Comments on: How White Supremacy Developed Into the Diversity Agenda

By: MenckHitch

MenckHitch — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 13:46:30 +0000

Something that interests me is that there’s a small identifiable conflict between two social tendencies. The problem of, “America’s long lived leveling culture” & “the dark side of weak Galt hypothesis”. There’s no disputing their factual correctness whatsoever. That’s not the problem at all there’s a fundamental issue in regards to the two running counter towards one another. The elevation of social violence specifically in contrast to the progressive mixed messages of the culture with respect to politics of oppression causing social fallout on a regular basis perpetuated by the media news cycles. The creation of political & social barriers & increasingly stringent regulation regarding self-determination. While at the same time massive institutional violence, civil disorder, & the elevation of social stratification. These issues kind’ve indicate that even considering the possibility of reduction of foreign demand for the dollar not causing a catastrophic economic or social event- best case scenario that fundamental tenets that American society is building itself upon are incredibly tenuous.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bronwyn-lea/a-letter-from-a-white-soua-letter-from-a-white-south-african-to-white-america_b_7618544.html

By: AntiDem

AntiDem — Wed, 24 Jun 2015 19:21:36 +0000

The idea that a common feature of Modernity is systems that end up doing the exact opposite of what they were originally designed to do is something I touched on in my latest blog post as well. Relevant passage:

“In short, Puritanism now does the exact opposite of what it was created to do in the first place. That’s a common phenomenon in all the branches of Modernity (One may with difficulty recall that leftism was initially created for the purpose of protecting farmers and the working class – who were symbolized by the crossed hammer and sickle – from effete, decadent urbanized elites). This is because all Modernity prioritizes process over product. Modernity is heavily based on theory; specifically, on theories about social processes that will produce a good (or even a perfect) end product. The problem is that people come to believe so deeply in these theories that they lose sight of what the product was supposed to look like in the first place, and cling to the theory even even when it becomes obvious that they are not producing, and never will produce, the products that they are supposed to. Thus they will, in order to preserve the theory, either (like Marxist dead-enders) continue to delusional claim that the desired product will show up any old time now, no matter how much evidence exists to show that it won’t, or they will (like the Puritans) adjust their expectations of the product until their definition of a good product is reduced to merely matching whatever the process is actually capable of producing.”

What’s interesting is not just that these projects don’t work well or that they don’t deliver what they claim to – that could be explained by declining social technology or mere incompetence – but that they really do end up producing the complete, utter opposite of what they were designed to produce, and producing that opposite product with remarkable efficiency. It would be a fascinating exercise to gather a list of all the progressive/Modernist projects that ended up this way – I’m sure it would be extremely long list indeed. Welfare made poverty more intractable, feminism made women more miserable, gun control made our streets less safe, sexual liberation has resulted in less actual sex* and in plummeting birth rates, and so on. The pattern is obvious, and creates quite an intriguing paradox.

*http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/why-generation-y-less-sex

By: Pedro David Espinosa

Pedro David Espinosa — Tue, 23 Jun 2015 23:20:09 +0000

What’s Ketman-charity?