The only way to fight back against this constant barrage of absurd wokeness is to simply refuse to submit to the idiocy of it all. If saying that only women can have babies, that women are adult, human females, that men cannot have periods, that the jabs are useless at best and deadly at worst, that masks are Kabuki theater and lots of trannies are groomers gets me put in the pokey...we’ll, I hope I’ll
have lots of other sane folks there to keep me company. I will never buy in to their crazy. Period. Bravery is contagious. When all the sane folks refuse to follow along other will join them and end this nonsense. Seriously, we are living in a pathetic, weak, perverse and mentally ill world. We don’t need to accept any of it.
Historically I have always classed myself as a bit of a 'lefty' - I've never voted for the Conservative party (the right wing one) here in the UK.
But these days I find that commentators on the 'right' (or those who get labelled as being on the 'right') seem to be the only ones whose arguments make any sense.
I seem to have many of the same 'leftish' principles intact - but I think I'd probably be classed as a rabid far-right nutjob by many these days. It's kinda odd.
I too have been moved from “left-of-center” to “far-right extremist” over the past several years. Not that I’ve changed much. It just seems they keep moving the center line further and further left so I’m now a right-wing extremist.
But then…in the USA being pro-life, smaller government, protected borders, pandemic/vaccine questioner, and anti-child sex grooming are all considered “fascist”, Nazi viewpoints so…
I'm not sure I'd call it 'wisdom' myself - I wish I had some. I might say something useful if I did, instead of snarking away in frustration at the lunacy. But your kindness and appreciation is very much appreciated!
Theoretical physicist Rudolf Rigger is a practical genius with a fabulous sense of humour. And (not knowing anything about him) I can’t say enough good things about his Vietnamese friend Wot Da Phuc. I believe in Aristotle’s Golden Mean and it is therefore nice to know that the same island that produced King Charles, Beautiful Camilla and Struggling Prince Harry also produced Professor Rigger.
One of my former professors, now friend, is an expert on logical fallacies. On many occasions in class and out we discussed the slippery slope in the form of me saying that <blank> would absolutely be followed by <blank>, and him saying that my argument was fallacious. I cannot recall a single time where I was ultimately proven wrong. As I often argued with my friend the slippery slope is not really a fallacy. Unlike the other fallacies of presumption the slippery slope doesn't rely upon the use of emotional language or circular reasoning. The slippery slope, though not always proven true or accurate, is based upon the logical progression of steps to reach a desired outcome.
"Is there an acceptable proportion of Asians? The mind boggles. I have difficulty comprehending the mindset required to even think such a sentence, let alone publish it."
To try to steelman this, I guess it's important to ask: acceptable to who? Admittance to elite American universities is a crucial first step towards admission to the elite of American society, and it is possible that, if the public see that a hugely disproportionate fraction of their ruling class are visibly foreign, then for World On Fire / market-dominant minority reasons, that could create ethnic tensions, rioting etc. that would not otherwise happen. (A similar argument applies for admitting a larger fraction of African-Americans than would get in on academic merit alone, even if in practice that tends to result in importing the intellectual elite of various African countries rather than old-stock American descendents of slaves). Thus it is conceivable that the 'acceptable' number of any given ethnic group from the perspective of those who are trying to socially-engineer ethnic tensions away would be different from the 'acceptable' number from the perspective of someone who cares only about selecting the most intelligent applicants. (Of course, if that is true, then it implies that it might be a bad idea to import large numbers of immigrants from populations that do significantly better academically than your majority population, to avoid them becoming a resented overclass, *and* a bad idea to import large numbers from populations that do significantly worse than your majority, to avoid them becoming a resentful underclass).
None of this is to suggest that US elite university administrators are in fact wisely crafting admissions policy in a way intended to minimize ethnic tensions in the future. But it's a factor worth considering.
Thanks for this - an interesting take and thanks for the steelman.
It's baffling to me because, if we're talking about citizens, then what is being said is that we're going to classify our citizens based on how they appear. We're only going to admit a certain 'acceptable' percentage of people who look like X, and a certain percentage of people who look like Y, and so on.
It would be like restricting the number of people with ginger hair to a certain percentage, or requiring that admittance beyond a certain percentage is 'unacceptable' if one's eyebrows were too long.
