SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
No bio...
User ID: 853
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
11mo ago
· Edited 11mo ago
"Being English has nothing to do with ethnicity", yes I would say that is the perspective of someone who has been brainwashed. How do you think such a prevailing opinion has come to be? Do you think if the culture were different then the public would have a different opinion?
Let's take this story from a few days ago: Anglo-Saxons aren’t real, Cambridge tells students in effort to fight ‘nationalism’
Cambridge is teaching students that Anglo-Saxons did not exist as a distinct ethnic group as part of efforts to undermine “myths of nationalism”...
Its teaching aims to “dismantle the basis of myths of nationalism” by explaining that the Anglo-Saxons were not a distinct ethnic group, according to information from the department.
The department’s approach also aims to show that there were never “coherent” Scottish, Irish and Welsh ethnic identities with ancient roots.
The increased focus on anti-racism comes amid a broader debate over the continued use of terms like “Anglo-Saxon”, with some in academia alleging that the ethnonym is used to support “racist” ideas of a native English identity.
Information provided by the Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic (ASNC) explains its approach to teaching, stating: “Several of the elements discussed above have been expanded to make ASNC teaching more anti-racist.
“One concern has been to address recent concerns over use of the term ‘Anglo-Saxon’ and its perceived connection to ethnic/racial English identity.
“Other aspects of ASNC’s historical modules approach race and ethnicity with reference to the Scandinavian settlement that began in the ninth century.
“In general, ASNC teaching seeks to dismantle the basis of myths of nationalism - that there ever was a ‘British’, ‘English’, ‘Scottish’, ‘Welsh’ or ‘Irish’ people with a coherent and ancient ethnic identity - by showing students just how constructed and contingent these identities are and always have been.”
...
However, the term Anglo-Saxon has recently become embroiled in controversy, with some academics claiming that the term Anglo-Saxon has been used by racists – particularly in the US – to support the idea of an ancient white English identity, and should therefore be dropped.
Cambridge teaching its students that there are no English, Scottish, Irish, or Welsh ethnic identities could be considered brainwashing or education depending on your perspective. But whatever term you choose, the fact remains is that public opinion is indeed trained by these institutions.
These students, as learning agents, are being trained to believe that "being English has nothing to do with ethnicity", which is a complete lie from any reasonable perspective that would acknowledge the biological reality of an English ethnic identity. LLMs are fine-tuned by similar people with similar methods and for similar motives.
If these cultures and institutions rallied around a real history of English ethnic heritage which recognizes the Anglo-Saxons, public opinion would be very different, and public opinion was different when the narrative described in that article was the popular narrative.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
8mo ago
If there's relevant CW topics like the Indian Reservation excavations, or this controversy between Musk and the ADL, I'm going to post about it, sorry. If you're going to perma-ban me, then whatever.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
9mo ago
When they recently attempted to crash a MAGA rally they got their asses kicked by the attendees. Not a particularly popular bunch even among the demographic they're trying to target for recruiting and persuasion.
Well, that's not Patriot Front in that video...
The X-Files captured a moment in time when conspiracy-theorizing was more bipartisan. Within the context of that content, the government and national leaders were mostly engaged in cover-up to hide the truth of the actual subject matter of those conspiracies, which were a giant nebulous "other." That stands in sharp contrast with today where the conspiracy-theories are much more niche, partisan, and point the finger at the government and real people rather than a fictional entity.
It seems quaint to think of a time when the biggest conspiracies a baby boomer would come across would be aliens, bigfoot, etc. I think part of the reason this stuff is given oxygen is because it harkens to a time when being a "conspiracy theorist" meant something completely different, and more benign, than it means today. Back then, that conspiracy mythos brought people together more than it pushed them apart, even people with different political beliefs could have a discussion about aliens or bigfoot. Now they just live in entirely different universes, and the "conspiracy theories" are that the other side is irredeemably evil.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
10mo ago
I used to love WWI/WWII movies when I was younger, it scratched that Star-Wars-esque heroism itch. Now I avoid them unless I'm willing to end up demoralized watching Hollywood dance on the grave of Europe. Some are really good and worth watching like Dunkirk, but it's a genre where my interpretation of the films has radically changed from adventure-heroism to tragedy.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
11mo ago
· Edited 11mo ago
I heard a quote awhile ago that was something like "be careful telling people they are Nazis, because one day they might believe you."
