaggerate, misrepresent, and ramble ad nauseum about white colonialism, Jim Crow, segregation, etc. as if we haven’t heard about those things a billion times.
1. White genocide is not “ending slavery” on any wide scale, but perhaps in the minds of blacks it is. Blacks even killed the entire families of whites who were sympathetic and friendly to them.
2. Slavery has always been racist. “Slave” is a variation of the word “Slav,” which is an Eastern European white person around the area of Ukraine. Many of the same women ROK posters obsess about today. These people were only widely kept as slaves.
3. Whites didn’t want to compete with blacks, this is true. Let’s be honest, whites are the ONLY ones who are racist now are they? 😉
4. It was a major practice. It was THE major practice.
5. Nice attempt to try to change the subject (red herring). Africa had (and still has) a culture of slavery. Acknowledge the prominent black role in perpetuating slavery. You do not morally superior. You’re just as guilty.
6. Of course Black Americans have it worse than White Americans. Check the IQ, violent crime rate, and single parent statistics. Why would blacks be as successful as whites?
I’ve come to the conclusion that people like yourself will never acknowledge the facts that inconvenient you because, let’s be honest, what do you have to gain by acknowledging them? Absolutely nothing. The race card will be continued to be played indefinitely against every new generation of whites. To get over the past, to accept the complexity of history, and to move on would be like handing over your most powerful weapon to your enemies. It would also mean blacks would be required to stand on their own two feet, which observations suggests most are unwilling or unable to do. Truth hurts.
I see you can’t critically think can you…I never STATED ALL WHITES I stated the SYSTEM that COLONIAL EUROPE established. Of course there were Whites who helped the Slaves and JOHN BROWN is a perfect example of a WHITE MAN LEADING A VIOLENT SLAVE REVOLT. So John Brown is an extreme example of White’s who helped the Black Slave condition.
1. All in All Haitians ended Slavery by being the first Black People to overturn a brutal colonizer in the Americas..however you conveniently leave this fact out. Also the British and later Americans also committed acts of Genocide towards the Native American community and Blacks for CENTURIES yet when Blacks successfully turn the table you seem to be absent to the pre-cursor that LEAD TO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE…poor logic on your behalf.
2. Thanks for stating something I have stated many times before everyone who studies knows that Slaves come from the Word SLAV. If you look at my previous posts you see I have detailed this fact. I also just talked about Slavery as an Ancient Institution. Again Slavery as it was practiced by Western Society greatly emphasized the RACIAL ELEMENT!! And created Pseudo Science and Whitewashing of HISTORY for Centuries. Again its called critical thinking…focus please.
3. At least we agree on something lol…I never said Whites were the only racists…stop being defensive. Also Racism by whites was actually BACKED by an overall RACIST SYSTEM, where you would be crying from the rooftops if it was the other way around…I believe that.
4. LOL I have seen this guy he makes good points but overall in a debate with someone who knows the full history he would lose or at least be forced to acknowledge a more complete view of History. He is used to divert from the main discussion of Race and Slavery in the Americas. You have a lot of minorities namely on Fox News that are good for this they offer Conservative Media a sort of “legitimacy” by putting on their token Blacks Browns and Asians…who usually also spew right wing ignorance…only a few Black Conservatives I agree with namely Colin Powell.
5. No Red Herring here..The RED WHALE in the conversation is Centuries Old Whitewashing which continues today. Slavery like I have said has existed everywhere and currently exists in Europe as well as some places in Africa, Middle East and Asia. Slavery in the Americas was a unique condition however so deviating from Slavery in Americas is actually the initial “Red Herring.”
