Social Matter

Race, gender, and class: the dividing rhythms of modern social science. I hear the obnoxious music through an echo that alienates me from both the liberal intelligentsia and conservative values-brokers.  The degenerate apathy that gets shaken out in the rancor drives me back to the beat of my own drum.

I come from a middle-class family. Growing up, I had some friends who were dirt-poor trailer-park kids, and others who lived in opulent 12-room mansions on the historical registry. From my experiences between these two worlds, I began to notice what starkly different adults were produced from the classes. The sound and smells are worlds apart, but not as many believe.

Wealthy men still seem so effeminate to me they are almost homosexual. They have their nails done. They wear bright clothing that is perfectly matched. They spray cologne. They talk more girlishly. They also seem to be more anti-social, – in that its very unlikely they will just randomly strike up a conversation with a stranger even if that stranger appears to be from the same class. There is a kind of pretentious formality around even the most casual experience that appears awkward, its participants often visibly displaying social anxiety.

Poor men, on the other hand, – or more specifically, – men who were raised poor, tend to display the opposite, – an over-the top kind of manliness that is often obnoxious in how intentional it may seem. They may wear offensive clothing. They yell and curse even when they are being kind. They talk with anyone they want to, even when ignored.

Of course there are outliers from both groups. Some poor kids were cultured and well mannered due to church or family grooming. Some of the rich were so snobby and undisciplined that they just turned into white trash. But a clear pattern seemed to emerge from those who had too much luxury, – they were no longer fully men. These guys became insecure, narcissistic, and easy to offend, – just like women.

I cannot ignore how huge an impact techno-luxurious life has been on society. Most of its social impacts are negative. You may have noticed this trend melt into the middle-class over the last decades. This has occurred because of overall technological advancement: the cheapening of once exclusive items of luxury, such as flat-screen TVs, microwaves, smartphones, personal computers, cars, convenient foods, and other increasingly cheap luxury-lifestyle items.

The result is a creep of passive upper-class values that have been transferred into the former warrior or labor classes over the last 100 years. I would describe it as a deafening symphony of social tech being dictated by the upper class, effortlessly followed by the imitating peons of the middle.

The aristocracy used to keep this in check by sending at least one child to military academy, or by practicing what I call war-sports such as horsemanship, fox hunting, shooting, sword-fighting, martial arts, dangerous adventure travel, and keeping a rustic cabin in the mountains to go “rough it” once in awhile. Largely due to technology, and the insulation of men from danger, these practices became increasingly rare, now seen only as “traditions” in certain wealthy communities, – not a way of life.

Another aspect of this is racism. Wonderful racism. Racism, that honest institution that honors us all as different yet connected, the father belief of black colleges and black business districts and distinguished emissaries between the tribes of the nations. Institutional racism was once a facility of the upper class. Yet nowadays, it appears that the previously segregated races are practicing the few manly pursuits awhile the upper-class self-deprecates themselves with bizarre “anti-racist” delusions.

There is a strange hypocrisy in this. The poor, who are often mocked and ridiculed in the bi-coastal media as “trailer-trash” or burger-flippers or Uber-drivers, are the most likely to be openly racist. Yet they are also the most likely to live in wildly diverse neighborhoods. They often have multiple friends and colleagues of multiple races. Yet the rich and liberal will live in largely segregated Euro/Asian communities completely isolated from the realities of multiculturalism awhile prosecuting a psychological war of “anti-racism” on the very people who blend the most.

In a world of oddities and freak-shows we must experience these strange songs of the self-tortured upper class, where they engage their faith of masochism. There are layers of alienation here only a professional can assess.

An even more bizarre level of self-deprecation takes place among wealthy men and their entitled wives. I’m often astonished by how much bullshit wealthy men will take from their wives/girlfriends. These women have become a kind of ultra-privileged class even the high-earners will not question.

After witnessing an outburst by a rich friend’s girl, I realized that this man is actually working for the feminist matriarchy and is not really a “man” by any stretch of the imagination. His master screamed at him “How the fuck are you going to get us a good dinner?” I was shocked. How could a woman be allowed to speak like this? Surely a sane man would immediately leave her. But no, he went into a long explanation about how they’re going to order dinner from so and so company and that they are very reliable and everything would be okay for her tonight. This takes place in Northern California where almost anything can be ordered over the Internet and few (non-Mexican/poor) women cook, unless it’s as a novelty, in which case, a contrived dinner would result in an Instagram frenzy, and was merely intended as a kind of self-promoting art.

A poor friend whose girlfriend said the same thing may easily reply with “shut the fuck up bitch.” And she may actually shut up without being surprised at all that he said that. I even know one man who may have stood up, holding up his hand, and the woman would have been silenced mid-sentence before the ravings about food came out. She would have then proceeded to make a decent dinner for him without complaint.

Another aspect of this is homosexuality, which is also an upper-class phenomenon. Gayness is kept completely secret amongst the poor. It is glorified amongst the rich. I see this most evidently in clubs or fashion magazines where super-wealthy elites are often depicted as androgynous bisexual men. It is echoed constantly in the media with tales of sex-parties and gay sex predators. The pseudo-men of the upper-class supplicate these gays, and have for many years, since the famous gay celebrities of the late Victorian era. The same thing takes place with glorified feminist women who “rose up” with their lucky endowments to raise hell.

