Botond173
1yr ago
To quote a Swedish white nationalist from the old subreddit who made the same argument 3 years ago:
The big problem in the long term for the alt right is that America is so suburban. Suburbs are very blue pilling. When whites left cities in the 60s after being forced out by race riots they moved to suburbs and their views on race did a 180. We see similar trends in Europe where suburbia is the one place where nationalist groups can't make progress at all. In Sweden the weakest results for the Sweden democrats in every election has been suburban areas around Stockholm. Those areas are solidly neoliberal. Unfortunately for American nationalists urban areas are small, rural areas are too spread out and the suburban population dominates white people. The suburban demographic is naturally materialistic, rootless, individualist and globalist.
Botond173
1yr ago
The former Canadian ambassador to Israel came on to chastise people who accused her of dual loyalty during her tenure and demands for anyone who believes that to speak up.
Technically speaking, I'm sure she's right. It seems very obvious that her loyalty is not dual indeed.
Botond173
2yr ago
For a great segment of single women, probably a majority of those who are following social media in the first place, it cuts too close to the bone. It's too horrendous. So I can understand the reactions.
Botond173
4mo ago
Plate-spinning + soft harems = promiscuity, as preferred by promiscuous men
Serial monogamy = promiscuity, as preferred by promiscuous women
Society generally considers the former promiscuity but not the latter. It's important in cases such as this to keep this in mind.
Botond173
5mo ago
Carter finds more success in the arena of foreign policy, where instead of dealing with mercurial politicians from his own country, he can deal with mercurial politicians from other countries. He starts by tackling the third rail of the Panama Canal. The United States built the Canal by essentially colonizing the part of Panama it runs through, and obviously, the Panamanians aren’t super cool with that. The U.S. government has been kicking the can down the road since the LBJ era by continually promising to return sovereignty over the canal to Panama eventually, and after over a decade of “eventually,” the Panamanians are getting impatient.
The politically easy move for Carter would be to drag out the negotiations until the canal becomes the next president’s problem, just as Johnson, Nixon, and Ford all did before him. But for better or for worse, Carter almost never does the politically easy thing. “It’s obvious we cheated the Panamanians out of their canal,” he says, and he negotiates a treaty in which ownership of the canal is turned over to Panama, in exchange for the U.S.’s right to militarily ensure its “neutral operation.” It’s a clever diplomatic solution—Panama gets nominal ownership while we retain all the benefits ownership provides—but the American public hates it. To the average voter, it feels like we’re just giving some random country “our” canal.
To get the treaty approved by the Senate, Carter plays the congressional negotiating game well for the first and maybe only time in his presidency. He lobbies heavily for his treaty with every senator, cutting individual deals with each of them as needed. One even goes so far as to say that in exchange for his vote, Carter has to… wait for it… read an entire semantics textbook the senator wrote back when he was a professor. Oh, and Carter also has to tell him what he thinks of it, in detail, to prove he actually read it. Carter is appalled, but he grits his teeth and reads the book. It’s a good thing he does, because the Senate ratifies the treaty by a single vote. Although it remains unpopular with the general public (five senators later lose their seats over their yes votes), those in the know understand that Carter cut a great deal for America. Panamanian dictator Omar Torrijos knows it too. Ashamed of his poor negotiating skills, he gets visibly drunk at the signing ceremony and falls out of his chair. He also confesses that if the negotiations had broken down, he would have just had the military destroy the entire canal out of spite.
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/your-book-review-the-outlier
(emphasis mine)
Botond173
11mo ago
So, a couple of months ago (I think - time is a flat circle), there was a conversation and some slight complaining about how center-right parties in Europe never work with "far-right" parties, and how that's proof that the elite are against the votes, etc. and it's actually unfair the center-right aligns with the center-left instead of the far-right and there was even some talk it was somehow undemocratic.
As a dissident rightist I’d offer a different point of view.