6. You are the problem firstly because I DO acknowledge natives in the Black Community, and I speak to people in the Black Community as the best ways to face them. Society also makes Blacks answer for the negatives in the Black Community when deviating from specific dynamics that are unique in terms of INEQUALITY in the LAW when it cops to White/White Cop on Black Violence in this country. The Historical Truth is what hurts people like you because you try everything to deviate from the historical evidence and even go as far as whitewashing history to suit the white man’s ego as many of them believe they are the father’s of Civilization when they didn’t have language or society when their was Civilization in Africa and the Middle East before there was a Greece…TRUTH HURTS lol
Also you understand that understanding Internal as well as External factors in the Black Community can both be done right? I can criticize issues in the Black Community while acknowledging external factors with the putting down of Blacks in this Country which is the brutal truth. However why can’t I question high White on White violence over 86% why can’t I question why white kids from good money and neighborhood still feel the need to shoot up a school or movie theater. Now you do understand that there are factors that occur everyday in this country currently so its not just the “past” as you say. Also know one is playing the “race card” when the overall game has been rigged against blacks for most of this country’s history, so what card do you really get to play? Again most of the hardest working people I have seen have been black and brown people in this country and I have been around all different people. Don’t judge a whole group by a few like I don’t judge all white by some Redneck garbage I see. Also IQ most of my friends were black and brown people and they regularly shown IQ of over 120 some over 130 and 140….But I don;t go by IQ as its not a true indicator of Intelligence for me like it is to people like you that try to use it to demote blacks.
Look at your own bullshit face it and don’t get defensive about it. Truth Hurts.
1. What happened in Haiti was a genocide against whites. What white people did was end slavery all over the world. Sorry if you can’t see the difference.
2. Everyone knows Western slavery had a racial element. All slavery has a racial element, including what’s currently in Africa. Read the article.
“Although slavery is a crime against humanity in Mali’s constitution, it remains deeply ingrained in the culture. For centuries, descent-based slavery – where slavery is passed down through the bloodline – has resulted in “black Tamasheq” (the Tuareg’s language) families in Mali’s north being used as slaves by nomadic Tuareg communities. Generations of children have been considered the property of the Tuaregs from birth.”
^ Keep reading that over and over until it sinks in, and you realize blacks are no better than whites concerning slavery.
3. Perhaps the system was racist at one time, but if it were still racist, in that case the highest office in the land wouldn’t be occupied by a black man. There’s an assumption of racism now, without actual proof that it still is. Keeping playing the race card though.
4. That black guy you’re LOLing at is Henry Louis Gates, the Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University. I think when he speaks about black history you should listen.
5. Slavery does exist all over the world, but especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. Here’s a map put together by the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2013/10/slavery-per-capita-map-wo-arrows.jpg
6. Blacks are equal in the law. The myth of human equality has long been destroyed. Evolution would’ve been impossible if humans were actually equal. Therefore, equal outcomes are impossible. Feminists want equal outcomes too. If you take feminism and replace the word “gender” with “race” you have modern black politics. It’s exactly the same.
The rest of your post was the anecdotal fallacy. I posted actual data. Statistics > personal experiences
O.k. Critical Thinking involves thinking on several levels here. I recognize internal as well as external factors on the Black Community. You provided some modern data yes however it does not prove many your mostly false premise on Whites benevolently freeing everyone of slavery. Although I have noted Whites who were against slavery and extreme example being John Brown. Now let me clean up some of your incorrect and flawed premise…
1. Again Haiti was a response to the SUBJUGATION of their people before I begin…can you admit to the complete subjugation of the Natives and later Blacks in what is now Haiti and the brutal rape and genocide of the native population?…why don’t you mention what lead up to the SLAVE REVOLT…Many tried to revolt against Slavery all over the Caribbean and the America’s Haiti was the first. Also Whites did NOT “END SLAVERY ALL OVER THE WORLD” no matter how many times you repeat that it wont make it true
Some sections of Europe like Russia ended slavery in the 1600s and 1700s but retained Serfdom and in the Americas the entire country did not officially MAKE Slavery ILLEGAL as Haiti did in 1804
MEXICO 1810
Argentina 1813 (with conditions)
Chile 1823
GRAN COLOMBIA (COLOMBIA, ECUADOR, VENEZUELA, PANAMA) 1821
LIBERIA 1822
URUGUAY 1825 etc. etc.
“1830: Mexican president Anastasio Bustamante orders the abolition of slavery to be implemented also in Mexican Texas. To circumvent the law, Anglo colonists convert their slaves into “indentured servants for life” (Those damn American Immigrants going to Texas not obeying Mexican Law and bringing America into the fight taking Mexican territory…oh yeah but Texans now complain about Jose now….Bullshit).