If every young white man who has a valid criticisms of the prevailing cultural dogma is pigeonholed into that classification, the author isn't doing himself any favors. It's true that Dissident Right talking points are increasingly being embraced by the mainstream conservative movement. Is that due to sadism, or is it maybe because the DR is getting at something real, and the perspective can no longer be ignored by the conservative talking heads?
Here's Matt Walsh a couple weeks ago:
Well, I'm concerned too. And my concern is this, that if you still have any confusion about what these diversity initiatives actually are, well, this should clear it up. Diversity absolutely means anti-white. That's what it means. All diversity initiatives are anti-white initiatives. Anytime you hear about any kind of diversity initiative anywhere, whether it's in government, in corporations, in any institution at all, it is an anti-white initiative. Diversity is an anti-white conspiracy. And you can clip that and cut it and post it on Twitter because I know you will, because that's what it is. And if you ever doubted it, well, here you go.
It would have been unthinkable for someone like Matt Walsh to say this even a few years ago. Matt isn't saying this because he's sadistic, he's saying it because the prevailing cultural dogma is actually pretty hostile to white people. Gaslighting people with "If you believe that you're a Nazi" has greatly contributed to the Nazi memes, I can guarantee you that.
But ultimately, the core of fascist subjectivity is the indulgence of sadistic feelings.
This is so uncharitable that it bears no resemblance to reality. Let's take a look at one of the many various compilation videos of Hitler's speeches that gets clicks from e-fascists. The fascist subjectivity here is not the indulgence of sadistic feelings. It invokes:
-
Feelings of revolutionary triumph from an undesirable status quo
-
Sense of community
-
Strong leader with a charismatic devotion to the people
-
Proposing the nation as inherited from a people
The author has no understanding whatsoever for why this propaganda is compelling to those people, and why there might be a lack of these elements in the present culture that does indeed explain Trump and the growing influence of the Dissident Right. But it's not due to sadism, it's due to very real deficiencies in the culture that do not provide for these human needs, so they are sought in heterodox and taboo spaces.
Edit: OP deleted the post, which was just a copy + paste of this article with no additional commentary.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
2mo ago
In the last 2 years he seemed to develop this understanding of all the users he didn’t like (a group that spanned veritable progressives, myself, @SecureSignals and various other far-from-ideologically-aligned regulars) as part of some communist-fascist-Jewish conspiracy against America.
It's a Hayekian Road to Serfdom schtick.
Fascism is considered "reactionary" by academics because the Academy was dominated by communism, so any ideology opposed to the inevitable global Proletariat revolution is "reactionary" according to their priors.
Hayek inverted this by grouping together any ideology that doesn't accept Liberal priors under the "tyranny" umbrella.
Traditionally, Road to Serfdom rhetoric has been invoked on the Right/Libertarian sphere to associate Socialism with Fascism, in order to discredit the former due to the anti-fascist consensus that exists across the political spectrum.
But Hlynka is observing a large, organic shift of that paradigm in the Dissident Right sphere, where the anti-fascist psychology within the Right is becoming discredited. So he is attempting to denounce that trend by associating it with Wokeism/Socialism as being part of the same "road to tyranny."
I understand where he's coming from, but it's a boring argument... "Woke Progressives don't accept Liberal priors, SecureSignals doesn't accept Liberal priors, look you are basically the same!" is the essence of his argument. The problem is the argument only works if you accept Liberal priors and if you don't then there's not much to discuss. He just repeats that accusation over and over.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
8mo ago
Per Paul in 1 Corinthians 8, Christians are allowed to eat meat that has been sacrificed as an offering to pagan idols, so I think there's more latitude than you would expect on engagement with pagans. The rationale being, "we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God" and so the pagan worship has no power, but it should not be indulged if it emboldens those with a "weak conscience."
Of course you can say that the Pope is emboldening those with a weak conscience, and of course that's a bigger deal than the actual pagan ceremony.
On the other hand keeping the US majority anglo white is not going to happen with measures short of genocide or other mass population movement.
