hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
hanikrummihundursvin
6mo ago
I read it was around 100 dollars. What are you getting at?
hanikrummihundursvin
6mo ago
Candace is probably the biggest political streamer in the world right now. In large part because of her conspiracy minded take on Charlie's death.
hanikrummihundursvin
6mo ago
What is not to believe? The top 1% of OnlyFans creators can generate everything from 20 to 100k per month. Factor in prostitution on the side and you can make a lot of money.
Yes, I concede that could plausibly have happened in the case of some women that are old hags at this point and have performed in films that were released on VHS and were later never digitized.
No one remembers the vast majority of pornstars, even those that were digital. Remove the makeup, change the hairstyle and have the publishers start scrubbing your scenes and/or stop republishing them. There's no pornstar purgatory for those girls that could cope with the profession.
Hold up. Who are you specifically referring to in this case? Average blue collar men?
Guys I've worked with. To clarify, some of them do make money, but it's generally not a lot.
hanikrummihundursvin
6mo ago
The quintessential dude asks: Would you suck a dick for a million dollars?
A lot of people today will never marry. A lot of peoples children will turn out to be screw-ups. A lot of people have no social standing, get no respect, and are at the end of whatever stick is being swung around. They, unlike Bonnie Blue, work very hard and still get no money.
I think what most people feel when thinking of the huge amounts money these women are making is denigration. They see their own lot in life as even lower than that of a prostitute.
Bonnie Blue is the most extreme example, and is only held high since she is doing viscerally disgusting things that people can look down on. I mean, fuck a thousand dudes for a million dollars? Hell no. But outside of that there are thousands of girls making executive level salaries dancing on TikTok with an OnlyFans on the side. Every blue collar working guy is an objective loser in comparison. It's humiliating to know that there are teenage girls shaking their ass on camera for more money than they will ever make. The economy has to be a joke and your participation is the punchline.
To that end, no, most of these girls will never have trouble finding a boyfriend or creating a small bubble of privacy with all the money they've made. It's all cope. They can buy mansions, hire maids, babysitters, tutors, and never work a single day in their lives after grinding OnlyFans for a few years. There are plenty of pornstars that disappeared and their kids are growing up just fine since the old porn has been long buried with the new.
I can't find the article but a fair few years ago there was an Instagram model owning the Red Pillers back when RooshV and all of that stuff was at a highpoint. She wrote, as I recall, explaining how she got invited to Dubai or somewhere similar. She sucked a few dicks, denigrated herself in front of some rich arabs, and a few weeks later she was out with enough money to last a lifetime. She detailed how she set up investments and savings accounts, she bought an apartment near a university where she would start studying and so on. All in her early or mid twenties.
To a red pill 'high value man', this girl is crushing it. She can do whatever she wants. She looks good, is young, has more money than 99% of her peers. There's no argument. She has the power, men gave it to her.
hanikrummihundursvin
6mo ago
More political violence
From Tim Pool:
Last night a vehicle approached our property and opened fire.
No one was hurt.
Our security team is reviewing the incident and will be relaying the report to appropriate law enforcement
This is the price we pay for speaking out against evil.
One might think back to oft made historical analogs like Weimar Germany, and see the steady escalation of violence between communists and anti-communists and proclaim Weimerica to be just like that. But these acts of violence seem so... Aimless? Random? Poorly thought out? I mean, the degree of distortion that drives one to shoot at Tim Pool. I don't get it. Even the excuses that Charlie Kirk was a fascist theocracy enabler that would genocide the trans felt far fetched. How do you justify the glee of seeing Tim Pool murdered?
If the official narrative is to be believed, a lot of these acts of political violence are coming from ideologically ambiguous social media addicts. Be that the killer of Charlie Kirk, the Trump shooters, the attacks on ICE agents and facilities and more. Gone are the days of a regimented left/right brawl in the streets like we got around 2017. Or a good old cops(presence optional) and robbers BLM riot. To that extent, I think a lot of people have completely lost sight of the media backdrop of peoples lives on both the left and right.
For context, Candace Owens is talking about global conspiracies and the involvement of TPUSA in the killing of Charlie. This has been ongoing for weeks, and she averages around 1.5 million views per show. That's including ridiculously high live numbers no one else is coming close to. At the same time the biggest mainstream internet personalities on the right have been cozy-ing up to Nick Fuentes. With Steven Crowder now joining the fray of Tucker Carlson and many others, giving him a long and cordial interview.
On the other side, the largest streamer on the left, Hasan Piker, along with many others, have made it a routine to skirt as close as they can around calls to violence. And sometimes not bothering at all. With the government starting to ask questions after the murder of Charlie on the topic of radicalization.
The Wild West days of the internet are seemingly back. With Hitler memes on Instagram instead of 4Chan, Qanon conspiracies having their own show on Youtube all whilst the leftist revolution is being streamed live to millions on Twitch.
