BANNED USER: waging culture war repeatedly after multiple bans and warnings
Lepidus
No bio...
User ID: 1547
Banned by: @Amadan
W.H, liberal morality, and why co-existence is undesirable
A little while ago, I read a story of a recent scandal which I think conclusively shows that the Dems have finally gone too far. You see, the state legislature of Massachusetts passed a prisoner rehabilitation weekend pass program, in which prisoners with good behavior could obtain leave to spend time unsupervised in society and then return to serve their sentences. Unfortunately they forgot to exclude first degree murderers serving life without parole sentences who, for obvious reasons, could not be trusted to return. As such, the court said they must be allowed to participate unless the legislature specifically excluded them. The legislature passed a new bill to do so, but the Massachusetts governor vetoed the bill.
Enter inmate W.H, who with his 2 friends got bored robbing a cooperative teenage clerk, so they stabbed him 18 times and threw him in a dumpster. Sentenced to life without parole, he was furloughed from prison and escaped. But normal life was of course boring. So predictably, he broke into a woman's home with a pistol, tied up her boyfriend, stabbed him, and then raped her in front of him.
Perceptive readers will have guessed by now that by recent, I mean 36 years ago. You see W.H is Willie Horton, the governor was Michael Dukakis and this was the scandal that helped sink his campaign for president. or as the Times covered it back then:
"Foes accuse Bush campaign of inflamming racial tension": https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https%253A//www.nytimes.com/1988/10/24/us/foes-accuse-bush-campaign-of-inflaming-racial-tension.html#site-content
Now, as much as i'd like to dunk on the Times they didn't cherrypick random nobodies. Their sources for the accusation of "inflaming the nation's racial fears", Dukakis' running mate, Jesse Jackson and the future DNC chair, Dona Brazille. And of course, if you look up Willie Horton today, basically every non-conservative source including your high school teacher will tell you about the "infamous"... ad, which unlike unleashing rape and murder on your innocent citizens violates the sacred values of our Democracy or something. Some degree of deliberate unrestricted warfare is going on here, but I don't think this fully explains it. I'm reminded of Amy Biel who went to South Africa to fight apartheid, only to be pulled out a car by a black mob which slaughtered her despite the protests of her black friends that she was on their side. And then her parents flew into the country to testify a the "truth and reconciliation committee" in favor of releasing her murderers. They then started a foundation and hired these murderers.
Hlynka, I'm sure, will find a way to call them hypocrites. Moldbug will ask, 'but don't these elves eat great food'? As for me, I neither desire nor expect cooperation with these people, whatever their thought process or culinary habits. I wanna see the conservative movement* draw a clear unambiguous moral line between us and them, accept those that will cross over, and to crush the opposition permanently and with the same concern they feel for their pets' victims.
Added:
*Of course they are more concerned with saving the enemies' feti.
Added:
Here are the two ads Bush ran on the issue.
Willie Horton ad https://youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y
Revolving door ad https://youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y Note how in the second one, the campaign goes out of it's way to find white criminals for it's footage.
This is it.
WELL THIS IS IT BOYS. I've been Permabanned. I appeal to the other mods not for "a second chance" but for an outright acquittal, as I believe this charge to be a travesty. Paging @naraburns, @ZorbaTHut, @TracingWoodgrains
Commenters who are tempted to draw conclusions from this ban should... do exactly that. Seriously, read @Amadan's rationale and try to defend his integrity. There are people who place no value on your life, and others who, whatever their pretensions to the open discussion of ideas and others who find pointing this out intolerable. The outer party lives on, laundering gross atrocities into respectability by demanding that you not be outraged by them. And so, in this eternal re-run of the scene from "politics and the english language" releasing monsters to slaughter innocents becomes, "a policy that resulted in a criminal doing some crime." Depicting the criminal becomes "racialized imagery", and the promise of open discussion becomes, "I'm not sure how you'd make it relevant today without being pure "boo Democrats,"...
Lepidus
1yr ago
Anecdote request on racial differences in innoculation response
For the doctors here. I'm wondering whether any of you have observed racial differences in infant responses to universal treatment experiences. I'm particularly interested in whether you've observed differences in crying rates between different race infants in response to innoculations, administered before cultural effects might be expected to take hold.
Rate estimates would of course be appreciated.
