Homogeneity is our strength

I dislike Libertarians because they're politics are negative (in a philosophical sense) and as unrealistic and Utopian as any socialist. They are often obsessed with minor issues like vaping, and miss the big picture issues like immigration. They are cult-like in their worship of Hayek, Mises, etc. I've been trolling Catallaxy for a couple of months, very irregularly - perhaps five posts in total. My latest troll: white supremacists exist in the mind of libertards who want to virtue-signal while cucking for the Left’s framing of their opponents as such. basically: libertardianism = cuckoldry. discuss. The context is not really important, as I am just trolling for a reaction, but if you want to read the thread in full: David Leyonhjelm. Don’t let the terrorists and supremacists win The more I thought about my troll the more I realised it was true! Not that Libertarians are actual cucks (though that would certainly be permitted under their morality), but that Libertar...

Much has been written about this, so I will only give a short answer. Reason means reflecting on something and working out how it can achieve, or not achieve, some end goal.

What is meant by 'living according to nature'? It involves: Reflecting on the nature of humans To be honest in this day and age, you must take a Evolutionary perspective and see humans as highly evolved animals. You must remove all Political Correctness and other cultural indoctrination from your understanding. You don't need to be an expert on human behaviour, but you must respect scientific fields such as biology and neuroscience. Although more speculative in nature, evolutionary psychology is also insightful. Avoid Politically-Correct fake 'science' like Sociology. Understand why we were created and our place in society  Having reflected on human nature, you will have an understanding of human instincts and motivations. You should realise that though we may try, human beings cannot overcome their nature, but they can pervert it, unlike other animals. This is owing to humans susceptibility to indoctrination though their advanced cognitive abilities. With...

He's a proxy for white people.

Your faith has made you weak and you sure af aren't inheriting the earth, you're helping to throw it away. Go read or watch a few YT vids about Kierkegaard, a Christian, then we can have a good conversation about different lifestyles (hedonistic vs ethical vs Christian life of faith). From reading him I hope you find that Christianity cannot be justified by argument/reason/logic/apologetics. It requires a leap of faith, because the Christian worldview is absurd. Christianity makes no sense within an Enlightenment logical/scientific worldview -- which is not to say such a worldview is the limit of human experience, far from it. The mystery of God, unknown except though faith, was lost during the Enlightenment. The attempt to rationalise Christianity within a scientific framework effectively made God an idol of human intellectual agency. That idol was smashed and led to the nihilism that many people still suffer today. The Brother Karamazov tells of this, as does Nietzsche and ...

Another made-up 'phobia': do you think people are naturally and inescapably xenophobes - it is wired to people's brains as a result of evolution? how 'diverse' is your suburb and social circle? do you look your doors at night? Everyone is 'xenophobic', it's in there biology. If you say you're not 'xenophobic', you're a liar. If everyone is xenophobic by nature, it's not really a 'phobia' now is it?

The Medieval world offered an ordered universe where Christ would someday return. That got crushed by the Enlightenment in favour of the eschatology of 'progress'. Then that was supplanted after the Moon Landing by a focus of humanitarianism; also economic liberalism after the fall of the Berlin Wall and collapse of the Soviet Union. There was some talk of a Pax Americana/NWO (e.g. "exporting democracy") under Bush Snr/Clinton/Bush Jr but Neocons couldn't bring the masses along due to all the new problems they created and the big lies of WMDs, blatant profiteering, etc. Pax Americana was perhaps the last grand vision. The Social Justice cult is a reaction to loss of all grand narratives where adherents seek to find meaning in identitarian victimhood and resentment. Climate Change handwringing also provides some meaning and connectedness for the Left. There is still a struggle between Global Capitalism/Global Bureaucracy and traditional national community sentiment...

There is always an order to society, whether people are aware of it or not. Under Monarchies, the order is clear. The ruling elite is supported ideologically by the priesthood. Under democracies, the order is obfuscated and misleadingly seen as determined by the popular vote of free-thinking individuals. In reality, the ruling class is more powerful than a Monarch because it governs through proxies (politicians and public servants) and 'soft power' (finance, media, education, lobby groups, NGOs) and therefore is less vulnerable to attack. Democracy exists to maintain the soft power of elites. Monarchy is the more 'natural' order and the most beneficial to the tribe. It unites a people in common cause and eliminates 'identity politics' as everyone has a common understanding of gender and productive roles.