BOLIVIA 1831
Meanwhile back in the United States in 1850, you have the FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW CREATED.
Again some countries abolished slavery namely countries that didn’t have a large stake in the Atlantic Slave Trade but to say that it was the Whites saving everyone from Slavery is dishonest and pardon my French…COMPLETE BULLSHIT!
2. Correction everyone knows that Western SLAVERY was PREDOMINANTLY RACIAL. Third World Countries continued to be enslaved by the World Back and Western Countries today, having their leadership influenced by money or threatened by assassination or externally fueled Coup de Etat.
3. Again by you mentioning “Race card” doesn’t make your false reality come to life. Yes the President is Black now after 232 YEARS wow what an accomplishment!! I hope you grasp sarcasm. Anyway elements of right wing ignorance still mention he NON “Americaness”, by stating he is from somewhere else , not a citizen, a Muslim, and a Communist…all of which are extremely misinformed and ignorant statements used to sway the vast majority of ignorant racists in this country. You keep thinking that a few of your little token words like “race card” can disprove certain realities.
4. Yeah I know who Gates is….but many times the degrees that a man has does not really Legitimize a person’s complete authority over the conversation. There are many “educated fools” out there many of them work for Fox News lol. There are various different opinions from others who have the same level of “education” as Mr. Gates does..do you “listen” to them?
5. Slavery exists today even in Europe It doesn’t in America because we go to war and subjugate people INDIRECTLY now. We make up lies and false narratives to get the masses riled up to take another Brown country’s resources, or install someone we like in their leadership and call it “Democracy.” We use financial means to destroy countries that don’t play by our own rules. However the direct brutality of racism as it was practiced by Whites specifically against Blacks was nasty and overwhelmingly RACIST that to divert from this fact is being intellectually dishonest, or revealing complete ignorance. But as you will see below even RICH EUROPEAN Countries HAVE A FORM OF SLAVERY. Which has no excuse especially when a country is rich.
6. Of course blacks are not equal to the Law…although I admit things have gotten somewhat better in many areas. (See that’s called Critical Thinking.) Everyone is different I understand that, but we are Humans capable of higher level thinking and to have a successful Civilization we have to have a certain level of equality, and a healthy spread of resources. Of course the harder workers get more of the resources but not the wealth gap disparity that we have now…it causes revolutions in your society…and class has negatively impacted Blacks Whites and everyone in between in modern American Society. Secondly Feminism is a different animal as it is dealing with gender and the sexes which are different BIOLOGICALLY. Last time I checked differences between a Man and Woman are much more vast than between someone with Dominant Black Genes and more melanin and someone with recessive genes and less melanin pink/white. Furthermore Feminism was started by Upper Class White women, who had a great experience and life compared to their native, black and white female counterparts. Some of what feminism demands now in terms of overlooking differences in our gender roles and differences in our physical attributes is not to be fully and properly compared to Racial struggles in this country although both have some overlap. Also like I have stated before I support female rights in some middle eastern societies and I support Women’s rights when it comes to things like the vote, owning their businesses, seeking public office etc. I disagree with Third Wave and much of MODERN FEMINISM. However completely saying that Civil/Black Rights and Modern Feminism are interchangeable as to be able to simply swap the words…again is ignorant and lacks critical thinking. Again Im not stating that ALL WHITES ARE RACIST or THAT ALL WHITES SUPPORTED SLAVERY…your Defensive mind gets offended at my factual statements so you quickly move from the direct issue and seek to deviate my original statements usually stating knowledge that has already been used during and post American Slavery and the Slave Trade so its nothing new to me lol Here are some articles of my own:
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/modern-slavery-in-europe/487603.html
http://thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/15/slavery-in-europe-how-big-a-problem-is-it/
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/malmstrom/news/what-written/archives/2012/06/20120619_en.htm
http://www.euractiv.com/justice/slavery-remains-scar-humanity-eu-analysis-531144
I respect a lot of things you raise here. I’m black as well. However, my question to you is this: I see a lot of whites always bringing up this “race card” thing whenever anyone black or of color raises serious issues that exist. Ok, I can acknowledge fully that some are “playing the race card” as you say. Granted. Some are not. Problem is pretty much anytime anyone black brings anything up they are branded as “playing the race card” really as a way not to deal with what they are saying in a substantive way. So they deflect with this “race card” quip. Also, it’s a bit ironic on a macro scale when I hear whites as a group using this when it was whites collectively who first “played the race card” against blacks in the first place. This is, in large part, how you get a trans-atlantic slave trade, atrocities therein, jim crow laws, 3/5th of a human, etc. That comes from members of a certain group, whites in this example, “playing a race card” on a grand scale. So in the interest of seeing how objective you are, my question to you is this: Do you acknowledge the “race card playing” by whites in what I just pointed out? Also, do you acknowledge that many whites “play the race card” at all? When you hear whites complaining that blacks are “taking their jobs”, is that “playing the race card” to you? Just asking. Let’s see how objective you are about the truth.
