|
|
|
Why Virtue-Signallers Are psychopaths and “Ethics” is Just Emotional Manipulation Impressions of Dr. Edward Dutton following this video, “Why Virtue-Signallers Are psychopaths and “Ethics” is Just Emotional Manipulation”, 20 August 2020. I haven’t liked much of Ed Dutton’s content, usually finding it scientistic, philosophically off the mark - worse, led by the discourse that Jewry is altercasting for White reactionaries (against “The Left!”, a whole (((marketed))) charcterology thereof) - and sometimes his opinions/judgments are in just plain bad taste; while he annoyingly seems to assume a quanta of objectivity, which should thus be everybody’s taste. He goes along with all the Jewish abuses of terms, concepts and misdirection, altercasting against “THE Left.” In fact, his take - along with Keith Woods and Richard Spencer - on “post modernity”, “hippies” and so on, was so annoying that it necessitated these posts, “Do Joel Davis and Richard Spencer Want to Suck Jewish Cock? (subtitle, “or would they prefer to take it up the ass?”). And White Post Modernity: corrects reactionary chase of (((red capes))) fucking up necessary pomo ideas However, this piece, “Why Virtue-Signallers Are psychopaths and ‘Ethics’ is Just Emotional Manipulation” was decent; and his preceding video, on “Why All Non-Autistics Are Liars”, seems to be taking a corrective direction; though it still suffers a bit from scientistic rigidity and a disappointing ending - the honest autist goes transgender. Growing up in the 60s and 70s, transgenders didn’t exist as far as we knew, and so I still find it irritating to even talk about them - an obnoxiously freakish, rare phenomenon that has (((become))) part of mainstream discourse; even though Edward is not defending transgenderism, it is disappointing that that is where the hero of the honest autist story wound-up; and I still see the whole issue as a distraction, an issue so absurd that it is scarcely worth discussion. Comments:2
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 06:44 | # Back in 2003 I discovered the book-selling website C-Theory, run by a couple of Canadian Marxists with funny names. The site was at the cutting edge of “gender fluidity”, which had emerged on the academic left in the 1990s as a new form of discourse-framing for the culture war. It was obvious that the function of the literature was not to “liberate” people with tissues (biological) or issues (psychological) about their sex, but to attack the principles of masculinity and femininity; and it was obvious who, in turn, this was attacking. There is, of course, no reason whatever to be politically interested in these vanishingly few, very tragic cases of genetic error or psychological damage. The only interesting aspect of it is the who and why of those who created and advanced the framing. 3
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:21 | # The issue of the bounds of gender sometimes being a bit too stereoytpically drawn by tradition actually does bear nuance worthy of consideration. Typically, however, what may have been a good line of inquiry for nuanced consideration to match reality, has been red caped by academic Jewry, making it absurd and repugnant to White people, i.e., having much less to do with reality (than an attack on Whites). However, just considering Philip Rushton’s distinction between Asian, European and African rates of maturity makes it clear that it is important to distinguish masculinity appropriate to its kind, from less to more, later to earlier, regarding Asian, European and African. There are stereotypes thus, which, if enforced as universal, merely natural fact or unquestionable tradition, custom, habit, can issue forth terrible misdirection for a young European man coming into maturity. He may be better suited as a K selector and for some sort of intellectual task, should be advised to sublimate his drives to study, but feel compelled to compete with blacks and other R selectors on the basis of a “universal maturity”, to prove that he is not gay, to get attention from women where he might be casually overlooked… then let his studies suffer, get a knee injury, lose confidence as he does not hold up to the universal competition… When sheer masculinity is valued, its going to benefit blacks. When episodic evaluation is valued, as it tends to be in the atavistic fallout in the disorder of modernity, its often going to be to the benefit of blacks (their lack of impulse control, inborn rhythm and hyper assertiveness, given higher levels of testosterone and faster twitching muscle fiber). Hence, there is legitimate reason to look critically at gender stereotypes, not to prescribe androgyny, homosexulity and elective transsexualism as the cultural marxists might, but to help take the pressure off of gender stereotyping which might direct people away from their true nature. It is not sufficiently descriptive to call it an “academic” left ...as it is an international Marxist and Cultural Marxist Anti-White Left that has permeated academics and erstwhile legitimate inquiry. 4
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:40 | # The objective of the revolutionary left is to present the sexes as fluid. It is a lie, and it is not supported by between-race differences in the nature of the male principle. That difference is only half the story, because femininity also traverses towards the masculine on the EA → SSA axis. The issue at hand, therefore, is the relational stability between the sexes within evolved groups. 5