Scientists may say 'nature' as the term is commonly used is not a metaphysics. They're wrong, however unlike other metaphysics it's just a non-anthropocentric, unadorned, undogmatic (mostly, supposedly), empirically-based metaphysics. Scientific understanding of 'nature' is mostly unchanged from Aristotle, except that science has removed Aristotle's rich teleological phenomenology, which it finds redundant. Scientists can certainly work with nature without Aristotle's enhanced meanings, but they often assign nature more meaning than they admit. Scientists such as Richard Dawkins often aestheticize and spiritualise 'nature'. They may also assign a weak or strong teleology and other attributes - though, unlike other metaphysicians, most scientists would recognise these as human projections if you challenged them.

tbh I don't know why these guys don't just convert to Islam: 4 obedient wives + 20 children + Centrelink benefits + don't need to work -- modern-day Genghis Khan! but seriously, there's much reason for men in particular to be disenchanted with this feminised/gayised society women can cope better as they more conciliatory generally and are benefiting from extra gibs and social status. however, as they grow older and become cat ladies, they grow increasingly resentful and channel their energies into lame left-wing, virtue-signalling causes as a substitute for a fulfilling role as a family matriarch and care-giver the alpha chads are still doing well, because they can simply ignore all the feminine/gay stuff and the girls still want them the more reflective/reserved lads are the ones doing it tough. I don't know much about MGTOW and don't care to know more. It is a scientific reality that we are made and driven to pass on our genes, so they should be trying to do t...

Generally when religious or ancient philosophical texts refer to 'soul' they leave the concept vague. The Soul is the brain reflecting on itself and the world, or simply 'reflecting'. In amusing Kierkegaardian-Hegel-pisstake language, it is 'the process of the self relating to the self.' Aristotle's notion of soul is a bit different, but that peculiar notion will definitely discussed in a later post.

Cultural Marxist is not Marxist in the traditional sense. There are no Marxists in terms of working class advocacy nowadays. Union membership continues to decline and most unions that remain survive through providing financial services like superannuation. The only Marxists are 'Cultural Marxists' and I don't think Marx would agree with them - why? Because Cultural Marxists (CMs) support Capitalism and oppress the working class. Cultural Marxism, for example, the promotion of 'diversity' and privileges for designed victimhood classes (female, POC, etc.) is pushed by the largest corporations and mass media. Large corporations recognise that CM is no threat to them and they actually use it to promote themselves and increase profit. CMs think the working class is bigoted, uneducated backwards, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc. It will take you less than a minute to find evidence of this on social media and use of anti-working class slurs like 'bogan'. C...

Leftism is the perfect upper-middle class morality. They aren't even pretending they care for the working class nowadays. They hate those 'bigoted bogans'. It's all about pretending to care about designed victim classes and climate change. Key to this morality is no personal responsibility for the issue, no personal cost for the advocate. It's others: government, corporates, evil right-right wingers that need to change. All the Leftist needs to do is point the finger and feel morally superior. The Leftist can advocate for diversity and illegal economic migrants (AKA 'refugees') because they know such people won't be moving to their middle class suburb. Leftists won't feel the financial burden of supporting them at all. They can wring their hands about climate change and renewables all they like, because again, there is no personal cost that they can't comfortably bare. The other function of Leftism is to enhance one's social status....

A couple of theories: Challenge from the ascendency of Christianity, which appealed to the masses of slaves in Ancient Rome and later the noble classes Loss of persuasive teachers after Epictetus (Marcus Aurelius came after Epictetus but he was no teacher himself) Challenge from Christianity  It's a pity more Christians weren't persecuted so that that Stoicism had more opportunity to flourish. Though Christianity was always going to win out - it offered an afterlife, an imminent Kingdom of God, greater fellowship and was attuned to the resentment of masses of slaves in ancient Rome. On the contrary Stoicism offered tranquility, but only through personal effort, self-responsibilty and discipline. Stoics had no one to blame for their problems but themselves. Not attractive to the resentful liberal, now more than ever. Loss of persuasive teachers I've been learning more about Stoicism lately, but not reading the original sources. I want to develop background knowle...

Honest people are often attacked as 'racist' by Leftists. For too many years they have responded poorly. This post outlines some good and bad responses to the malicious 'racist' charge.