It’s not only that center-right parties in (at least) France and Germany (in this context) never work with far-right parties; that’s just the less important half of the story. It’s that they’re willing to cooperate with any sort of left-wing extremist groups – i.e. withdrawing their candidates in the 2nd round and calling on their supporters to vote for the leftist bloc that includes those extremists, for example – in order to keep the far right in a political quarantine. Again, I’m sure there’s a lot more delicate context to this whole issue and I’m not well-versed in these political events anyway, but that appears to be the crux of the issue.
If these trends continue, and I see no reason to believe that they won’t, we’ll see situations where center-right parties enter governing coalitions with Islamic fundamentalists, Trotskyites, hard-liner Greens, Maoists, various Communists and whatnot just to maintain this political line.
This, in effect, is the mirror image of the Communist argument that imperialism/fascism is capitalism in decay i.e. that the capitalist class will sooner side with literal fascists than to cede power to their class enemies when their regime enters a crisis.
Botond173
11mo ago
I've read a theory by one of the commenters on Steve Sailer's blog that the unprecedented economic prosperity between 1945-73 in the US had the effect of large masses of impulsive, low-IQ people with high time preference from the rural areas of the South and the Midwest moving to Great Migration cities to work in manufacturing (heavy industry in particular). After the oil shocks, stagflation and deindustrialization, it was mostly these people and their descendants who were hit hard, and had no practical means of moving away and getting re-trained to do other things, so they're just stuck there in their misery.
Botond173
1yr ago
except his wife and daughters
Well, yes. That's the point. "Men had authority over women in return, similar to how parents protect their children but expect their children to obey them."
Botond173
1yr ago
Nobody is lining up to tell you the low time preference alternative is how you get girls, money, family, respect, etc. Everyone can plainly see that is not allowed to work anymore. They're all telling you you should do the hard work and be happy to be a loser on top of it, you uppity bastard.
I'd argue that liberal leftists usually couldn't even give useful dating/relationship/lifestyle advice to single heterosexual men even if they wanted to, which the mostly don't, or it's something they don't consider relevant/necessary.
Botond173
2yr ago
Women 40-45 with Bachelor's degree went from 85% married in 1968 to 75% in 2015, women with a high school degree fell from 80% to 60%.
Many years ago on a long-defunct tradcon blog, I saw this summed up as: marriage is becoming unavailable mostly for women who'd need it the most.
Botond173
2yr ago
A recent event that I’m sure fully counts as culture war is the official removal in Odessa of the monument to the city’s founders, mainly Catherine the Great. The justification, which is rather easy to predict, is that Catherine was a perpetrator of Moskal imperialism who repressed Ukrainian patriots (supposedly they already existed back then), committed cultural genocide and erased Ukrainian nationhood (which obviously we’re also supposed to believe existed back then). There isn’t much to comment on this, I think (though I’ll again point out that Odessa would never have existed in the first place without Catherine), but an educated redditor was eager to point out* the curious fact that the removed monument is actually a replica erected in 2007, largely as a response to the events of the so-called Orange Revolution, as the original was removed (and supposedly destroyed) by the Soviets in 1920. So yes, it was originally removed as an imperialist relic, by powers that the Ukrainian authorities claim later perpetrated genocide specifically against Ukrainians because they were Ukrainians i.e. it was an incident between opposing factions of Ukraine deniers. This is where we’re at, which actually doesn’t surprise me that much because I believe we’ve been in a clown world for a long time.
*https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/zyccgk/catherine_the_great_statue_taken_down_in_odesa/
Call it the Long March through the Institutions and blame the enemy if you like; or note that Mao's physical Long March was a work, that Chiang Kai-Shek (foolishly, as it turned out) let it happen, practically escorted Mao out of town without too much of a fight or too many efforts to undermine Communist columns on the way
Normally I'm against nitpicking, but I think it's warranted in any case such as this when some off-topic example is brought up to support another larger point.
Considering that you seem to have more than just cursory knowledge of the Long March, I assume you're also aware that Chiang's only biological son was in Moscow at this time, practically as a hostage. That alone I think was enough reason for him not to try eliminating the Communists completely. Also, the reason the Long March out of the the Jiangxi / Chiang-hsi Soviet was decided in the first place because the area was successfully attacked and surrounded by the Kuomintang. Chiang was also aware that any warlord whose area of control was entered by the Communist columns would reach out to him for assistance, which would in turn let him grow his power base; and that the Communists were likely to to become convenient co-belligerents in a war against Japan if they were compelled by the Kremlin (which was likely); and that the Communists were effectively playing into his hands by leaving Central China and retreating to an insignificant corner of the Northern Loess Plaetau.