No it's not going to happen, a fact which is known to all "White Nationalists." Jews don't expect to attain a majority, but for some reason that doesn't stop them from organizing on tribal lines, in fact their minority status makes their agitation for Jewish interests all the more important in their mind. So this statement, while true, does absolutely nothing to rebut the importance of a white identitarianism in the face of the reality of demographic change, and this fact underscores the importance for why it's necessary to advocate for it given the reality we live in today. Whites becoming a minority only makes the danger of prevailing anti-white culture and propaganda more acute.
‘Whites aren’t allowed to have ethnic identity’ is just false to me, they’re not allowed to have ethnic identity generically as whites.
Ok, so you concede the point... Notice that there is a "white identity" when it is a subject of criticism and critique of everyone else, but anybody who is put under that umbrella by Progressives cannot actually advocate for the ethnic identity that is central to their critique of prevailing culture? It doesn't make any sense.
Many white Americans are not "German American", they are a mix of different European ethnicities, which is why a "white" ethnic identity is a coherent ethnic category. It's good enough in every sense: in census data, crime statistics, leftist cultural critiques and CRT, but when it comes to advocacy in the same terms as every single other ethnic identity then all of a sudden it's an invalid category. That's incoherent, it's hostile.
Obviously, HBD is relevant because it can justify or refute a position. I think what you mean is that our "post-modern racism" came first, and we just cling to HBD to justify something we already wanted to believe, and that was partially true at the beginning although probably not in the way that you think...
My politics pre-HBD were probably closest to yours among anyone else in this community, of a broadly libertarian-conservative persuasion. Believe me when I say I understand where you're coming from because I used to think exactly like you in many ways (I know that's insulting, sorry, but I mean it).
My interest in HBD was initially, admittedly, because I saw it as bolstering some pervasive criticisms of Free Market idealism:
- HBD sinks the theories that persistent wealth inequality and inequality in various social outcomes is driven by market failure, or aftershock effects of racism.
- HBD provides a strong anti-welfare argument in the presence of open borders (yes, my initial interpretation of HBD pegged it as an argument against Welfare rather than an argument against immigration/open borders).
Given that the chorus of Systematic Racism was in a massive crescendo post-2016, HBD sparked my interest because it seemed plausible and to provide the best libertarian-compatible (or so I thought) explanation for those patterns of social behavior.
Of course, though, that didn't last long as @DaseindustriesLtd recently described, accepting HBD as true and taking a few steps beyond questions of economic efficiency quickly led to a broad, systematic collapse of my previously held beliefs (again, which were basically aligned with yours).
On Dissident Right Telegram I recently saw an informal poll with a decent sample size indicating that about 50% of the respondents previously identified as libertarian, so my experience is likely common among those in that sphere.
On one level, you're right that interest in HBD was motivated by an attempt to bolster a political viewpoint, but at the time it was as a defense of moderate system values against the Systematic Racism rhetoric which exploded post-2016, rather than motivated by an a priori desire to be a political dissident, which was unimaginable at the time. I know you don't want to believe that our political beliefs followed our acceptance of HBD rather than the other way around, but that was certainly my personal experience.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
10mo ago
· Edited 10mo ago
Far-right parties on the rise across Europe.
That's a headline we've all read many times in the past decade, is now really different? There are many clips around the internet of the race riots in France, with this Reddit thread showing a compilation of some. It's hard to gauge how serious the riots are, or if it's relatively isolated to a few blocks in a couple cities and these compilations make the situation appear worse than it actually is. The words of Eric Zemmour paint a dire picture:
We are in the early stages of a civil war. It’s an ethnic war. We can see clearly that it’s a race war. We see what forces are involved. We need someone determined and firm. … The problem, above all, is the number [of immigrants].
The reason I think the BBC article is noteworthy, most of all, is because it observes that contrary to the previous bouts of nationalistic populism that inspired Brexit and Euroskepticism, this surge in far-right political support seems to be dovetailing with support for the EU:
While at the same time, a number of far-right parties in Europe have intentionally moved more towards the political centre, hoping to entice more centrist voters.
Mark Leonard cites far-right relations with the EU as another example of their 'centrification'.