You still haven’t acknowledged most of my original points, just as I said you wouldn’t. You just try to use red herrings and ad hominems (i.e. “use critical thinking”).
1. The British set the precedent for peacefully ending slavery around the world. A slave revolt followed by genocide is not comparable. There have always been slave revolts, including in the ancient world (ex. Spartacus). An isolated slave revolt and genocide is not comparable to a people using the law to peacefully end slavery. In Haiti the white children were murdered and white women raped. (Those children were such slavemasters!) Apples and oranges. Bolivia happened AFTER the British banned slavery in 1830.
2. All slavery, including African slavery is racial. I already proved this.
3. Red herring. The President is black. Perhaps this wasn’t possible at one time, but now it is. If we lived in a country of institutionalized racism, Obama would not be possible. White people can’t even discuss race without being accused of racism. The “Jim Crow” world you think we live in is not the world we actually live in.
4. You’re trying to cast doubt on a source that knows a lot more than you. The fact is, blacks sold other blacks into slavery. Deal with it.
5. The differences between whites and blacks are not just externally, but also internally. For example, whites and blacks suffer differently from dieases, and it’s undeniable that genes play a role. We are biologically different, and because we are different we should not expect the same outcomes. We should not expect blacks to thrive as well in a white world, nor should be expect whites to thrive as well in a black world. There is simply no evidence to support the assertion that whites and blacks are the same. All evidence suggests we are BIOLOGICALLY different. The only way we should expect the same outcomes is if blacks and whites were actually the same. Again, the evidence suggests we are not.
1. Again The English were not under Slavery themselves when they enacted your definition of “peacefully” ended slavery. And you like people who think like you seem oblivious or turn a blind eye to the Brutality that led to the revolts in the first place. I want to come to your house and take your women and raid your fridge for a couple of hundred years then I’m gonna get angry at you for killing my friends and trying to push me out?! The Audacity of people like you.
The English continued to extract resources from their colonies and their companies…their crown jewel being India as well as drug pushing to the Chinese. Not a strong need for slavery when you are still extracting resources and using divide and conquer techniques.
2. “All Slavery is Racial” IS A GENERALLY a blanket and FALSE STATEMENT AND YOU CANNOT PROVE THAT! A) Because the very idea of Race can be disputed B. Cause in modern terminology Races have enslaved their own Races throughout history, including Tribal Europe. Whites made their institution of Slavery PRIMARILY RACIAL to an unforeseen level never before seen. If you debate against that then you need to do more research. The Europeans created Pseudo (FALSE) SCIENCE to state that whites were superior and to justify the enslavement of Black People. This persisted by creating class divisions including highly stratified Racial divisions under the Spanish and Portuguese. Also Indentured Servitude does not always include Race. Since many mix both institutions incorrectly.
3. Not a Red Herring but legitimate. Of course things HAVE IMPROVED I have not denied this. White people CAN discuss Race, its just that if they use racial slurs or ignorant statements like some of the posts I replied too they should expect to get a debate on their hands. Its basic and simple you expect me to sit back and have an ignorant statement stated without challenge? lol
How about if a Person of color succeeds in something legitimately a jealous insecure white person might bring up Affirmative Action to denigrate that person’s achievement like they did with Obama even though he’s ten times smarter than Bush was (not that its something to boast about really).
