MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
No bio...
User ID: 1783
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
13hr ago
I’m not suggesting for ten seconds that the solution is to make race or gender “not exist”. To the contrary I think they exist in a strong sense via cultured preference and whatever else you choose to name. What I’m suggesting is that those with power stop noticing and certainly stop catering to these notions. If a woman applies to be a programmer, that’s fine, she can do whatever she wants. But she shouldn’t ever expect to have a leg up on getting a position simply because she exists and has a vagina. The laws and policies should not be giving special treatment to anyone. We shouldn’t concern ourselves with whether enough of a given demographic is obtaining certain goals. That’s their job to work that out.
And as far a# culture goes, I’m firmly in favor of having one culture that people generally abide by. You can worship anything you want, but you may not undermine the cultural norms of the dominant religion. You can speak any language you like at home, but we aren’t going to translate or hire dozens of speakers to accommodate your lack of English skills. We value hard work, and being on time, and studying hard, if you don’t want to work, fair enough, but you get nothing from the rest of us. We will be teaching our culture here. Your culture is okay, but we aren’t going to accommodate the entire culture to what you want.
International affairs are a bit different, and in that case I agree with nationalism— a country should primarily look after its own national interests and avoid treaties and wars that don’t serve their interests.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
15hr ago
I would say that cultural marxists are those who are biased in favor of progressive favored groups, of intersectional alliance, such as blacks, Jews, women, LGBT, and more, are identitarians in favor of such groups, on the basis of deeming them oppressed, and favor the destruction, or disminishment, with especially hostile against whites, and are also hostile against men, straight, etc, treating an environment that favors them, or is even even handed, as inherently oppressive and an example of the crisis of misogyny, antisemitism, racism (agaisnt blacks). It is about those who are dogmatic and see as heroic favoring such groups and a reforms in that direction.
It is about the presumption of ism being against those groups. So your quoted definition is great if one says that a cultural marxism is someone who makes that presumption. But inaccurate, if you use that definition on face value.
It’s basically naked tribalism as most in-group out-group political ideology is. There’s no way around it, and frankly it’s no different than any other sort of political tribal alliances that existed in every society that ever existed. Political hegemony is produced by convincing various tribes to unite against the common enemies of the powerful. In this case it’s whites mostly because they have the legacy money and connections to effectively fight back against regime power. By destroying the rivals in the name of other tribes, they cement their power.
Where there is some difference between more naked tribalism, although I consider cultural marxism, to be fairly seen as progressive supremacist, and supremacist movement of supremacists for those groups and against their outgroup is that there is an argument that promotes disingenius one sided critique and promotes a motte of against identity politics, inequalities. Then they change it, to favor superior treatment for their favorite groups.
Some do this while arguing for the destruction of their outgroup, and painting them as nazi evil threat for opposing their own self destruction.
It’s still tribal. And pretty nakedly tribal. Blacks being outright told that they’re betraying their tribe if they vote republican or pretty much calling it “self-hating” if they bite the hands of the elites. And yes, the white tribe is the Dalit of modern political discourse. Any hint of the kind of tribalism that is encouraged by the discourse for others is evil for the political Dalits.
Another element, is the utopian dream that after destroying their white, or heteronormative, or any combination of identities they are against, they will reach a utopian without racism, or oppression. There is a certain egalitarian pretense, or belief at least with some of the less well off groups. But cultural Marxism is not sincerely egalitarian.
They’ll pick something else. I’m already seeing people start to include East Asians and Jews and Indians as part of the tribe.
But to be honest, Equity is the problem. It’s impossible for any society to create a situation where everyone is capable of doing everything equally and with equal results. You are not an interchangeable cog. And so the tribes simply use the cudgel of “inequality of outcomes” to secure the ability to cut in line to the good positions society has on offer. You don’t hire the only black guy to apply — you’re obviously racist even if he isn’t qualified. And as not everyone wants to do the work, it often means active discrimination against whites to meet the quotas.