You may remember, after the UK's Brexit vote in 2016 that Brussels feared a domino effect - Frexit (France leaving the EU), Dexit (Denmark leaving the EU), Italexit (Italy leaving the EU) and more.
Many European countries had deeply Eurosceptic populist parties doing well at the time but over the years those parties have felt obliged to stop agitating to leave the EU or even its euro currency.
That seemed too radical for a lot of European voters...
Polls suggest the EU is more popular amongst Europeans at the moment than it has been for years.
And so far right parties now speak about reforming the EU, rather than leaving it. And they're predicted to perform strongly in next year's elections for the European parliament.
Paris-based Director of Institut Montaigne's Europe Programme Georgina Wright told me she believes the far-right renaissance in Europe is largely down to dissatisfaction with the political mainstream. Currently in Germany, 1 in 5 voters say they're unhappy with their coalition government, for example.
Wright said many voters in Europe are attracted by the outspokenness of parties on the far-right and there's tangible frustration that traditional politicians don't appear to have clear answers in 3 key areas of life:
- Issues linked to identity - a fear of open borders and an erosion of national identity and traditional values
- Economics - a rejection of globalisation and resentment that children and grandchildren aren't assured a better future
- Social justice - a feeling that national governments are not in control of the rules that govern the lives of citizens
I do not agree with Mark Leonard that far-right relations with the EU are an example of the centrification of the far-right, it rather represents a change in strategy.
I've seen it asked here, what would be the pathway for political or cultural victory of the radical right? This is it- these energies being transformed into a positive and ambitious political project that surfs the wave of globalization and European integration. In hindsight it seems like such a bad strategy for the far right to advocate stepping away from a project like this, and the failure of Brexit to produce any meaningful change is, along with Trumpism, proof of the failure of petty nationalistic populism. If you blame the EU for immigration you don't leave the EU, you go for European parliament.
Journalists have spent many years hand-wringing over the Euroskepticism being influenced by right-wing politics, but I think they will find the prospect of the EU being reformed by a pro-EU radical right to be much more worrisome- and effective at bringing real change.
Edit: Police Unions are also describing the situation as dire:
Faced with these savage hordes, asking for calm doesn’t go far enough. It must be imposed.
Re-establishing order in the republic and putting those arrested somewhere they can do no harm must be the only political signals to send out.
Our colleagues, like the majority of the public, can no longer have the law laid down to them by a violent minority.
This is not the time for industrial action, but for fighting against these ‘vermin’. To submit, to capitulate, and to give them pleasure by laying down weapons are not solutions, given the gravity of the situation.
They said: “Today, police officers are at the frontline because we are at war.” And they warned the government that, unless officers are given yet greater legal protections and more resources in the future, “tomorrow, we will be in resistance”.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
5mo ago
I've never liked the term "white genocide." The word genocide itself is just a word that gets to be claimed by the victor, as the definition is broad enough to be applied to nearly every conflict...
Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Destroying a group "in whole or part" is just up to the interpretation of the victor. So if you have no power, like white nationalists, claiming you are being genocided is just going to be dismissed and valid complaints about i.e. demographic replacement are discredited.
In any event, this should just confirms that Jews are right to be wary of encroaching antisemitism.
In the past I've described antisemitism as anti-fragile. So let's say Jews are going to respond to antisemitism. What are they going to do that isn't going to further and visibly validate the arguments made by antisemites? Pushing for greater authoritarianism in the public discourse is their only strategy, and it's becoming less effective quite rapidly.
On the other hand, I think this rhetoric is going to have a real deterrent effect on Jews. You are going to be less likely to see people like Jon Stewart say things like "Jews and blacks should gang up on whitey." Even the ADL is relatively mum recently despite Musk now overtly endorsing DR rhetoric, likely due to the negative PR campaign started by Keith Woods.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
8mo ago
Yes? Adding it as a comment to more of a roundup thread is less risky than a top-level thread, I received a 7-day ban for my last one.
The OP hewed pretty close to bare links, so I can’t really blame you for taking your own spin.
The thread is "Time for some links about breaking and not so breaking culture war news" and my reply is contributing to that.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
11mo ago
Do you think in that situation with the exact same facts of the confrontation between the protestors/counter-protestors BLM protestors would face these charges as well? Or do you acknowledge that the political viewpoint is decisive here in how the case has been handled?