Western civilisation versus the Left Democracy => Party/union rep control Representation => Commissions, e.g. AHRC Rule of law => Social justice Individual liberty => Political correctness Free will => Privilege, structural determinants Personal responsibility => Blaming government not doing enough and whites, males, etc. Free speech => Hate speech Science => Subjectivity Innovation => Disregard, distribute what already exists, don't create Meritocracy / Colour-blindness => Identity politics Entrepreneurship => Parasitism Unique to Australia Fair go => quotas, bias towards POC and women Mateship => hall monitoring Friendliness: gidday, hows it going => Political correct language and offence-taking High trust => suspicion and tribal conflict

Culture war = Race war Western civilization = white civilization Democracy = racial head count Fact check = cover up/distort Diversity = division (literally, etymologically equivalent) Multiculturalism = tribal warfare Mass immigration = invasion Conversation = propaganda Greatest strength = tearing the social fabric apart 'Whiteness' = white people (kind of obvious, but the Academic Left try to pretend)

Some ugly aspects of the Left that drive people away Having your identity unfairly judged. anti-male Feminist, anti-white ideologues Exposure to gross hypocrisy. e.g. support for Socialism regimes Leftist violence Snobbery/sneering The physical ugliness of the Left: soyboys, cat ladies. Leftists are generally ugly.

The political spectrum is oversimplified and inadequate as most people recognise. The Political Compass (https://www.politicalcompass.org/) is better, but still has its faults. The dichotomy assumes symmetry between Left and Right, which is an assumption few people ever considered. There is no symmetry. If you are looking to confirm an a priori symmetry you are wrong. Yes, you can find some similarities, but 'some similarities' is not symmetry at all. Even 'many similarities' would not imply symmetry. The Right does have ideologues (Libertarians), but they are far fewer in number than the Left. Aside form Libertarians, the Left projects and invents ideologues on the Right so that they don't need to deal in reality and pretend only a power struggle exists. The biggest difference between Left and Right is their attitude to the world generally: The Left is ideological, resents their life and the current state of the world, and seek to socially engineer societ...

The extent to which people are unknowingly/unreflectively influenced by others is grossly underestimated. We like to pretend that we've come to our conclusions based on evidence and informed opinion, but that's B.S (mostly). We are influenced by what we are exposed to - period. Yes, we can reject a minority of things we are exposed to based on previous experience and reflection, but we pretend we do this much more than we actually do. We are a blank slate and we are mostly not in control of the quill. We don't realise this because of our myth of 'free will', which is a lie, but a lie nearly everyone in the West believes in. This lie persists because it fits neatly into our framework of moral accountability. It is also comforting to people who feel pressure and obligation. Why must the will be 'free '? Why not partially or full determined? I don't like analytical philosophy because it's generally pointless, but in this case, using Ockham...

Heritage defines a country. So we're mostly British, but still distinct from the Brits in that we're more egalitarian ("we don't like stuck-up stickybeaks here") and more "rugged" owing to our convict pioneering ancestry. Of course, we've experienced the dysphoria of multiculturalism since the 60s which has resulted in some loss of identity and lower levels of social cohesion and trust. However, multiculturalism and rootless cosmopolitanism are a growing phenomenon in all western countries and not distinctively Australian. Multiculturalism has no inherent value, as we have all the recipes now. We are struggling with cosmopolitan consumerism like many countries. It produces deracinated individuals seeking fulfilment through consumption. The good news is that our laws and mores are still distinctively mono-cultural and fantastic. We still have relatively high levels of social trust, infrastructure, social services, and wealth for toil, which is why...

The propaganda has been coming out strong for the last two months or so. It's just a diversion to prolong the Population Ponzi has hard and fast as possible. It's obvious that too much too much immigration is the problem, not where those migrants. The state cannot dictate where people must live. Ethnic enclaves have developed because new migrants prefer to live with their own. Immigration only benefits capital: more consumption, more bank lending, increase in apartment/house prices for property developers. There is a huge migrant rent-seeking industry too. Universities have turned into visa factories. Government budgets look better, but they lie, per capita GDP goes backward. The profits of immigration are privatised while the losses are socialised, all while social trust and cohesion continues to fall apart. You will find many shills for immigration in the media and university. Cui bono.

These pampered middle class brats are the useful idiots of the Establishment. They are hysterically conformist grandstanders. They are massively pro-capitalist and trendily consumerist, despite their virtue-signalling. There is not one major policy they don't agree with the elites on, be that open borders, mass immigration, multiculturalism, hedonic materialism, etc. They are extremely racist too: the anti-white racism is obvious, but the racism toward POCs manifests in treating them like pets, low expectations/paternalism and segregating themselves in white neighbourhoods while preaching the benefits of diversity. Everyone outside their cult sees through them. Most are just larping idiots, so for the most part they can be ignored. The violent ones eventually come undone, either through mockery or being turned into vegetables by the Proud Boys or others.