I got nothin’, so here’s this.
A Honky in Newark. “Freelance urban sociology,” as we might call it, is pretty interesting. I grew up in a major Southern metro, so I got to see all the hyphen-Americans without the hyphen — Chinatown, Little Saigon, Caracas del Norte, and, of course, the 100% Black enclaves. It’s quite a show. Cruising through the all-Black areas, it’s hard not to sympathize with Liberals’ “poverty causes crime” mantra. If you haven’t had this experience yourself, watch a season of The Wire. Minus a few regional variations — “lake trout,” snow — The Wire’s Baltimore could be any urban Black area in America. Season 4, especially, is heartbreaking — what chance in hell do those poor kids have?
And yet…. race. Always race. Black Americans are just different, in ways that are obvious to everyone when it’s politically convenient to notice them (e.g. in any African-American Studies program, where this is the bedrock premise). As your second pass around the block will prove, they’re not Africans — Africans-from-Africa tend to be openly contemptuous of American Blacks, especially when forced to live among them — but they’re not White Americans, either, even when forced to act approximately like them. The fact that they were forced to act that way, for a full century, pushes folks who know their history pretty far into the “race realism” camp. Culture isn’t genetics, and genetics isn’t culture, but they have a dialectical relationship — American Blacks are the way they are, one is increasingly forced to conclude, because they can’t be any other way.
And this is where the keyboard warriors of the HBD crowd jump into the comments with things like “end the welfare checks, close the freeways, and the problem takes care of itself.” And you wonder why you get called Nazis. You do realize you’re talking about genocide, right?
There’s really only one way to get very different groups to coexist peacefully. It’s incompatible with a whole bunch of seemingly fundamental-to-Americanness stuff like “representative government.” This is not the world we want, but it’s the world we have. Give me a realistic plan to keep the peace when the credit bubble bursts — as it must — that doesn’t involve dictatorship, or you haven’t thought this “HBD” thing through.
Revolt of the Revolting. Speaking of not thinking things through, here’s some half-assed Nietzsche for you:
The entire social justice/aggrotolerance/equalism movement is a revolt by the ugly and freakish against the beautiful and normal. The ideology has no morality nor purpose and exists only to substantiate in political radicalization the aggrieved spitefulness of life’s losers.
True enough. This is “slave morality,” and ol’ Friedrich wrote about 100,000 words on it. Which makes us — “the beautiful and normal,” oxymoronic though that is — the ubermenschen, I suppose. But Nietzsche was obviously wrong about a few important things, starting with that whole “ubermensch” bit.
The transvaluation of values he preached has already happened. It’s impossible to be more overtly anti-Christian than “Social Justice,” and SocJus — “Cultural Marxism” is far more accurate — is the law of the land. Nobody turns 19th century European values further on their head than transsexuals, for instance, and look where questioning them gets you. Nietzsche’s 19th century “slave morality” brought us the prosperity from which “social justice” is an organic outgrowth. But then again, Nietzsche, a philologist by training, thought Socrates turned the Athenians into a bunch of girly men. I doubt he’d be much of a Pickup Artist.
Teacher stops having sex with high school sophomore who wore MAGA hat to class. Satire, I realize, but satire only works when it’s true. I guess it’s Nietzsche Day here at Rotten Chestnuts, as the feminists, via bargain-bin Nietzsche-wannabe Michel Foucault, actually got this one right. Sex outside of a monogamous, procreative relationship — let’s call it “marriage,” for convenience — really is exploitative* (the more thoughtful PUAs, like RooshV, admit it**). As our social dilithium crystals overload and the sexual polarities reverse, you see women acting like men and men acting like women. Why do grade school teachers, some of them quite attractive, go for their students instead of guys their own age?
Simple: They get off on the power imbalance. Sex isn’t about the sex act for lots of men — see Elliot Rodger, Alik Minassian, Nicholas Cruz, and suchlike losers. If all they needed was to get laid, they could’ve hired a professional, who would look exactly like they wanted, do anything they wanted… but none of them even considered it. Rather, they felt they deserved a certain type of girlfriend. That type, obviously, is high status — hot, blonde, a cheerleader — which would mean they, Rodger et al, had the goods to merit that type of girl. Google up pictures of these losers. They weren’t so fugly that a girlfriend, possibly even an objectively attractive one, was out of reach. The point wasn’t the girl, much less sex with the girl. The point was the type of girl, and the validation that provides — i.e. the power imbalance, because, as everyone knows, the head cheerleader only goes out with the quarterback.
Same deal with the reverse-Lolita teachers. The quarterback may rule the school, but he still has to ask his teacher for permission to go to the bathroom. If she seduces him, her dominance is complete. It’s twisted, obviously, but if you assume that modern women act more and more like how they think stereotypical men act, it all makes perfect sense.
UPDATE: Secondary boycotts. This is the kind of thing I was trying to get at in my Chamber of Commerce Republicans post, below. I no longer believe it’s possible to fix SJWs. Their brains are broken, and short of a total amygdala replacement they are forever lost. But SJWs are actually a small minority. The professional Left uses them as useful idiots, knowing that the professional “Right” would never dare push back against them.
What I suggest, then — hypothetically, of course, since I disavow all this — is a kind of “secondary boycott” of the GOP. All it would take to defeat the Democratic Party is for the Republican Party to stop enabling them. Stiffen the GOP’s spine, and “antifa” collapses. But, I’m told, the GOP only does what it does because it’s in the Chamber of Commerce’s pocket. Well then, let’s stiffen the Chamber of Commerce’s spine a little bit. We can’t bring any pressure to bear on the big boys in Washington, but your local CofC? Them we can get to. If “boycott” — or, heaven forbid, “pressure” — sets your delicate heart aflutter, we could call it a Concentrated Niceness Offensive or a Coordinated Civility Campaign or something. Just say hi. A whole bunch of nice, normal Americans saying hi, at their work, at their places of business, on public streets, near their homes…. that would concentrate their minds wonderfully, one would think. After all, it works like gangbusters on us.
But of course, I would never suggest such a thing. I disavow it all.
*Sure it is, if you think it through. Sex without love — “hookups,” “pickups,” whatever — are purely transactional. You want it, she wants it, it’s an all-but-capitalistic exchange (this is the starting point for all those feminist arguments about how all heterosexual sex is either prostitution or rape, I realize, but that’s for another day). “Getting more than you give” is the cornerstone of capitalist exchange. Ergo — Latin!! — hookups are exploitative. QED.
**Read your Nietzsche, Roosh. Then read the Christian critiques of Nietzsche (G.K. Chesterton has a good one). Then come on over to the Light Side of the Force.Loading Likes...