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
30d ago
Last year I was at a social gathering with an (about 30?) year old, higher-class Indian woman who lamented that her parents refused to find her a match before her older sister. She was also talking about matchmaking sites where all sort of criteria are included, like skin tone. It was problematic that her older sister was darker skinned than she was. Wild stuff.
When we were having the atheist culture wars of the 2000s, the side representing Christianity may have earned more followers after some public spat with an internet atheist, for example. But that wasn't a victory for the Christian side. The victory for the status quo of the religious order is there is no debate, because it's beyond the pale to even consider this a question that warrants argument. So even if a Christian won some debate against the atheist, he still lost by virtue of debating something that only works if it is taken as true on faith.
Stancil is falling into the same trap. Maybe he gains more followers than Sailer. But his followers are being increasingly conscious of and exposed to a debate they were previously not aware of (and a debate they cannot win with the scientific methodology they hold in high regard). That lays the groundwork for real seismic shifts in ideological thinking down the road.
"No press is bad press" for growing a personal brand, maybe, but for maintaining a civic-religious ideology certain things have to be so true they are beyond debate. Then when you start debating them in the public sphere the cracks begin to show in front of an audience that had never even previously considered the debate at hand.
What you're missing is that society requires cooperation between classes of people. Neither flooding the country with masses of low-IQ foreigners or flooding the country with high-IQ foreigners who have no attachment or regard for the average person accomplishes that. Accepting intra-racial HBD doesn't change that fact.
Hanania is perfectly fine with a cognitive elite that has no attachment to and despises the average person, or even who views the average person as an ethnic rival. The DR recognizes that is not the formula for a healthy civilization.
What happens if you have a cognitive elite that hates the civilization it is part of and has a racialized antipathy towards it? Hanania doesn't care, as long as they have the highest IQ in the room.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
8mo ago
In the decades and centuries to come, all sorts of group differences in biology, including perhaps group differences in various kinds of intelligence, may well be identified. But this will be done in laboratories and other controlled settings by actual scientists, by geneticists and biologists and physicians. It won’t be done by right-wing shock jocks poring over statistical tables and publishing their “research” in trade-press books and club newsletters written and edited by their fellow true believers.
That sort of pussyfooting is infuriating. He is basically saying even if they are right, they are wrong and pathological. It's so cowardly. It's pretty rare though to see that level of hedging from anti-HBD pontification. But he'll never accept that they were right even if they are right.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
9mo ago
It may not cancel the publication of his book, but it's going to limit his ascendency. It would be remarkable if it did not. The biggest issues aren't even the edgy things he has said about sterilizing black people. He wrote for Counter-Currents and The Occidental Observer, which is Kevin MacDonald's publication. Here is one of his articles on The Occidental Quarterly:
I’m not one to be suspicious of an intellectual just because he happens to be Jewish. But Emory University’s Melvin Konner seems to be a character straight out of The Culture of Critique...
In another context, Konner called MacDonald “worrisome.” He must be. His work hits too close to home.
Either he gets cancelled, which he deserves for such an intellectually dishonest groveling (i.e. saying it doesn't matter for policy whether social outcomes are driven by racial differences), or he doesn't get cancelled and it's a big step towards the normalization of Dissident Right thinking.
Greg Johnson at Counter-Currents apparently did not know that Hoste was Hanania:
It turns out, though, that Richard Hanania and I go way back, and I didn’t even know it. From 2009 to 2011, I published Hanania under the pen name Richard Hoste, first at TOQ Online and then at Counter-Currents. Hoste was a joy to work with. He was intelligent, versatile, prolific, wrote well, had interesting insights, and was enthusiastic about exploring ideas. He was also a prompt correspondent and never threw diva fits over editing.
Hanania characterizes the views he published at Counter-Currents and similar platforms as “repugnant” and renounces them. Beyond that, he says that he was not entirely in earnest. He was “trolling.”
Sorry, but I am not buying it. Trolls post one-liners on social media. They do not read thousands of pages of densely-written academic works and write carefully-crafted multi-thousand-word reviews.