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:32 | # Also, for clarity on the non-fluidity of male and female principles, it is worth pointing out that genetic errors (ie, in coding or switching) do occur in Nature, and in human populations genes carrying errors can be transmitted with a bunch of other genes. Hence errors like homosexuality and hermaphroditism can occur by transmission and by new coding/switching error where none previously existed. The intra-population frequency among Europeans of male and female homosexuality, at 1.5% and 0.5% respectively, is generationally stable, so we must assume that the expression of existent errors and the creation of new errors is also stable at that rate. There may be a change to it, however, with smaller families/greater selection pressure/greater fitness offering less opportunity for error to be transmitted. On the other hand, the practise of homosexuals fathering/mothering babies may counter that a little. 6
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:50 | #
They may well be trying to do that absurdly with the sexes. But gender roles and behavior IS a bit more fluid…not just between races, but through the life span, circumstances and niche position.
Not exactly, how “the male principle” will behave is a bit fluid as demonstrated by racial differences in behavior, sublimation, aggression, k/r selection, etc.
That is not always the issue, as in the example I’ve provided and the like. I realize that many young males are floating around Brighton, and that academic concepts have been abused to your legitimate, utter disgust… that’s your situation…. But if you had a situation like mine, father who was entirely masculine, aggressive, confident, quick to attack, anti-intellectual, treated any question as an affront, could not communicate with words, would get furious when you didn’t understand him, even though he made no sense…. you would get a sense of how oppressive an overly imposed gender stereotype can be - masculinity against your masculine nature, even. ..then you might begin to get a sense that there is a balance between sublimation/survey/empathy as opposed to sheer self assertion/action/confidence…the latter possible to be over enforced as “what men do” in universal maturity; i.e., there is a fluidity of these traits between the genders which they both share more or less and most normally need to integrate to favor the traits corresponding to their sex. Of course we don’t want effeminate men, but neither do we want absurdly aggressive asshole men (and women) - like the folks whose lives are asserted to matter of late. The circumstances that I had, extremely anti-intellectual, vulgarly pragmatic, everything was “nonsense”, anything the least speculative in terms of context and orientation was mocked and humiliated as effeminate, made for utter confusion, put me at a disadvantage and I knew it. ..So, I’ve learned from experience (not from passive acceptance of academic concepts), evaluation and inference that if the abuses of concepts by the Cultural Marxists are taken to represent “academics”, indeed, if they are taken to represent the concepts themselves, like hermeneutics, it is to perform a vast disservice. I’ve known life without these things, in accordance with the likes of your distaste and entire dismissal of these concepts…that this represents “academia”...“all nonsense” ...and I despise it…the result is that shitty Hitler loving assholes like Keith Woods are ascending to premature attention and credit for ideas that have been here, without proper respect, for years. 7
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:18 | # 1. Behaviour is the variant neo-Marxists seek to influence via their tropes. It is Nature we, as nationalists, seek to bring to bear on those tropes. Always, the ground of the culture war is that between personality and essence ... artifice and authenticity. The revolutionary left seeks to overtake and render obsolete the essence of the European racial kind. Literally everything they and we do is about this. 2. You must put away racial comparisons. These have nothing to do with the male and female principles as such, which are within-group evolutionary fixities. East Asians did not evolve with Modern Africans. They are categorically different on every key evolutionary measure. The only point at which racial comparisons are relevant is in miscegenation (ie, with the marginals who are weak at identifying fitness, and whose effective elimination from the gene-pool actually strengthens group genetic identity). 3. Where are the academics in the humanities who are resisting the revolutionary wave of the left? Keeping their heads down, if they exist at all. Academia is not producing ethnic nationalist content (ie work which is true in human terms). What work on ethnic nationalism it has produced is pathetically weak and sociological and external in perspective. Only we can speak from the understanding of one within the nationalist worldview. The guiding principle here is the profound and mutual disaffection and distance between a worldview derived, ultimately, from Judaism and come down to us via Christianity and liberalism, and a worldview derived from what Man is in the very fibre of his body and being. Not socially, not behaviourally, not communicationally or anything remotely like that. 8
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:58 | #
Speak for yourself as to what you think a nationalist needs to attend to. Continue in the manner of Only reacting to red capes as you might.