I think honestly the law shouldn’t see race, sex, religion, or gender at all. If a field is 99% white, fine. If it’s 99% black also fine.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
18hr ago
But the lying part is where you impart a false belief into an audience. And Lawyer lying does much the same in a much more insidious way. Telling people that people in Ohio are having their pets or geese or whatever is obviously on its face false. But the reverse, that the integration of 20K Haitians into a town of 40K is going just fine, actually is also false and based on cherry-picked good reports (for example the factory owner saying that the Haitians are hard workers, which likely elides labor issues like wages and working conditions that the natives didn’t like) or the lack of reporting of things like crime, education strain (this town likely needs a whole lot of resources because they suddenly need to educate a bunch of ESL students who speak French) traffic congestion and accidents. Sure you can say that these aren’t serious problems and if you cherry-pick just right, you can get “Fact Check: True”. but you’re spinning the situation in a dishonest way to get people to believe what you want them to believe. Trumps lies are less sophisticated, but I contend that both are lies, and it doesn’t stop being a lie just because you happen to be using manipulated facts and statistics to tell the narrative you want people to believe in.
This is why I tend to be much more skeptical of the second sort of narrative than the first. Make no mistake, both are ultimately lies and meant to deceive an audience. But for all the faults Trump’s style of lying has, it’s easy enough to detect and therefore ultimately less harmful to the body politic than the kind of lying where it’s manipulated facts and thus hard to attack and debunk. That means the damage done will be harder to undo (especially since doing so is “racist conspiracy theories,” and thus impossible to bring up in polite society.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
20hr ago
Giving something a name and admitting it’s real gives people the ability to fight it as a phenomenon. Terms like Political Correctness and Cultural Marxism give you the ability to abject to the phenomenon without having to be an open heretic. You can oppose the notion that one must have only “correct” opinions or must be forced into silence if you can name the phenomenon behind it. You no longer have to argue for the heresy, just oppose the enforcement of orthodoxy. It’s much harder for the inquisition to fight back because you aren’t officially endorsing the heresies of the day. You didn’t say “trans women are men” you said “I should not be threatened for not using pronouns”. Because we still value free speech, it’s actually an appeal to commonly held values.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
20hr ago
Perhaps, but it was a time when standards of living were rising and life was pretty good.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
What’s causing the divide is the utter failure of the current system of delivering anything the people want from their leaders.
It can’t deliver on economics, in fact the standard of living seems to be getting worse. People are cutting back on things that were once considered normal. The hoops necessary to get to a decent wage and lifestyle are higher every decade. In 1950, a kid could barely graduate high school and still get a pretty decent job at a factory or something similar. He could expect at least a small house, a car, and to be able to support his wife and kids. That same lifestyle in 2024 requires a good college degree from a good university and quite often unpaid internships just to hope that if you and your wife work 40 hours a week, you can maybe have what your grandparents had with one less worker and less education.
It can’t stop crime. The number of anti-crime measures you take without thinking about them is crazy especially once you see how good it is in functioning societies. In Asia, it’s common for stores to leave their deliveries on the streets for hours. In some parts of Europe, people leave babies sleeping in strollers on the streets. In America, it’s common knowledge that you politely leave your car unlocked to prevent would be looters from having to smash windows to get at any valuables in the car. Porch piracy is a known problem. Personal safety often dictates when and where it’s advisable for the good people to go out. And police are basically told they aren’t allowed to stop a crime until it’s too late.
Education? About half of Americans don’t read above a 6th grade level. Many struggle with math more complicated than 10th grade algebra. All we can do with these kids is teach them The Narrative, encourage them to go into massive debt for the job training that K12 can’t give them and hope it turns out okay.
To me, it seems pretty clear that the problem is that what we have isn’t working, and everyone knows it, and so they’re grasping at the straws offered by radical and radically different ideologies to try and find a way to what people actually want — that the median American can live a modest but decent lifestyle in cities where crime is low enough that it doesn’t dictate how you live. They want their kids to have a good education and have the opportunity to be successful and happy. We have none of that, and the oligarchs in charge can’t give us that. So people are looking to other ideas: maybe socialism, maybe Christian theocracy, maybe some form of traditionalist society, maybe fascism, maybe some other idea.