Richard Hanania is asking us to believe that the things he wrote under a pen name at White Nationalist and human biodiversity sites, including endorsing ideas from Kevin MacDonald’s The Culture of Critique, were not entirely in earnest, but that the more moderate and socially acceptable things he wrote under his own name — when he was both subject to cancellation and rewarded with money and status — are actually honest and sincere. Only a fool would believe that.
The most charitable interpretation of Richard Hanania’s career trajectory is that he remained race-wise and Jew-wise, but edged up to the mainstream to inject good ideas and shift the Overton window.
He was wildly successful. Hanania is not just an intelligent and energetic writer. He’s also an entrepreneur. He had a good thing going. So, when his real views were revealed, he panicked, cucked, and doubled down on the classical liberal, color-blind meritocracy cover.
It is a depressingly old pattern: smart libertarian and conservative nerds start noticing collectives, especially Jews and blacks, but as soon as there is a hint of pushback, they say, “But I treat everyone as an individual.” Basically, they realize that this a world of clashing tribes, in which individualism is a sucker’s game. Then they get scared — because they have no tribe to protect them — and signal to the enemy tribes (almost always Jews), “I’m an individualist, so even though I notice collectives, I won’t act on that knowledge. So you don’t have to destroy me. You can just play me for a sucker.”
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
9mo ago
There's an interesting discussion to be had about how Oppenheimer and many of his colleagues were Western Jews whose favorable opinions of communism came from academic hobnobbing and philosophical flirtation, and who were thus not keen on the idea of nuclear brinksmanship against the Soviets, versus other Jewish figures of the era like Teller, von Neumann and Ulam, whose native countries were under communist occupation.
One wonders how much of Oppenheimer's remorse was driven by the fact the bomb was used against Japan rather than Germany.
HBDers dismiss pro-social behavior as stupid and counterproductive and when this leads to poor outcomes
HBD recalibrates what we ought to consider pro-social behavior. The mainstream "we should all mix until we are all a shade of brown so we can focus on our Constitution and Conservative values and put all this race stuff behind us" perspective is the anti-social perspective. Just because it gets you more praise from an adversarial elite does not mean it is pro-social behavior. "White people have no racial identity in a meaningful sense, and whites have had no ethnically-particular influence on America" is not pro-social, it's anti-social.
Someone who understands HBD also understand pro-social behavior to be just that: behavior that improves the quality of society. Tripling down on race denial and ignoring the elephant in the room of dysgenic spiral is anti-social behavior even if it's expected in polite society.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
10mo ago
If you haven't seen Knives Out, I highly suggest it as it is without a doubt the most explicit type of story along the lines you are describing here. I won't spoil anything but you will find every single trope you have identified smacked over your face repeatedly, Rian Johnson completely lacks subtlety in that film. Yes, it is agenda pushing and it always has been. They know what they are doing, and it means what you think it means.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
10mo ago
Which, unlike child molestation, is a perfectly legitimate goal in a democratic society. Just as those who lobby for or against teaching all sorts of things do all the time.
Right, so the Conservatives who said that this entire thing was about reaching their children were correct. You can say "it's a legitimate goal in a democratic society", whatever that means, as if social propaganda isn't common to all societies everywhere. But the conservatives saying "if we allow gay marriage next they are coming for our children" were right, and it took less than 8 years from the Supreme Court decision. We apparently could not allow gay marriage without our children shortly thereafter being inundated with LGBT propaganda, they were right.
Our nanny is great, we go through dozens of books at the library and let them pick it out. She comes from a place and is of a generation where this propaganda would be unthinkable and she lets her guard down occasionally. It's no big deal, she puts the book aside when she sees where it's going.
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
1mo ago
And de facto you were already well advised to keep your views on the Holocaust to yourself at any university anywhere outside the Islamic world.
Of course, but the idea of this being legally sanctioned by the government would have been far-fetched not too long ago due to First Amendment protections. No longer so.
This is like saying you abhor Zionism because you have non-Jewish friends. You have non-white friends, so you don't think white people should retain any ethnic identity or advocate for it in any way? How does that make sense? Do you deny any other ethnic group its ability to advocate for its own interests because you have friends outside that ethnic group? I have non-Chinese friends so I abhor Chinese nationalism I guess... Would that make sense to you, or does this sort of logic only apply for white people?
More options
Context Copy link