4. I’m not “casting doubt” I stated there are other men with Degrees who can counter some of his statements. By the way there are many “educated fools” out there. I never denied that “Blacks sold other Blacks into Slavery” I know that and accept that fact….What I am was that it was insignificant in the overall situation of the matter and it is used to deviate from the larger conversation. Also the market was pushed by Whites. Whites created FALSE SCIENCE RAPED AND PILLAGED CREATED A SEVERE FORM OF RACIAL SLAVERY AND THE WEST CONTINUES TO EXTRACT RESOURCES FROM OTHER NATIONS TODAY. Employing Divide and conquer and continuing to justify their actions to include denigrating anything Blacks have ever done historically. DEAL WITH THAT.
5. There are some differences I agree but they are not significant differences. There is not enough difference to say that we are a different Species genetically and although their minor biological differences and we appear different the factors are not significant.
Manosphere shouldn’t be closed off from any ideas/ideologies. By its virtue it should be open and willing to hear all, including points by Chomsky.
Yes I agree with you.
Is Chomsky NOT left wing though? I’ve never met a feminist who wasn’t some kind of PC equalist freak
If there is a dichotomy in the states, it’s because people have radicalized themselves into it
Actually I have seen a White Racist Female Feminist…she was putting down women of color….talk about mixed up lol
There is a dichotomy because thinking is difficult and requires time, and just like everything else, people tend towards assuming themselves experts with little education or experience. The drive towards simplicity and ease in the lives of westerners leads them to avoid hard practices such as thought and mindlessly follow only the choices initially presented in any conflict, leading to radicalism.
Another great article, so well written and well cut. The use of Emerson in a conservative argument is creative and persuasive. I think we must remember that the root of education in the minds of the left has little to do with knowledge, and is more intended as a type of denuding socialization. It raises good sheep that will not bay or struggle too much at the time of slaughter, and provides supple meat for wolf and shepherd alike.
This is a good article, which gives food for thought. But there are many more conclusions to draw from conservative wisdom.
Wisdom should teach us that multicultural and multiracial societies are dysfunctional.
Practically all historical experiences point in only one direction. With multiculturalism comes conflicts of interests and identity politics. And in the worst cases ethnic hostility and conflict.
Assimilation of ethnic groups can even leed to genocide, when the only thing that remains after this process has been completed is a mixed ethnicity with confused cultural roots and a watered down identity American multiculturalism is one of the worst examples of this phenomenon. Since it is also fused with anti-traditional individualism and hedonist comsumerism. Ultimately America bears the seeds of its own destruction. And it wont be pretty when this demise starts to unfold.
Another issue which the article neatly glosses over, is the fact that elite rule only works when it is done by tribal elders. When the common man cannot identify with the elite, it will breed resentment and erode trust in government. This can arise either from lack of identification due to ethnicity or because the gap in wealth has become to large.
The common people will only legitimize elite rule when they surely can confirm that the leader is “one of us”. If not, elite rule will become extremely difficult and possibly break down in the long run.
Half my friends are immigrants or children of immigrants an they have integrated into Australia flawlessly. I think multiculturalism can work but only if it’s highly controlled, an only groups who are have a way of life that is compatable with the host country are allowed to immigrate, an only if the immigrants are forced to follow the host countries laws an not granted special privileges or given free passes due to cultural differences which in turn actually creates more racism. Unfortunately that’s the opposite of modern western multiculturalism which is why it’s becoming a disaster regardless of what academics say. What you say about elite leaders is spot on.
The exception to the rule is if the immigrant ethnicity is very similar. An example would be the US which was founded as an extention of Great Britain. As a state with an anglo-saxon core ethnicity. Allowing relatively high numbers of other germanic peoples did not disrupt the ethnic makeup of the country, since germans and scandinavians were culturally and ethnically quite similar to anglo-americans. When Irish, italians and East europeans arrived it created some problems. Race was similar, but culture some what different. America survived but was some what strained, and cultural differences among Whites became more significant.
The native Americans were practically swamped demographically and therefore had a very minor effect on the culture and race of America.