Centrist minded people like Tim Pool like to talk about the pendulum swinging back and forth. But inherent to that analogy is the idea that there is a fixed point where the pendulum will stop before swinging back each time. But it seems like that's not the case. The pendulum can swing back and forth, but also faster and farther. And with the antifa being completely unwilling to engage in discourse or compromise, and the right being completely inept and unable to stop their radicalization and acts of violence, 'faster and farther' seems to be where we are going.
hanikrummihundursvin
6mo ago
So... He can just do that? No alleged legality issues like with the infamous Muslim Ban?
If so, why not pause all sources? Is that not what his voters want?
Outside of a crash, the one avenue I don't see discussed very often for how this can end is for contractors to start building smaller.
Where I live there are two main problems hindering this natural market development: Regulations and lot allocation. Smaller contractors can easily build small in theory. But due to lot allocation, high lot price and regulations, it's not economically viable. This leaves small contractors unable to meet market conditions since a lot of prospective home buyers are priced out of single family homes. Which places the ball in the hands of larger contractor operations that can deal with the situation more easily via multi story housing. So problem solved. Smaller contractors fade out of business.
The 'small' problem with this, and why I think this is the future, is that we are looking at a pretty obvious lowering of living standards. Your future is less idyllic and smaller in scale.
On a certain time scale there is nothing wrong with this. People should start small, build capital in their small home, sell it later and expand into something bigger that can more easily house a larger family. The real issue is more clear when you look at this in a modern context.
Most people don't have families until they are in their 30's. Of those that do, there will be many who had not entered the real estate market until their late 20's. Depending on income, your children will be raised in a small home for the majority of their lives. Any dreams of green grass, a white picket fence and children playing with a puppy will stay as dreams. You will not be giving your children the childhood your parents gave you.
This development, at least where I live in Scandinavia, is already underway. Being marketed as a conversation about how we should orient our lives and a challenge to critically confront our values. Forget about owning a car, a big dog or raising your children. You will see your family 4 hours a day in a mass produced concrete box, stacked on other concrete boxes. Everything will be shrinking. Everything is being outsourced. It may not be the future anyone wanted, but it's the future everyone has been voting for. The migrant who is delivering your half eaten UberEats order has to live somewhere, after all.
These guys were our friends in a war zone so they must make for great neighbors.
Whilst I understand the fuzzy feels of helping those who help you, one would have preferred a sort of quarantine zone or special village for the empires mercenaries.
That being said, I think it's harsh to call Scott embarrassingly wrong based on these events in specific and that quote in particular. For starters, I'm not sure it's fair to assume any hardline position on small scale Afghani immigration based on the quote. He's talking about something else, no?.
But assuming he is, the awful performance of Afghani immigrants in Europe is a fact. So one could perhaps call him naïve on the topic of Afghani 'assimilation' if he can't imagine a reason to be against importing a fair number of them.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
To a lot of people, especially those who deny HBD, there seems to be a complete lack of connectivity between real world actors doing things that drive forward history and history itself. It's like they see history as a movement independent of people. That it was preordained or inevitable that certain developments would happen at certain times.
To that extent the sentiment being expressed when exploring alternate realities like this ends up being a sneer: 'You only got there first. If you hadn't been in everyone's way things would have been better for us.'
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
How does hate even enter the conversation?
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
Starting from minute 14 or so, in the linked monolog Fuentes goes into his views on the topic. Largely derived from the facts laid bare in this article.
In the end he asks: 'Why is this so hard for people to wrap their head around'? It's a valid question. As far as Fuentes goes, these are not complicated observations. Yet there are entire books on the topic of anti semitism and how it's irrational, pathological this and that... But like SecureSignals points out, they don't deal with any arguments or observations laid out by the so called anti semites. To that extent, the entire premise of anti semitism as a concept is just a framegame.
It's rather comical that whenever the topic comes up, you end up with people asking an endless series of questions as if this is complicated or hard to figure out. It's not.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
I feel like the story of progressivism emptying the pews is a little bit too convenient and self serving to be true. Not saying it is entirely incorrect. But I'd also wager that the churches that were first to fall to 'progress' were also in a weak state to begin with, and therefor felt the need to do something. Couple that with the idea that more devout believers are more likely to congregate around a more traditional message, I'm more inclined to think traditional churches are herding devout believers rather than recruiting new ones. And that they persist by dint of the temperament of the radical that seeks them out. But there are only so many of those to go around.
The way forward for the Church always has been to stick to its own message rather than to pander to cultural fads.
I could be sympathetic to this point of view but from my experience observing Christian theology politics, 'every denomination that is not mine is a fad' seems like a common viewpoint when discussing the topic of what the church's message actually is or should be.
I can only plead ignorance and ask if there is some average form or consensus on what the general message of a Church is and whether or not it has changed over time. In my local Protestant Scandinavian church it is generally vague humanist platitudes. Or maybe the humanists just got to me first... In either case I saw no relevant distinction between the two. What is the churches correct message in America?
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
Is there anyone advocating for this? How successful are they?
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
As a general retort, directed against no one in particular concerning the gatekeeping rhetoric I usually see around this topic:
There's a historically consistent delusion of Christians believing they are always at the center of Christianity, which always happens to be right here, right now, exactly where they are, leaning towards exactly what they happen to think. Which lends them the power to feel justified to gatekeep many matters of moral and philosophical significance, including Christianity and the church, from outgroup outsiders.