The longer we keep on focusing on how people look, and making this such an **important** factor, the longer all this shit continues. I say let the chips fall as they may.
In Sweden, you can and will be fined or sent to prison for the "wrong" opinion as defined and decided by court on an arbitrary case-by-case basis.
You can also be sent to prison for stating facts, if these facts run counter to allowed opinion or speech, expression et c. depending on your race and faith.
Even if you source your claims and use mainstream scientific knowledge, such as different populations having vastly different IQs, propensity for violence, propensity for rape, and how this correlates perfectly with the most troublesome races almost exclusively marrying their first cousins, uncles or aunts for centuries or more.
Even writing it like that can get me landed in jail, despite no names being used, since the prosecutor would argue that I'm banking on everyone knowing which groups I mean, and that I am therefore knowingly disparaging these "minorities".
Reporting on this may damage Sweden's reputation and status abroad, which is (from January 1st) a crime too. You can't talk about what you can't talk about or why you can't talk about what you can't talk about.
And most people go along, tut-tuts at the right place following the script they've been conditioned to respmond to, and happily spread slander about dissenters, splitters and wrong'uns. All the while wringing their hands about the horrors of nations such as Romania or Poland...
wow - so despite distinguishing itself by having one of the most sane responses to covid - we find that Sweden, in other respects, is several Lagkaptens short of an office.
Oh aye, we've had speech laws for several decades now. It all started with a nutter more than 50 years ago, who had it in for a jewish colleague. So a law was drafted, making slurs based on being a jew ciminal. From there it's snowballed into a tool of oppression of dissent.
The text of the law is very ambiguous too. There doesn't need to be a realperson as a victim. Nor does a person from the group used as a slur need be present or exposed to the slur in question. Just the utterance as such is criminal.
So if you and me were to stand ata bus stop, chatting about this and that I would quip "If moslems are so effing big on sharia, why don't we just set the courts to hand out punishments according to scripture for moslem criminals?" and a bystander over-hears this and files a complaint, that'd technically be enough to land us both a fine, and possibly me in prison for a couple of months.
There's an ex-cop who has - backed by the Socialist Democrat party - made it into a business of his to trawl the internet for utternaces that might qualify. He then files a complaint, and tries to troll his target into making disparaging statements about him sohe can then sue for defamation/slander/libel (we don't really differentiate between those the way british/US law does) and damages.
And as swedish law on defamtion et al makes no allowance for whether the information published or uttered is factually true...
The Party and the System itself uses such persons as he to run rings around the laws preventing private spy operations and other such SA-like Freikorps, like Antifa and EXPO.
And all judges and most prosecutors are political appointees.
There are lots of reasons swedes like me refer to Sweden of today as the DDR v2.0, unironically.
That the Covid-response differed was simply because of lack of resources, totally fumbled logistics and pure incompetence, not because people in office or in agencies opposed it.
I used to be constantly horrified by the awful news coming out of Sweden about crime, bombings, societal disruption etc, but it got to be too much. One can only have so much sympathy for people who keep enthusiastically voting for the destruction of their society. Now, whenever I hear surreal, absurdist news about Sweden such as what you posted here about the bizarre laws, I just shrug. It seems to me that Sweden, as a coherent, liberal Western society is lost, and it is now regressing to some sort of chaotic middle eastern shambles. It's ghastly, but what's to be done?
There's probably a good masters thesis or perhaps even a PhD in investigating the correlation between wearing bizarrely shaped and sized spectacles and having (and loudly espousing) bizarre beliefs about the world. The phenomenon seems to be everywhere.
Is there causation in there? Does wearing a pair of crazy looking specs cause people to start saying crazy things...etc...
Funny that “Asian” lumps Tamil Brahmins, South Koreans, Dalit Muslims, Hmong, Uighur, Adivasi, etc all together. Funny also how family and cultural traditions of prizing scholarship are treated like handicaps. (Incidentally I believe I was a beneficiary of such admissions policies— identifying “childhood hardship and lack of cultural support for education” as special factors for admission— and I’ve done nothing useful with my Ivy League degree because honestly, it’s really hard without the structural support of family and culture, and also I don’t care about the same stupid stuff they care about, as it turns out. I wasted some money and they wasted my spot. Then again, I’m not dead yet.)