I agree that US Conservatives were and are likely to be quokkas, cucks, short-sighted, naive, complacent etc., and that they have little excuse for their actions, or more precisely, lack thereof. But Chiang or anyone else in 1935 had precisely zero reason to believe that the Long March will eventually, more than 10 years later, provide the Communist with a suitable base to start out from and conquer the entire country.
Botond173
6mo ago
sticking around and thanking us for training them
Why should they? What reason did you give them to? Do you think their attitude is worse than yours?
Half of them within a year have left to take senior admin jobs.
They're gone in 6 months. As soon as you train an American, they are gone.
So what is it? Half, or all?
Botond173
10mo ago
My wife can't wear her old shoes.
Am I the asshole for thinking this isn't that big of a problem?
Botond173
1yr ago
So now Reuters is stating that Russia is a "larger, better-equipped enemy"? Really? This is where we're at, after more than 2 years? They actually have the cheek to say this? Every single liberal leftist normie-oriented talking head I ever encountered kept repeating for months that the orc invasion force is completely undersized for the task, their rapist orc cannon fodder is deserting en masse and running from their positions like rabbits, they ran out of artillery shells and missiles, have no food, no gear, no body armor, no tanks, what equipment they have is all a piece of crap etc.
Botond173
1yr ago
A couple of months ago @2rafa made the following observation:
MeToo represents an organic rebellion by a lot of women against the excesses of the sexual revolution, whether they consciously realise it or not (and most, as you suggest, do not). Is it often misguided, does it often harm innocents, does it broadly fail to present viable alternatives, is it still trapped inside liberal ideology? Of course - it represents a dynamic rage, it is largely impotent, those supporting it have little understanding of the real material causes of their suffering.
Young women raised in a climate of total sexual liberalism are rebelling with the only words they have, in the only way they can. They’re not going to become “trad” overnight, they have no understanding of what that is, they were raised without religion, they are surrounded by a media environment that means they don’t have any real understanding of what reversing it would mean. Still, they know the present situation is untenable.
This got stuck in my mind, as it reminded me of that memorable scene from the original Conan movie ("Crom, I have never prayed to you before. I have no tongue for it."). Still, it appears to me the issue isn't that the women pushing the #MeToo message (although this whole trend appears to be pretty much over) don't have the words to express their dynamic rage, it's that they're terrified of being branded as losers by other women. What is the implication here, after all? It's that what these women actually want to shout out is "I was duped into have crappy sex multiple times even though I didn't even want it". Or, in other words, "it's unfair that we women have to pretend that men are free to have technically consensual casual sex with us without offering anything in exchange". I'm reminded of laws in many Western countries, I guess most of them still officially on the books, specifically punishing false promises of marriage made for the purpose of sex. I guess these women would prefer some sort of this law to still be enforced.
In other words, while modern Western society claims to empower women and girls in various ways, it seems to actually disempower them completely in a crucial aspect.
Am I correct about this?
Botond173
1yr ago
The farce that was the Trayvon Martin scandal and the media circus that accompanied it was definitely a sign of things to come. In retrospect, that is obvious, and the trend isn't abating. That was in early 2012. And I'm sure one thing fueling it was culture warriors following the story on their smartphones all the time and triggering themselves.
Botond173
2yr ago
What the linked article actually says:
The attack ended when a patron grabbed a handgun from the suspect and hit him with it, Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers told The Associated Press. The person who hit the gunman had him pinned down when police arrived, Suthers said.
At this point in time all this makes scant difference. French society is in terminal decline, ideologically captured and on an irreversible path of racial replacement. In this it's not different from other Western European societies, of course, but one aspect that does set it apart is its proven ability to regenerate and transform itself by itself through upheaval and bloodbath. After all, it's no coincidence that the current French republic is the fifth such in history. This is something the Germans or the British will never be capable of doing.