Feminism is actually an upper class phenomenon originating in the very pampered Anglo-American aristocracy. It can be observed in other European countries, but its recent history and support emanates from the very bratty women of affluent WASP families. It is not an underclass habit or cause. Back in the day, the only women who were allowed any education or rights to titles were the very rich. Most of the suffragettes were rich. In many ways, the fight against feminism is a struggle against an element of the moneyed class. The non-white feminists are keenly aware of this.

A large portion of my disdain for feminism comes from the way I would hear about it, – I mean literally hear it. This feminist noise is always in a superior tone, screeching out self-righteousness and pseudo high-class intonations. It is decidedly low-class in modern society to oppose feminism. These compose two entirely different social sounds.

Look at how obvious this is in academia: the more elite the school, – the higher the volume of feminist propaganda. State universities will have the token band of feminist fanatics who do their thing, along with a troop of leftists that wander in from the town, but overall, the state universities are about their football team, the frats, and drinking. Then there are private or specialty schools that seem to be nearly devoid of any liberal “organizing” because the students tend to be from the middle-class and actually attend to pursue a career, – not to stir shit. A bit higher up, colleges begin to less resemble an academic institution and more resemble mental institutions, where students are issued degrees in vague political ideas or revised political versions of history, anthropology, and social sciences. Schools like Cornell or Sarah Lawrence have reached such a deafening volume of leftism, it becomes difficult to find anything in the curriculum that is not saturated with far-out liberal political noise.

Unlike socialism, which was appealing to many members of the working class in American history, modern liberality, and most specifically feminism, is a ruling-class ideology of the well-heeled, imposed from the top-down.

The few bastions of masculinity among the “higher-ups” have been obliterated by technology and liberalism. These softening practices have not only trickled down to the middle-class, but they have become a kind of holiness as the super-rich are subconsciously considered holier-than-thou by those who wish to emulate them.

Only the poor, the military, and certain elements of the middle-class still maintain classic ideals of manliness. But these are often considered crass or depraved. Yet men deeply crave them as a source of meaning.

All this is taking place while Mexican gangs brand 13-year-old boys with red-hot irons and put tattoos on their faces. They march around with stolen guns and must kill an innocent person to be a member of a gang, remarkably similar to ancient Spartan murder rituals.

A 16-year-old Mexican gang-banger may embark on a mission to raid a village they name “Operation Blood Money,” or “Operation Get Profit” awhile white American boys are playing with iPads and being instructed on “cultural sensitivity” at the age of 9. Gangs are hurling tatted-up kids over the border with bags of coke. They murder both 84-year-olds and 18-year-olds who have nothing to do with their war of domination.

Strangely, many of the weakening ideals that have become so common amongst the middle-class have their origins in the American super-rich “one-percent.” Their absurd ideal of feminist/gay life is now a rule. Americans in general believe that the deluded inconsequential way of life of a super-elite dilettante is applicable to them as well. Perhaps this is also a kind of deluded criminality?

The divisions within feminism and liberalism between the rich and poor are very obvious. The black women did not become feminists for the same reason rich whites did. The wealthy white women all joined up because they wanted “careers like the men” and “representation.” Black girls were stuck in jobs because they had to work due to their poverty.

Having a working wife was once seen as a sign of poverty and low class. The rich women often desired work out of sheer boredom. The black women were forced to work because their husbands couldn’t earn enough money to support the family. The divide between the white and black forms of feminism are still obvious today, as black society is inherently more matriarchal and adversarial. White women are constantly seeking to “prove themselves” in salary earning white male society.

Within “intersectional feminism” these divides become even more wild not to the white working man, but to the activist feminist. Similarly, it was the wives of white working-class men who were forced to work industrial jobs during WWII awhile their men killed for the cause. Wealthy liberal women, on the other hand, were dedicating themselves to high and mighty semi-religious charitable acts propagandizing the war or making vapid narcissistic public gestures.

The men who inherited this paradigm were caught up in the wartime reformation of sex roles. These roles were defined by the self-righteous upper-class which had set an example for Western women. They didn’t need to care for any children. They had a bossy upper-class attitude. They had a gang of servants to look after them. They were feminists.

Now, all we have are imitations of this class amongst the women and gays. Our men are equally effeminate, more obsessed with making dinner or matching their clothes than fighting off offensive races or proving their manliness.

The sad extreme remains of offensively silly poor boys. And the middle-class is lost to decide where they belong as the mediating moral leadership of the church disintegrates into irrelevance.

Thus, the worst aspects of the upper-class and the lower-class have been magnified. The public at large is now a sad parody of the emasculated super-rich they once wished to be.

A reparation is offered to ourselves, but most deny it, every morning when they refuse to vocally renounce feminism, when they decide to sit passively and not act, and when the poor emulate the declining rich, whose fate has long been decided.