The fact that we’re all so tuned into politics and it’s becoming so central to everything itself is a problem. If things were good, we would not care. People in all societies all over the globe got on very well in functioning societies without even trying to understand world affairs. They didn’t care that much even when given the vote. It was a small part of life, and probably came far behind other concerns like the health and welfare of their own family, sports, religion, and so on. Common people really only get super into politics when they are neither left alone nor helped. And this is where we are. Some 40% of the income earned by Americans goes to the government. And not only do we get what Moldbug calls “bad customer service” (meaning that the government doesn’t improve things for those taxpayers) but spends vast resources on harassing people about what they should think all the time (with their own money of course). Normies getting involved is a reaction, and polarization is the result. I contend that the only solution that will actually turn down the polarization is results.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
The MV incident to me, showed just how bubbled the elites are. I’m not sure whether or not it ever occurred to the elites of those enclaves that importing people with no resources has a negative effect on community. They interact with the world through news media whilst living in gated exurbs where the only interactions they have with the rest of the world are transactional. They don’t talk with the lower clases, they order their services and when no longer paying for that service, they kind of forget they exist. I’m not sure it’s even contempt, it’s summoning a workman or servant, hiring their services and banishing them back into the ether where they don’t think about them until they need the air conditioning fixed or order door dash.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
To me it’s somewhat more dishonest. A lawyer lies by recasting the facts so that they tell the story that best serves his purpose, even when the clearest telling of the facts points in the exact opposite direction. They often do so by leaving out crucial context and details that would lead a neutral observer in the opposite direction, thus making people believe something is true that isn’t.
We’ve all been talking about the Lebanon pager explosions. Some people here have speculated on how it was done and how it might be detected or hidden. And on the political side, I would find it fair to say that the comments on this site have a lean towards conservative and neo-reaction. Now if someone who frequents this site is prosecuted, any good lawyer would have painted this site as a reactionary and even fascist site where terrorism was discussed pretty openly. Ripped from context, as lawyers tend to do, the discussion of how Israel blew up pagers juxtaposed with a bit of juicy reactionary or HBD talk paints a picture of this place as a Proud Boy type site. Left out is the crucial context. It’s against the rules to recruit for any cause, liberals post here fairly often, and the discussion of pager batteries was talking about a news story and discussed by people who work n tech.
Lying by recasting the facts is worse to me because it can cover itself with the veneer of truthfulness. You can cite a fact, and people who check will see that the actual facts cited are true. But stripped of context, the facts tell a very different story than the events they’re used to describe. A lie, on the other hand, is easy enough to sus out. You look it up, and it’s not true at all. And so it doesn’t get deep enough into the culture to affect how we see the world. But tell a sort-of-truth, and your fact-checking will help the narrative stick because it’s not obviously wrong. It’s just not an accurate and honest telling of the facts and designed to elicit a belief that isn’t accurate.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
2d ago
I’m pretty much the same. The opinions of professional activists, actors, writers, singers just get an instant dismissal from me. Nobody in that group has any real stake in the outcome. They aren’t going to feel the effects of failure or the benefits of success. An activist wants less policing but he doesn’t even live in that community. If crime goes up, it’s not his stuff getting stolen. And if businesses flee, it’s not them losing their job.
Even so called experts are hyper-expert in one tiny corner of a very large interconnected web. Yes, shutting down all the coal plants in the world would mitigate climate change. Of course, it’s not going to work because our entire economy requires electricity to function.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
2d ago
The unspoken assumption here is that there’s only one way to solve the problem. The only solution to the dead baby is shooting the dog. But that isn’t true most of the time, in fact it only seems to make sense if you’re talking about a single product, and only if the product cannot somehow be made safer. Dogs are not like that. We can have leash laws, muzzles, requirements for training, size and breed regulations as alternative, to dog genocide. In the case of guns, you can require training, gun safes, restrictions on caliber and speed of firing, or limit the number of bullets available. In both situations there are probably solutions that are similar that I’m not thinking of.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
The contrary of that is that it’s designed to psychologically convince you to accept the legitimacy of the system. Democracy is at least partially a pacification mechanism— it convinces people that because they and everyone else voted for the government that’s doing this or that bad thing, or that preselects candidates that it must be legitimate. And really, it works quite well. No matter what actually happens, most people barely bother to complain, let alone protest no matter what.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
Just speaking for myself, I’m in favor of real politik. The most important axioms: ought implies can, and policies exist to serve the nation.