Ignoring all that, it's a great write-up indeed.
Botond173
8mo ago
The so-called sex recession has been discussed both here and on the two old subreddits extensively, and a consensus seems to have formed for a good reason (I think) that it's not actually a sex recession per se but instead a socialization/community recession, a recession of social interaction. That is, it's not only sexual activity that is declining but also every form of socializing and all traditional social circles (churches, clubs, associations etc.), and the sex recession is just one consequence of that.
There are three related phenomena that I remember being occasionally addressed on the subreddits, namely:
- The decline of shopping malls.
- The decline of arcades.
(These two started to take place largely around the turn of the millennium and were exacerbated by the 2008 financial crisis, and can be explained by a combination of social and technological trends but that's not the point here.)
-
The long-term effects of the federal enforcement of 21 as the drinking age, as a phenomenon peculiar to the USA. This meant that people over 21 and under 21 have no venues or social circles left where they can interact, and teenagers who graduate from high school and subsequently lose that place as a venue for socializing basically find no replacement for that, because every conceivable venue that could fill that role caters to people over 21.
-
The proportion of 18-year-olds with driver's licenses has apparently also declined massively, which appears to be a phenomenon tied to the ones above; anyway, I don't remember it ever being discussed here in detail.
All in all, the obvious combined effect of all of this is the massive loss of what sociologists call third places for teenagers in particular. And all this happened before the proliferation and normalization of smartphone/tablet use, which had its own great consequences, of course.
So, to get to my question: have there been studies about this particular phenomenon and its effect on the sex recession or the social lives of teenagers / 20-somethings? Because there must have been one. Was it ever even discussed in mainstream media?
Botond173
1yr ago
The original goal was about gay marriage and gay and lesbian recognition.
Are you sure about the former? Because I've read multiple arguments from gay-supporting liberals that this was specifically not the case. Their narrative is that the talking point that homosexual men are just normal, average people like anyone else who want nothing else but to live as average people in faithful marriages and be accepted as such was manufactured by gay rights activists in the '90s for normie consumption and as a pure PR move. It's not something most homosexual men even agree on.
I find it a bit odd that while John Hajnal has a (concise but detailed) Wikipedia entry, but the Hajnal Line as a concept, in fact, does not, and instead redirects to an entry seemingly arbitrarily entitled "Western European marriage pattern", which appears to have been put together by leftist activists. This applies even more to the entry on Werner Conze, which it links to.
I also find it very odd that Hajnal has no entries in either German, Hungarian or Hebrew on Wikipedia, even though he was the son of Hungarian Jews who moved to Weimar Germany.
On a related note, I find it odd that nuptiality as such has no Wikipedia entry at all, and only has a very short and imprecise entry in online dictionaries. I'm no scholar, but as far as I know, the scientific definition of nuptiality as a concept in demographic studies is the rate of fertile women within a population. As such, the nuptiality rate and its projected change is absolutely crucial to the demographic future of any society.
Botond173
1yr ago
Good point. We might as well argue that "everybody wants clean, safe and efficient public transportation", "everybody wants mentally ill homeless violent drug addicts off the streets", and yet we know what the reality is on the ground.
I'm glad someone pointed this out. That he was introduced to the parliament as the veteran of the "First Ukrainian Division" was a calculated and blatant lie. The 14th Waffen-SS division was named Galizien specifically to avoid any official mention of "Ukraine", as the Nazis did not view it as a legitimate nation, and certainly not as a polity worthy of sovereignty. Then in the last stage of the war when defeat was imminent, the Ukrainian collaborators in Germany started to self-organize as control over them collapsed, and one of their actions was apparently renaming the 14th, which was at that point stationed on Austrian soil, to the "First Ukrainian Division". The Waffen-SS headquarters never sanctioned this, so the change was never official, and thus does not appear in official documents.
Another calculated lie that at least some members of the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada committed was erecting monuments to their military veterans which carry the insignia of the 14th on them, but are nominally dedicated to the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which is a completely different organization and was not founded by the Germans.
More options
Context Copy link