Lepidus
1yr ago
That said, I agree with the rest of your post - once you have rolled the dice you might as well play to win, and there are probably a decent number of motters who would be compatible with her who wouldn't know she existed if not for the op.
Oh, yeah I was refering to other posts, should've made that clearer.
Why, in response to getting a negative reaction, is she intent on spreading it even further? That’s the opposite of what she should be doing.
Really? She's deciding on what may be her final companion for the rest of her life, can cast the net as far as she wants and she's supposed to restrain herself because a few ****'s don't like it?
Everyone who would be compatible with her has already seen it.
How is this obvious to you. Are there not viral trends even within rationalist circles that you sometimes miss entirely?
I'm not exactly above calling out women's failure modes, but I really don't get the negativity of comments about it. Seems like i've underestimated the the prevalence of sheer gratuitous cruelty in the rat-adjacent scene.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Yes. Here's the review: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/just-like-home/.
The Uvalde police actually appear to be entirely latino, of varying levels of distinctly visible native admixture. It's border patrol that is half-non latino.
And that’s before asking if 40% vs 11% chance of trust could actually make the difference. I can think of a lot of other reasons a man might do his job—or fail to do it.
I really don't know how to bridge the inferential gap here. If anyone else can, please be my guest.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Why would it be? Garrett Jones makes a compelling case that even European immigrants only assimilate about half-way, generations after they've forgotten even their original language. There is a considerable IQ gap between mestizos and white europeans. Why shouldn't our prior be an absence of complete integration?
Also, the idea that American citizenship means much when you can obtain it without knowing the language is prima-facie absurd. Even if you are a Civ Nat it should be obvious that we are a long way away from anything resembling integration conducive conditions.
Lepidus
1yr ago
40% percent of Americans say that most people can be trusted while only 11% of Mexicans feel the same way. That demographics that differ in social trust people might show differing levels of willingness to take on risks for strangers --- matters.
Lepidus
1yr ago
There's got to be a social aspect to the instinct. That's the only way I can see to explain the seeming unanimity of the response here vs the contrary unanimity at e.g. Uvalde and Broward County.
It might be relevant to note that nearly the entire Uvalde Police department seems to have been mixed race latino (visibly so), while up to 50% of the US Border Patrol is Hispanic or latino.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/06/26/fact-check-are-half-of-all-border-patrol-agents-hispanic/
Lepidus
1yr ago
Great, I just realised someone’s gonna deepfake a band performance by all the school shooters one day.
Lepidus
1yr ago
I just can't figure out the sense.
Resulting casualties.
Lepidus
1yr ago
The DR isn’t really a thing though outside of the ideas it sneaks into the mainstream. Unless Moldbug has a special forces dimes square project that I’m unaware of, there’s not much else it can/is willing to do to have any real influence.
This isn’t exactly what winning looks like. But it’s at least not loosing.
Lepidus
1yr ago
It’s all so tiresome. On the one hand Dems cheating wouldn’t exactly shock me, but every single time the GOP candidate does so much stupid shit that I can’t possibly trust anything they say. Kari decided that the best way to get votes in godamn Arizona would be to shit on John McCain and tell his supporters they weren’t welcome. I mean wtf? If dems stole this one, they stole it fair and square.
Every time this subject comes up I wonder if zombies are the main life form in existence or if modernity has somehow created them. Who the hell comes up with the thought experiment of a “philosophical zombie” who is identical in every way but lacks consciousness and forgets to consider the possibility of p-zombie 2.0, one that seems identical until you ask them about consciousness?
And who but a zombie hears their interlocutor denying the existence of qualia and then tells them, “you lie!” without imagining that they might be accurately reporting on their own inner experience?
Lepidus
1yr ago
A) The rule that homicides are a good metric for general crime because they are unlikely to be swept under the rug may only apply to Western countries. How many intrepid journalists are looking to expose underreporting in third world countries, and would anyone care?
B) Nonetheless, levels are probably substantially lower as blacks aren't necessarily gonna be soft on black criminals in a black majority country. There may be collective punishment mechanisms in play.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Cold winters, The hajnal line has far more to do with individualism than it does IQ.
Lepidus
1yr ago
This one should be relatively easy to solve. What percentage of the institutionalized was black?