That might be one axial to attend to, but it isn’t very good. Too narrowly focused to pay sufficient attention to what is being done and what must be done in response.
The Marxist anti national and Cultural Marxist anti White Left is doing that - revolution until only the Israeli union remains undifferentiated. But as I said perfectly (and you apparently ignored) a White ethnonational left would be revolutionary where our elites are not loyal to our ethnonation, but not revolutionary, rather elaborative and self corrective where the elites are in line with our interests.
No thanks. Rather, you must put away designating neutral concepts and academia as “Jewish”, anti White, anti national by definition. You suck hard when you do this.
I knew that you were going to try to take advantage of this example. It was an example, and even though I am right, forget it. However, I said it once, that was the first time I provided this example and you tried to act like I keep doing it and need to stop. Further to the point, the example - e.g, masculine gender role Jock vs less explicitly masculine role, Nerd - is not necessarily a cross racial comparison at all.
No they are not, they can interbreed with them as well.
Maybe that’s true, comforting to believe, or maybe it’s the road to cuckdom.
I don’t know, but what I do know is that your thing against academia per se is over drawn and incredibly boring.
There are reasons that this happened.
It is producing some (and some good resource for nationalism)... though at present, it is a hostile environment. At any rate, i’m not here to defend academia, I am here to defend concepts that you refuse to understand, because you’d rather tilt after red capes. Again, your thing against sociology is retarded - taking a neutral instrument, a necessary instrument (group unit of analysis) that’s been abused by our enemies and acting like the instrument is Jewish and should be left in the hands of Jews. That is stupid.
Fine.
You’re jealous, all this is about trying to suggest that me and what I say is worthless. Fuck you. All your autobiography as the savior against the academic humanities ever shows is that not only do you Not know what you are talking about, but that you don’t listen to anything that I say. But I know why, because its a hundred times more valuable to ethnonationalism than the shit that you spew. You propose the farts from your armchair to replace all, everything that I’ve said, all academia, no matter how significant in reality, because you’re so much “deeper”, smarter than all history of European thought. What is really sickening is that it would be so easy for you to satisfy your predilections if you didn’t try to stupidly turn it into a giant either/or ..trying to entirely eliminate the conceptual perspective, the working hypothesis, rather saying something to the effect of there may be slight ambiguity in gender roles, less so in sex differentiation, but most people - our people overall - are advised to prefer the standard to the offbeat. Because goodness knows our enemies are trying to blur and confuse necessary boundaries to weaken our resistance and ultimately, apparently, do away with us. Cultural Marxism now hegemonic in academia is largely responsible for disseminating this attack on our people. 9
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 12:24 | # “Red capes” - a presumptious virtue-signal in Daniel-world. Look, the political question (as distinct from the philosophical question) is always ... always ... how to give our people free expression of their nature, natural identity, and natural interests. In other words, expression of what is permanent and true in them and not merely an effect in them generated from their immersion in Time and Place, or enworldment if you prefer ... the world being too much shaped by interests inimical to our people’s life and good. Our nature is what carries into that consciousness we nationalists called awakening. The freedom of its expression quite automatically re-orders the effects of Time and Place, restoring to the everyday life of the people qualities which are vivifying as opposed to the qualities of existential decline (self-estrangement, alienation) which, today, develop otherwise. Now, will you kindly understand that and fit your own contribution to it. Do not further insist that the Danielesque political tail wags the ethnic nationalist (and Heideggerian) dog. It is boorish in the extreme to continue arguing away without actually having anything of substance to say about this. Let’s draw a line under this exchange, in which my only point is that sexual polarity is a fixity, and the very small percentage of those unfortunates who cannot naturally conform are results of errors in gene coding or switching, either transmitted generationally (but not, of course, by selection) or occurring in gestation in the womb. 10
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:09 | #
Absolute bullshit strawman. Red capes are misrepresentations of terms and concepts with their reverse or gross exaggerations for the purpose of misdirecting Whites, having them chase after and reject didactic misrepresentations of what would otherwise be good and importantly useful concepts for their organization, homeostasis and defense (But the Jews would never do anything like that…wage war by deception, cough). It is a very important concept and unfortunately - tragically - typical of you to attack and misrepresent an important concept (red caping) with a strawman. 11
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:17 | #
...and that can be done, their emergent qualities coming forth uncoerced by their people having borders of their nation and boundaries to ensconce their freedom, to be free to be who they are, which is always - always - my primary concern. 12
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:21 | #
This is just a long winded way of saying that you are either too stupid or too jealous to acknowledge that my untangling of Jewish language games that would misdirect White people is not in opposition to these natural expressions of the English or any other European people; quite the opposite. 13
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:24 | #
It is you who needs to conform your “natural purity” spiral to reality and to human nature.