The first is pretty simple. If you’re not in a position to honor the treaty without serious damage to yourself, then don’t do it. If the enemy is stronger than you are, the only thing you get for entering a war is the death of your own people. You aren’t even going to really stand up for the treaty, and will prove to everyone else that you can’t.
The second is just a principle for political survival. If you’re constantly getting involved in conflicts because of morals you’re wasting the resources of your country and getting little for it. Your military doesn’t get stronger because of your morals. People can’t eat morals. And wars by nature have a real cost that will be carried by your nation. As such, I think it’s rather important to have a good strategic reason for a war. It could be materials access, or the ability to project power, it could be to shore up an important ally, or access to markets, but it has to be a reason that you can articulate and that serves the good of the nation you’re leading.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
I tend to think the opposite. Most of the trouble in modern politics is too many people are invested in and care about politics, especially people who know very little about the topics at hand. People weigh in on things like AI and have no idea how it actually works. Or policing. You don’t understand crime you really shouldn’t be telling experts how to deal with crime. If anything, I think the government and political systems work much better when people are fat and happy and could care less about what’s going on in Washington.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
Yeah, we had assassination attempts, but we didn’t have two nearly successful attempts on the same political figure within two months of each other. That’s pretty unusual. And especially as by the second time, the SS had intelligence and knew that there was an Iranian plot to get Trump. They still can’t get their act together.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
I mean things like that only work until they don’t. The sheer incompetence of the western elites is on display. The entire plan, as far as I can tell is “Ukraine is the good guy here. We arm them to the teeth, let them do whatever they want, and hope they win before something bad happens.” It’s not working, and worse, we’re putting ourselves in an extremely weak position by doing so, and for little strategic gain. Ukraine doesn’t have much beyond farmland. It’s not Taiwan with a big chip manufacturer base. And we’re depleting weapons and risking nuclear exchange to save Kansas.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
I mean, I think this is just par for the course. The entire system is starting to collapse and as such nearly catastrophic systems failures are normal. We’re used to crime, drugs, shitty roads school shooters, random spree shooters, and a dozen other things that would shock people if they visited from 1950 or before. I mean or swan song is so bad at this point that we had congressional hearings about UFOs and the reaction was fairly muted. At this point, Mr. Spock could land on the White House lawn and most people would have muted reactions. We’re used to things being completely messed up.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
I think it’s a poor measurement of the general health of the country. It’s useful as a general overview, but it misses the question of whether the economic benefits of the activity measured is beneficial to the country as a whole or if it’s only one segment of the economy. I think much the same of CPI because it doesn’t tell you which items are going higher or whether they’re necessary goods or luxuries.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
On thing going against it is that the victims just aren’t that sympathetic to normal Americans. Most of these people are elites with more money than most median Americans will ever have and they’re upset, basically about something that had been known long before these particular women decided to show up. The “casting couch” had been a known feature of Hollywood film and TV since long before most of us were born. It’s not like they were surprised it happens, it’s been a thing since the 1930s or earlier, maybe going all the way back to the early days of stage. It’s something that anyone considering a career in movies, TV, or music would absolutely be aware of going in and likely decided beforehand was a reasonable price to pay to be famous for acting and live in a mansion.
Other movements were a bit more sympathetic simply because they were the normal everyday people who worked normal jobs for normal pay and were expected to put up with bad male behavior. Sleeping with your secretary as a condition of her either getting promoted or keeping her job is worlds different because that person isn’t making a choice to follow a dream of fame and thinking “well if I want to be a secretary, I’ll have to sleep with the boss, but the deal is just too good to pass up.”
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
The problem with that is that we haven’t had a significant spending cut in the modern era. Unless we get a real balanced budget amendment to the constitution (which won’t happen) budgets won’t go down. So then there can’t be tax cuts, basically ever, because the state is going to need every penny.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
I believe literature serves the purpose of setting the standard for high culture much like classical music and good art. The point is to develop good taste in those things, understanding how they’re ideally structured, rather than just reading low end pulp books or listening to nothing but low end pop music. Good taste in art is a thing, and I think a lot of our culture is degraded with low grade art because most people never get exposed to good art.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
I agree with this. I’ve long suspected that “pressure” as you call it is necessary in the right doses to bring about what we call maturity. In other words, if you took a child and remove all negative feedback from his life (which were often doing in the name of “mental health”) you short circuit the feedback mechanisms that teach kids to handle adversity in healthy ways, and furthermore, you stunt their ability to mature. What you’d end up with is a human with a mature body but a mind that’s much less mature. I would probably estimate that the median 18 year old kid would be about as mature as a 19th century 12 year old. A 24 year old adult often thinks and acts with the maturity of a 16 or 18 year old.