Blacks have never been fully Integrated or assimilated into the core ethnicity, both because of discrimination, but also because differences are just to great.
Yea exactly right. The other exception is if the ethnic group shows a willingness to adapt even if their culture is different which is rare but does happen. Chinese and Japanese come from a quite different culture but have adjusted very well in Australia, either becoming more like Aussies or retaining their traditions but not trying to force it upon anyone else, an actually respecting the fact that Australia is different from their culture. There’s problems with them buying large parts of Australian land and real estate but larger problem. In general they have adapted well for the most part. Same can’t be said for some other ethnic groups.
Yes, but my guess would also be that willingness is coupled with the “small number” rule. Offcourse if there is not willingness to assimilate, minorities become hostile. But that is a no brainer.
If the chinese however grow in number and begin to have significant demographic impact. Then the whole situation changes. If they reach critical mass, they suddenly are able to wield political power and make demands, now they are able to form self sustaining Communities which can for all practical matters function autonomously. They now start marrying exclusively within their own ethnicity and some even refrain form learning the host language. This is why immigration is such a dangeorus issue. “Small number” policy needs to be very strict, or else a whole Pandoras box of unintended effects spring into action.
Democracies are especially vulnerable, to these effects as minorities quickly can muster political influence through voting and special interest lobbying.
So while the chinese case down under may be under control at present, tables can quickly change if politicians are not very cautious.
I agree with your small number policy I’m just think their are some exceptions, an so far Asian immigrants are the exception. I don’t have the stats but Australia’s Asian population is huge, I know Asia is made up of different countries but overall they have a similar culture to each other an different from Anglo Australian culture but they have been adapted here well. There’s been problems but nothing on the scale of the problems with Muslims, Middle Eastern people or even Indians.
I probably dont share your optimism to the same degree. But I can certainly acknowledge that east asians are the easiest to integrate after Europeans. But I would still be wary, since chinese do not act submissive when settling in other countries. The historical record indicates that they will assert themselves once they have the power to do so.
Since they normally are a high IQ group they all else equal bring some positive externalities with them. Unlike say muslims or other asian groups. Muslims seem to be an especially problematic group, no doubt about that.
So we can agree to being partially in agreement.
I actually agree with everything you except I think there’s a case for multiculturalism if it’s done right. Australia has cases of it going well but overall I see Australia heading for a culterall colapse, due to extreme white shaming, too much immigration, a ridiculous amount of political correctness an the break up of the traditional family unit amongst Anglo Australians. I was just pointing out the cases of successful multiculturalism prove it can work.
There is no such thing as multiculturalism. There is only multinationalism, which means the presence of multiple nations within the nominal jurisdiction of one state. And multinationalism – well, I’ve never seen a multinational nation survive without either severe political unrest or the use of violence by the state, of any and all dissidents.
This boils down to semantics, but I certainly see what your point is.
Multiethnic society quickly morphs into multiple voluntarily segregated Communities – different nations ruled by the jurisdiction of one state.
Experience just teaches us that the multiethnic state is unstable in the long run, just like some chemical compound.
When I introduce Christian friends to the red pill worldview, I always begin by saying “Remember: women are subject to Original Sin too.”
Excellent Post.
Very nicely put article. Enjoyed reading it and of course we can always learn from great men of the past! Look forward to more articles from you.
There’s nothing cool about Classical Conservatism. Fancy having a state religion? A rigid class system? A protectionist economy?
Study a bit about Austrian history. And how they got their teeth kicked in by Prussian (and later French armies). On paper they were badass, with massive armies backed by crack Hungarian cavalry and skilled raiders and skirmishers from the Balkan regions. On the field though, they performed terribly because they tried the same tactics over and over again, refusing to change or instate generals who weren’t some important person’s brother or cousin.
Classical conservatism is about pragmatism. Not about clinging to outdated ideas which are maladaptive. There is a very big difference.
Great article except for one thing, RELIGION IS NOT THE ANSWER, it is just another part of the problem. Religion has been the bane of mankind since the stone age, it creates a multitude of injustices, religion will never solve problems, only create them or make existing ones worse.