14
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:28 | #
Do not further insist with a GWesque strawman that I am presenting hermeneutics and emergentism as a one way process from top to bottom and that politics, Jewish politics, have not been misdirecting our people with language games in need of disentangling…. nor that right wingers and liberals haven’t been falling for it. 15
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:33 | #
16
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:37 | #
You are talking about sex differentiation, and it is true enough; perhaps it can be disputed some but there is no particularly good reason that I can see. But there is a difference between sex differentiation and gender roles. Analyzing some gray areas in the latter can help people to better conform to their nature and to help their niche role in human ecology to be more broadly respected. 17
Posted by mancinblack on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 14:30 | # Gender fluidity during the Migration period and Viking Age. https://thethegns.blogspot.com/2013/03/shield-maidens-and-cross-dressing.html 18
Posted by mancinblack on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 15:26 | #
If you will imagine the male and female archetypes on opposite ends of a sliding scale, the vast majority will gravitate towards the archetype of their own sex and can be found anywhere on the scale from the centre point to the archetype. A small number will gravitate towards their opposite archetype. There’s nothing new about this. What is new, is that we are being told sex is more or less a social construct and that for this “the scientific evidence is incontrovertible”. In Germany during the 1930’s the state actively promoted, if not enforced, the male and female archetypes. The consequences of this policy led to some, shall we say, overcompensation in the Wehrmacht on the eastern front, as individuals attempted to restore a more natural equilibrium. 19
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 19:27 | # On sociology, Daniel, no analysis of Man that is confined to the life got from immersion in the world, without consideration of his nature and the permanence and necessities thereof, can ever reveal his existential dynamics. Sociologists just cannot get there. It’s a classic case of rubbish in ... Certainly, the social is inevitably presumed to contain sufficient of Man’s truth to make valid judgements of him. But therein lies the whole, self-limiting issue with sociological thinking, which condemns its vast catalogue of academic work to ontological irrelevance. And that is so quite apart from the ideological agenda - obviously all erroneous - which you reify as the “limit” of my grasp. There is no need for your hyper-defensiveness. One of these days you will think better of placing your own carefully constructed ideological light-prism in front of everything you encounter. It is unnecessary and unhelpful. Enough! 20
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 29 Aug 2020 19:57 | # Dear GW, fuck off, your assessment is completely full of shit, self serving bullshit…in addition to a lived, experiential perspective among other perspectives (while you invariably try to deny accurate inferences that I’ve made independent of academic enforcement) the disciplinary perspective that I am coming from is a communicologist perspective (interaction unit of analysis) but the sociologist unit, the social group concept is more than valid; it does not have to be the only unit of analysis, but when it comes to race and anti-racism, it is central…and already there in nature, not denying any worthwhile science where it is worthwhile sociology....and nobody is saying that we don’t also need biologists looking through microscopes, etc. or “ordinary people” contributing their deep experiential knowledge - in fact, that cannot be replaced. Social constructionism is bolstered by the input of different perspectives and disciplines. See this response to manciblack that I had just finished when I was confronted by your latest pile of shit.