I’m also fairly convinced that social pressure can and does move society in positive directions. And in that regard shame is a perfectly legitimate thing to use to enforce good behavior and punish bad behavior in the wider culture. At the same time acclaiming the people who are doing great things can often inspire other people to try. I want my kids to build the future, so obviously one way to go about that is to praise great scientific minds, great inventions, and try to make kids want to build and invent. Our heroes are celebrities. There are lots of books about Taylor Swift but not many about Richard Feynman or Elon Musk or the like.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
7d ago
I’m kids sympathetic to the point of AngoAmerican Imperial propaganda having more of an impact on the post war era than anything the Nazis ever did. It became a way to legitimize the rule of the Anglophone order and the right of the UN as an allied government to effectively control international affairs. It gave NATO the right to invade other countries in the name of protecting the world from communism and authoritarian regimes and anyone else we didn’t like. For the most part, we’re fairly decent as far as empires go, but at the same time, the narrative of us as the people who Stopped a Genocide and Defeated Evil Incarnate gives legitimacy to the effort that would be hard to create without the story.
It’s actually kinda funny to me to listen as both the Pro-Israeli and Pro-Palestinian factions try to weaponize the holocaust narrative to win the arguments about the war in Gaza. To the Pro-Israeli side, “Never Again” means that the Jews of Israel must be allowed to use force as much as they want to defeat the genocidal Hamas. To the Pro-Palestinian side, “Never Again” means that bombing Gaza is just like the Auswitz. It’s like using that narrative gets you the stamp of approval to do whatever is necessary to defeat your enemy. Heck even Putin tried to justify taking Ukraine by invoking the need to “denazify” Ukraine of Azov.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
7d ago
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that every Vice be made illegal. But when a substance or behavior proves itself to habit forming to a substantial number of people to the point that they can no longer be functional members of society, then the rest of society is perfectly within its rights to try to regulate it. The number of people who get addicted to rock climbing or backpacking is pretty small compared to drug use or alcohol abuse.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
7d ago
I’m beginning to suspect that the Totalitarian Principle is at least directionally true at least in places where there are strong contravening forces from social shaming or religion to counteract it (which is mostly just an informal ban anyway). Humans seem to bend to degeneracy of various sorts unless there’s a restraint holding them back. We’ve torn out religious taboos and shamed away shaming people, so for the WEIRD west we’re either banning it altogether or allowing it to be normalized.
Promoting a single unified culture has been a part of every national movement since the Greeks and Romans. Calling “treat everyone in society as legal equals and insist on a unified culture” is a concept that would be as close to universal as can be. The Romans insisted on the unification of their territory into being Roman. Major business and cultural exchanges were in Greek or Latin. If you wanted to be an elite, you better learn to speak the language. It was the same with unification of various countries in Europe— the French promoted Frenchness, the British promoted Britishness, the Russians promoted Russian culture. Peter the Great was not Marxist by any stretch of the imagination. He was a Russian Czar promoting the culture of Russia.
I think as far as people suddenly becoming “strangers in their own land”, again, this isn’t some weird new idea that nobody ever thought about until Marx came along. There have always been subcultures and ethnic groups on the outs in any given society. It’s how a unified culture tends to work, you go along with the culture or you are at least somewhat on the outside. I and my near kin would be on the outs in lots of cultures. The Chinese are not going to look kindly on a bunch of white Americans suddenly showing up in their country, nor would they tolerate a situation in which such groups demand infinite carve outs for their particular cultural preferences. I don’t think that legally forbidding someone to practice a religion makes sense, but that doesn’t mean that it should be perfectly legal to do things that the rest of society finds abhorrent in public under the guise of “my religion or culture.”
More options
Context Copy link