Yup - in the UK we lump a vast range of different cultures under the label of "Asian". I guess it's easier than trying to figure out what the difference is between a Thai and a Pakistani (culturally speaking).
Many would say I've done nothing useful with my degree either! 🤣
Imagine how we up here feel when called "caucasian" by americans. You've ever seen people from the Kaukasus? We look nothing like them and have no cultural links.
VEGEMITE, old horse. VEGEMITE is the way that wins to wealth, Corky m'boy.
And - it really should go without saying - only ever on hot buttered toast.
_The Lovely_ routinely befouls CRUMPETS with Vegemite - when Jesus himself declared that
>>> "If ye have a crumpet and a cloak, but no Golden Syrup, sell your garment and buy some Golden Syrup you absolute Herbert. <<<
For sandwiches, PROMITE's the stuff: slightly sweeter and more spreadable. We were forced to eat it as kiddies because it was cheaper than VEGEMITE and we were a bit poor.
In extremis, Jesus would allow a sandwich as follows:
butter (moderate);
Vegemite (sparingly);
Iceberg Lettuce (abundant);
'Chicken' crisps (one layer; two if you're showing off).
... on white square 'supermarket' bread, as the Lord intended.
Sounds heretical, but as Gandhi might once have quipped about violent uprising: "Don't knock it until you've tried it".
The only way to fight back against this constant barrage of absurd wokeness is to simply refuse to submit to the idiocy of it all. If saying that only women can have babies, that women are adult, human females, that men cannot have periods, that the jabs are useless at best and deadly at worst, that masks are Kabuki theater and lots of trannies are groomers gets me put in the pokey...we’ll, I hope I’ll
have lots of other sane folks there to keep me company. I will never buy in to their crazy. Period. Bravery is contagious. When all the sane folks refuse to follow along other will join them and end this nonsense. Seriously, we are living in a pathetic, weak, perverse and mentally ill world. We don’t need to accept any of it.
Spreading the wisdom of Rudolf Rigger is a better way to fight Wokeism. Today’s article has been shared with Fascistbook friends and actual friends.
I often share his posts with my leftist/work friends and family. Though I highly doubt any of them read it.
Thanks Cindy
Historically I have always classed myself as a bit of a 'lefty' - I've never voted for the Conservative party (the right wing one) here in the UK.
But these days I find that commentators on the 'right' (or those who get labelled as being on the 'right') seem to be the only ones whose arguments make any sense.
I seem to have many of the same 'leftish' principles intact - but I think I'd probably be classed as a rabid far-right nutjob by many these days. It's kinda odd.
I too have been moved from “left-of-center” to “far-right extremist” over the past several years. Not that I’ve changed much. It just seems they keep moving the center line further and further left so I’m now a right-wing extremist.
But then…in the USA being pro-life, smaller government, protected borders, pandemic/vaccine questioner, and anti-child sex grooming are all considered “fascist”, Nazi viewpoints so…
Thanks Terence
I'm not sure I'd call it 'wisdom' myself - I wish I had some. I might say something useful if I did, instead of snarking away in frustration at the lunacy. But your kindness and appreciation is very much appreciated!
Theoretical physicist Rudolf Rigger is a practical genius with a fabulous sense of humour. And (not knowing anything about him) I can’t say enough good things about his Vietnamese friend Wot Da Phuc. I believe in Aristotle’s Golden Mean and it is therefore nice to know that the same island that produced King Charles, Beautiful Camilla and Struggling Prince Harry also produced Professor Rigger.
You are far too kind Terence - but I do appreciate your support
One of my former professors, now friend, is an expert on logical fallacies. On many occasions in class and out we discussed the slippery slope in the form of me saying that <blank> would absolutely be followed by <blank>, and him saying that my argument was fallacious. I cannot recall a single time where I was ultimately proven wrong. As I often argued with my friend the slippery slope is not really a fallacy. Unlike the other fallacies of presumption the slippery slope doesn't rely upon the use of emotional language or circular reasoning. The slippery slope, though not always proven true or accurate, is based upon the logical progression of steps to reach a desired outcome.
Like I told her just the tip.
I think we should sometimes listen to the wisdom of our forebears. My mum was fond of the phrase "give 'em and inch, and they'll take a mile".