Boo hoo, having your access to institutions built by others limited may be unfair but it is not the worst thing in the world. Hollywood gentiles may have similar complaints but everyone just tells them to fuck off; or would if they dared voice them. Getting threatened at knifepoint by a degenerate who asks why u dared set foot in his neighbourhood and knowing that no one will come to help you but you are at the mercy of an 80IQ psychopath is.
Actually I think the Jewish problem is mainly socially constructed, and that the only genetic aspect to it is their high IQ. Imagine if you will, the Irish suddenly becoming 15 points smarter and a million of them migrating into the UK while obtaining a corresponding share of the Irish elite. You think the part where the key factor in Irish identity is their oppression, mostly real but sometimes fictional by brits is somehow gonna be forgotten? You think they might not sympathise and ally with every other resentful anti-British group ion the planet? Then what should Brits do?
The early ACLU was a support organization for communist revolution in America. They may have dropped this once the Soviets shook hands with the Nazis, but they seem to have had few qualms about the whole mass murder part. Then again, I'm not sure how Jewish it was back then, so Jews might have actually improved it. This article mentions mainly gentiles.
I think Moldbug's categories don't really apply well here. Republicans had generally been pro-some civil rights but drew the line at private property. Democrats hadn't been too concerned with private property, and were pretty statist, but as I noted elsewhere their version of progress circa 1918 was 'eugenics, self determination for competent races and segregation'.
There were pro-civil rights brahmins and anti-civil rights brahmins, pro-civil rights optimates and anti-civil rights optimates. New catholic elites, which don't really fall under either group, but I guess we can call them Brahmins provided we don't foget this is ahistorical were the only other group consistently allied with Jews and blacks.
Yes, obviously the blacks (not many yellows back then) play their role as stormtroopers, but no sane person imagines blacks pulling off the conquest of large chunks of metropolitan America on their own. White Catholics are an important part of the story, but at least their participation on the enemy side was temporary self interest while they integrated and a good half of them if not slightly more are now on the right side. Jews are the permanent Lieutenant and above staffing force for the permanent revolution, and it's not obvious that there are any concessions that could pacify them.
even if your thesis is true, so what? If the civil rights movement is indeed a destructive plot by triple-parens them, I can't get myself to think this is particularly immoral given that they have a pretty solid case for retaliation/self-defense in destroying whatever it destroys.
What did we ever do to them? This is the only country that let Jews in without discrimination, restricting their immigration only when Jewish revolutionaries began rampaging through eastern europe. They've made fortunes here. And now, a country that has done so much for humanity must have all it's cities turned into open air sewers because? Seriously, what have we done that justifies this?
And if what you mean is that Jews are entitled to do whatever it takes for them to feel safe even in the absence of a casus belli, why should we not feel the same way and act accordingly?
I think so far I've been a net beneficiary even taking into account all of its failings and wrong turns and local negatives.
And how is that? Furthermore, shouldn't your reaping benefits from this country engender some kind of gratitude and desire to defend it?
Lepidus
1yr ago
It was how the Apostles cited as evidence of Jesus being the Messiah, old testament verses that had nothing at all to do with him.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Peter Singer has made a name for himself over the past few decades describing this as "speciesism" and comparing it directly to racism as a means of convincing people his view of universal utilitarianism is true -- I prefer just to bite down hard on that bullet and say I am not a racist for the same reason I AM a speciesist. All humans are superior to all other things, full stop. Human supremacy forever.
This is not biting the bullet. In fact it is the exact opposite of biting the bullet, and a perfect illustration of why the right looses. You don't want to admit White superiority because doing so has become taboo, but then you have no basis for human superiority other than 'because I feel that way'. Well, 'because I feel that way doesn't cut it' just in the same way that the 'whites and blacks are totally equal, I just think they should remain separate' copout of the segregationists who didn't want to offend their black housekeepers didn't cut it. Unless you are willing to draw your sword, cut down your enemies, and draw the line based on your sheer brutality and force of will, it has to be based in something anyone who matters can recognize. Failing to do so doesn't make you better off, it makes you look callous and pointlessly cruel.
I value specific features of the human experience that set us apart from animals is that position. By discarding it you haven't bit the bullet, you've shot yourself in the face.
Why is it so hard to admit that It was wrong to tear down the earlier hierarchy?
Here are the only two ads Bush ran on the issue as far as I'm aware.
Willie Horton ad
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y
Revolving door ad
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y
Note how in the second one, the campaign goes out of it's way to find white criminals for it's footage.
More options
Context Copy link