But mancinblack: “Social constructionism” is an important concept which has been Red Caped. It has been red caped as “solipsism” which is the idea that an individual can make of themselves or a group whatever bizarre speculation that they like. That’s the red cape that the right wing altercast chases, as characteristic of “the left”...57 genders from outer space to choose from, “race is an optical illusion”, etc. However, to allege that sex differentiation and gender are mere solipsistic choices, a mere social construct, is not socially warranted - it is Cartesian, as it denies the empirical reality of sex differentiation and the practical complementarity of gender roles. As Cartesian it reverses the raison detre of social constructionism - which is to deal with the modernist, Cartesian estrangement that doesn’t deal with our social interactive reality. Rather, social constructinism corrects this by engaging the interactive process and lets add, emergence, to include GW’s important non Cartesian emphasis (though emergentism was never shunned by social constructionism proper). Social constructionism proper, maintains that there are four aspects of social construction, always entailing at least a modicum of agency: 1. The more literal: as in constructing a building together. 2. The metaphoric: as in parents “constructing” a child, with the help of some sort of input from any number of people around them… 3. The hermeneutic: to manage the non Cartesian process of inquiry between rigor and imagination as need be…necessary for the liberation from modernity’s mere facticity and the arbitrary episode into coherence and accountability following the historical expanse and temporal systemic breadth of our people. 4. The post hoc attribution as to how facts count: That guy may think he’s a woman, but he has a weenie and a Y chromosome, that’s a fact and for us as sane people, that means that he cannot use the ladies room. Of course the bizarre gender stuff is a red cape to make the concept of social constructionism didactically repulsive to Whites, to dissuade our people from it. It’s what “the left does” “those social people” “from their sociology classes” ...“those social justice warriors”... But to overshoot, to overreact to the red cape, to react to the deterministic extreme of scientism reduces our agency, keeps us rigid, rationally blinded, susceptible to infiltration, low on social accountability and correctability and thus manipulable… ..extreme reaction also serves our enemies by frightening away normal people as its anti social lack of balanced, real world judgement (phronesis), humaneness and accountability threatens them (‘that’s just the way it is’) .. scientistic reaction can, in fact, become a living nightmare as it can become an impervious/unaccountable founding principle in the case of dictatorships and misdirected war. ...... This White post modern concept properly understood is meant to provide some agency, but it comes at the price of social accountability (meaning you cannot make of yourself just anything); with that properly managed, it entails coherence through a hermeneutic liberation from the mere arbitrary facticity rife of modernity, providing instead coherence, correctabilty (homeostasis is self corrective systems) agency and warrant ...including to negotiate niche ecology… It is important for both individuals and groups to have this concept in order to maintain what capacity for systemic homeostasis (self correction/governance) that we do have - even an authentic (as opposed to arbitrary reaction to moment, episode, relationships) holding fast to emergence, being’s authenticity is facilitated. It is an especially necessary concept for White people to understand given our susceptibility to social group dissolution for our propensities for individualism and to take on natural, scientific challenges rather than social group challenges (e.g., trickery). It is necessary to fight off deterministic concepts (the opposite of social constructionism, as they will use that as well) thrown at us by our enemies, such as “migration flows” which happen like a “force of nature” which must be accepted as a mere fact about which nothing can be done but acceptance. To fight off the allegation that our freedom is being threatened as such: “they’re trying to take away our individuality”, when our individuality will be destroyed without a group structure to facilitate it somewhere along the line. Our enemies have red caped social constructionism so that right wing reactionaries chase after the misrepresentation and miss its facilitation of social interactive agency and the vital social organizing function. The YKW are always always looking to disrupt functioning organizational homeostasis. They keep right wingers chasing after the misrepresentation and right wingers might even feel clever: “see, scientists can look at a skeleton and determine what race and sex it is immediately” as if they’ve disproved social constructionism… what they’ve done is disproved the red cape and helped the YKW to obfuscate the important concept, which would not deny that factually, there are empirical difference between the races and genders. Post a comment:
Next entry: Kellyanne Conway’s 15-YO “Leftist” Daughter Wants Emancipation
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA Nations
|
Posted by virtuesignalingwon'tsaveyou on Tue, 25 Aug 2020 08:50 | #