Remember, when religious people are allowed to run a a society, we get the dark ages, the Salem witch hunts, sharia law, religious wars, bigotry, racism, oppression and corrupt politics, all in the name of “god”, whose favor can be bought by bribing the correct church official.
Hobby lobby is a perfect example of why religious people cannot be trusted with political power. Our founding fathers separated church and state for a very good reason, they knew first hand the horrors of a society where the church had too much power. The purpose of the first amendment is to protect the church from the government, but also to protect the government from church meddling, and the public from religious abuse.
It is amazing, and terrifying to realize that some people think the government of the most powerful nation on earth should based on and regulated by a book of bronze age mythology.
If you read the bible stories in any other book, people would laugh at them and call them fairy tails, but when read in the bible, they become sacred, inspired scripture.
It is pretty scary that one of the major political parties is based on this kind of thinking.
I am not here to bash religion, I just do not want it running the government.
Very good article, I really enjoyed it, many good points.
Virtue yes, religion NO.
Great post!
Return of kings is peculiar as fuck. On one hand, you get knowledgeable economists and writers who have an acute passion and understanding of literature writing about grand philosophy of life and the economic engine and structure; on the other you get insipid idiots who write about seduction and churn out articles of denigrating and obscene posts.
The Founders well understood the weight and consequential effect of freedom, which is why they took great steps to restrict the freedom of government through the constitution. They also emphasized the need and benefit of having a nation rooted in judeoChristian morality in order to support it (the constitution) and perpetually keep the government’s freedom to subvert the freedom of the governed in check.
Freedom, as with most anything else that can be taken to an excess, can result in dire straits for an individual and a collection of individuals in a society by allowing them both to indulge in things they both consider rights, at the expense of the moral fabric of the nation they choose to exercise these indulgences in.
The Founders wanted the individual to be the policeman of the politician (or other government representative) by using the constitution as the letter of the law he or she in government was to abide by. The people were to be the framework upon which the government was to be constructed, which is why it was once popular (and accurate) to consider the government a secular construct “of the people, by the people, for the people” as Lincoln once stated.
The problem is, when the people making up the framework of a nation are themselves made of poor and inferior moral material, the end result is a nation that will reflect and magnify those substandard building materials and further compound and imperil the freedoms the individual was granted by God in the first place.
As any good architect knows, a poorly constructed edifice will collapse under its own mismanaged weight before long, at the mortal expense of everyone within.
It is no different with the US nation.
At the crux of this issue is a need for God…in the hearts of Man and in the design of government.
When the people lack God, they lack morality. When they lack morality, they lack responsibility. When they lack responsibility, they lack restraint. When they lack restraint, they indulge in the most baseless and animalistic of desires and in things that only a perverted imagination can conjure, at the expense of themselves and anyone in their environment, especially those who think differently.
When enough of the latter kind of people gain enough necessary power to influence others and push for their way of thought as a social norm…the society that finds itself on the receiving end of their benighted collective thought, suffers withers and dies. JD Unwin recorded this time and time again, because the results are as inevitable as tinder being exposed to an open flame.
Modern day conservatives carry the legacy that the classic libertarian Founding Fathers began for America proper. They understand that rights come from God, not government, that the constitutions lists those rights, but depends on US to protect them, that the defense of the constitution requires a love and respect for true and total moral justice, not the “social” justice that those with a progressively fringe/ cancerously divisive agenda swear allegiance to.
A government that does not legislate on morality consequentially governs on immorality…obama’s rogue government is proof positive of this.
However…
When enough people in a nation lack character because of a lack of morality made possibly by an absence of God in their hearts, presidents like obama don’t just become a possiblity, they become an inevitability.
This nation is dying from a self inflicted mortal wound caused by a knife called “existentialism,” metaphorically given to us by satan himself.
Funny how so many people seem to agree that the great majority is too immoral and/or stupid to be entrusted with either freedom or authority or the right to vote, but always think themselves as part of the small elite minority which the above doesn’t apply to and which therefore should call the shots.
The last person who I’d want ruling over me is someone who thinks he has all the answers he needs, and that the great majority which disagrees with him is simply stupid for not “getting it”. Such thinking is a red flag that signals inability to see complexity.