It might not have been called "the slippery slope", but everyone knew about it.
The slippery slope has definitely been lubed up, and it is rapidly approaching its asymptote.
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME!!!
What about Vegemite?
Haha, yes. RR is an “anti-Vegemiter”.
Vegemite is just a poor imitator - Marmite (the original) is still a far superior product 😜
"Is there an acceptable proportion of Asians? The mind boggles. I have difficulty comprehending the mindset required to even think such a sentence, let alone publish it."
To try to steelman this, I guess it's important to ask: acceptable to who? Admittance to elite American universities is a crucial first step towards admission to the elite of American society, and it is possible that, if the public see that a hugely disproportionate fraction of their ruling class are visibly foreign, then for World On Fire / market-dominant minority reasons, that could create ethnic tensions, rioting etc. that would not otherwise happen. (A similar argument applies for admitting a larger fraction of African-Americans than would get in on academic merit alone, even if in practice that tends to result in importing the intellectual elite of various African countries rather than old-stock American descendents of slaves). Thus it is conceivable that the 'acceptable' number of any given ethnic group from the perspective of those who are trying to socially-engineer ethnic tensions away would be different from the 'acceptable' number from the perspective of someone who cares only about selecting the most intelligent applicants. (Of course, if that is true, then it implies that it might be a bad idea to import large numbers of immigrants from populations that do significantly better academically than your majority population, to avoid them becoming a resented overclass, *and* a bad idea to import large numbers from populations that do significantly worse than your majority, to avoid them becoming a resentful underclass).
None of this is to suggest that US elite university administrators are in fact wisely crafting admissions policy in a way intended to minimize ethnic tensions in the future. But it's a factor worth considering.
Thanks for this - an interesting take and thanks for the steelman.
It's baffling to me because, if we're talking about citizens, then what is being said is that we're going to classify our citizens based on how they appear. We're only going to admit a certain 'acceptable' percentage of people who look like X, and a certain percentage of people who look like Y, and so on.
It would be like restricting the number of people with ginger hair to a certain percentage, or requiring that admittance beyond a certain percentage is 'unacceptable' if one's eyebrows were too long.
The longer we keep on focusing on how people look, and making this such an **important** factor, the longer all this shit continues. I say let the chips fall as they may.
But, but, but, systemic wibble woo and structural ting tong . . . .
Maybe - but the evidence doesn't really stack up too well for these being a *major* factor.
In Sweden, you can and will be fined or sent to prison for the "wrong" opinion as defined and decided by court on an arbitrary case-by-case basis.
You can also be sent to prison for stating facts, if these facts run counter to allowed opinion or speech, expression et c. depending on your race and faith.
Even if you source your claims and use mainstream scientific knowledge, such as different populations having vastly different IQs, propensity for violence, propensity for rape, and how this correlates perfectly with the most troublesome races almost exclusively marrying their first cousins, uncles or aunts for centuries or more.
Even writing it like that can get me landed in jail, despite no names being used, since the prosecutor would argue that I'm banking on everyone knowing which groups I mean, and that I am therefore knowingly disparaging these "minorities".
Reporting on this may damage Sweden's reputation and status abroad, which is (from January 1st) a crime too. You can't talk about what you can't talk about or why you can't talk about what you can't talk about.
And most people go along, tut-tuts at the right place following the script they've been conditioned to respmond to, and happily spread slander about dissenters, splitters and wrong'uns. All the while wringing their hands about the horrors of nations such as Romania or Poland...
Truly it is written, Ignorance is Strength.
wow - so despite distinguishing itself by having one of the most sane responses to covid - we find that Sweden, in other respects, is several Lagkaptens short of an office.
Oh aye, we've had speech laws for several decades now. It all started with a nutter more than 50 years ago, who had it in for a jewish colleague. So a law was drafted, making slurs based on being a jew ciminal. From there it's snowballed into a tool of oppression of dissent.
The text of the law is very ambiguous too. There doesn't need to be a realperson as a victim. Nor does a person from the group used as a slur need be present or exposed to the slur in question. Just the utterance as such is criminal.
So if you and me were to stand ata bus stop, chatting about this and that I would quip "If moslems are so effing big on sharia, why don't we just set the courts to hand out punishments according to scripture for moslem criminals?" and a bystander over-hears this and files a complaint, that'd technically be enough to land us both a fine, and possibly me in prison for a couple of months.
There's an ex-cop who has - backed by the Socialist Democrat party - made it into a business of his to trawl the internet for utternaces that might qualify. He then files a complaint, and tries to troll his target into making disparaging statements about him sohe can then sue for defamation/slander/libel (we don't really differentiate between those the way british/US law does) and damages.
And as swedish law on defamtion et al makes no allowance for whether the information published or uttered is factually true...
The Party and the System itself uses such persons as he to run rings around the laws preventing private spy operations and other such SA-like Freikorps, like Antifa and EXPO.
And all judges and most prosecutors are political appointees.
There are lots of reasons swedes like me refer to Sweden of today as the DDR v2.0, unironically.
That the Covid-response differed was simply because of lack of resources, totally fumbled logistics and pure incompetence, not because people in office or in agencies opposed it.
I used to be constantly horrified by the awful news coming out of Sweden about crime, bombings, societal disruption etc, but it got to be too much. One can only have so much sympathy for people who keep enthusiastically voting for the destruction of their society. Now, whenever I hear surreal, absurdist news about Sweden such as what you posted here about the bizarre laws, I just shrug. It seems to me that Sweden, as a coherent, liberal Western society is lost, and it is now regressing to some sort of chaotic middle eastern shambles. It's ghastly, but what's to be done?
"What's to be done?"
Well. There's lots to be done, but what's to be done is too unpalatable to talk about even hypothetically, due to generations of conditioning.
Let's just say that Enoch Powell was 100% correct and leave it at that.
There's probably a good masters thesis or perhaps even a PhD in investigating the correlation between wearing bizarrely shaped and sized spectacles and having (and loudly espousing) bizarre beliefs about the world. The phenomenon seems to be everywhere.
Is there causation in there? Does wearing a pair of crazy looking specs cause people to start saying crazy things...etc...
Monumental guffaw from this reader. “Several spikes short of a virus” might just gain traction!
Oh, and just for the record, Vegemite is better. 😉
Thanks Mudcrab - much appreciated.
Vegemite might just about be acceptable as an additive to Fosters. It would still be undrinkable, just a little less undrinkable than before.
Funny that “Asian” lumps Tamil Brahmins, South Koreans, Dalit Muslims, Hmong, Uighur, Adivasi, etc all together. Funny also how family and cultural traditions of prizing scholarship are treated like handicaps. (Incidentally I believe I was a beneficiary of such admissions policies— identifying “childhood hardship and lack of cultural support for education” as special factors for admission— and I’ve done nothing useful with my Ivy League degree because honestly, it’s really hard without the structural support of family and culture, and also I don’t care about the same stupid stuff they care about, as it turns out. I wasted some money and they wasted my spot. Then again, I’m not dead yet.)
Yup - in the UK we lump a vast range of different cultures under the label of "Asian". I guess it's easier than trying to figure out what the difference is between a Thai and a Pakistani (culturally speaking).
Many would say I've done nothing useful with my degree either! 🤣
Imagine how we up here feel when called "caucasian" by americans. You've ever seen people from the Kaukasus? We look nothing like them and have no cultural links.
Marmite - yuk.
VEGEMITE, old horse. VEGEMITE is the way that wins to wealth, Corky m'boy.
And - it really should go without saying - only ever on hot buttered toast.
_The Lovely_ routinely befouls CRUMPETS with Vegemite - when Jesus himself declared that
>>> "If ye have a crumpet and a cloak, but no Golden Syrup, sell your garment and buy some Golden Syrup you absolute Herbert. <<<
For sandwiches, PROMITE's the stuff: slightly sweeter and more spreadable. We were forced to eat it as kiddies because it was cheaper than VEGEMITE and we were a bit poor.
In extremis, Jesus would allow a sandwich as follows:
butter (moderate);
Vegemite (sparingly);
Iceberg Lettuce (abundant);
'Chicken' crisps (one layer; two if you're showing off).
... on white square 'supermarket' bread, as the Lord intended.
Sounds heretical, but as Gandhi might once have quipped about violent uprising: "Don't knock it until you've tried it".