In reality the modal church of 100-200 years ago is so far removed from the modern modal church that there is no real reason to comparatively consider anyone Christian today. Which speaks to the fact that the church is not Christianity, it's the people. Insofar as there will be an influx of church going young men, they will change the church. Insofar as there are groups of people claiming to represent Christianity in the defense of their church and the inevitable change that is coming, they have no firm ground in proclaiming they are doing so as a Christian.
To that extent I'd wish for church leaders and gatekeepers to recognize that this has nothing to do with Christianity. Church politics are people politics. And the people are in a proxy ethnic culture war. There's nothing a pastor can say to a young man that will faze or enlighten him. They've been hooked up to technology far superior to an echo-y sermon. The church is a platform for organization. The church is at war for its life because of a culture war. Take these people and facilitate them and their beliefs towards something useful. It's a conflict the church needs to fight, and it's a fight these people want to join.
On a sidenote, how far removed are the groypers in opinion from Father Coughlin? Will anyone claim to be more Christian than him? Well, you have a few like those coming in. Less intelligent and erudite, but their heart seems to find the same place. To that extent it's hard to gatekeep those who are more similar in spirit to those who came before you than you are. Lamenting that they are not like the Christian church goers of today is hypocritical to say the least.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
I was more alluding to the premises you both afford yourselves. RR makes the point that there is already a substantial amount of evidence supporting his premise. To that end his historical just so stories at least serve a supporting role and fit a broader narrative.
As most know, there has been a media battle within the Con Inc ecology. I want to go over some of those developments. If you know the lore you can skip the story so far.
Story so far
On October 27 Tucker Carlson did an interview with Nick Fuentes on The Tucker Carlson show. Sitting at a comfortable 6 million views, it’s one of his most viewed videos. Following that interview, jewish ethnonationalists like Ben Shapiro and Jonathan Greenblatt made the rounds condemning and calling for disavowals. But condemning and disavowing Tucker Carlson is easier said than done.
When the Heritage Foundation released their condemnation video, they distinctly claused out Tucker from their criticism. This, for jewish ethnonationalists, was outrageous. Eliciting remarks from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator Ted Cruz, and other jewish ethnonationalist stooges. Tucker needed to be firmly disavowed, and Fuentes was not to be talked to or debated, but ostracized and ‘canceled’. Heritage Foundation president, Kevin Roberts, went back like a beaten dog and put up a second apology video saying as much. Still, it was not enough and condemnation articles, calls to resign and protest resignations rained in.
Despite all this chaos, Roberts kept his presidency, Tucker remained unfazed, and Fuentes was only emboldened by the attention. releasing an hour long monolog on the alleged overbearing fact of jewish ethnonationalist influence in American politics and his position on the modern JQ. The jewish ethnonationalist front had to hit back somehow.
Enter Chuck Schumer, proposing a senate resolution to condemn Nick Fuentes and the platforming of him by Tucker Carlson.
Whilst Fuentes is only emboldened by such attention, it might be different for Carlson. It is, after all, harder for a man of credibility and standing like him to shrug off an official disavowal like that. Though it could not have come from a better direction as far as a right winger is concerned, it is still bad.
The Carlson Rebellion
Missing from the firestorm of outrage and shock from the Fuentes Carlson interview is the simple question of... What exactly is Tucker Carlson doing here? Unlike Fuentes, who lives for this type of spectacle, Tucker is, one can imagine, an actual person with connections and things to lose. So why?
In a recent episode Tucker laid out his answer to the Fuentes Question. Young mostly white men are flocking to the extremes, both left but mostly right, because America sucks. Everything from the housing market, job market, education, media, domestic and foreign policy. It's all anti-white. It's all anti-male. What exactly does anyone expect young white men to do? What confident identity is even available to young white men?
To that extent one can sense Tuckers ire towards the establishment and those who shill for it. How is it possible to allow things to go on like this? To ignore it? Telling young white men to be individual whilst every other group is forming coalitions to outcompete them is suicidal and stupid. Why can't we tell them something else? Something they actually want to listen to. Well, that might lead to another holocaust in the minds of paranoid jews so, no, we can't. Young white men just have to die alone and abused.
Say what you want about Fuentes, but Tucker, at the very least, has a proposition that is open to compromise with the ethnonationalist jews on the right: This individualist free market zionism stuff isn't working anymore. Things, as they currently are, have to change. And if the only response to that reality is calling everyone an anti-semite or a nazi then what is even the point of this?
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
Not to turn this into a pile-on but:
The default premise of your post is that there exists somewhere an essence of parity between whites and blacks. And that this parity is obfuscated by external factors that give the appearance of an essential difference.
Which is in turn why you chastise RandomRanger for presuming an essence of racial difference.
Which is irksome, since most of the gist behind your post had already been responded to by RandomRanger to your "not very well thought out" response.
Whilst I've only worked in completely male dominated places, the stories I get from my acquaintances who are in more diversity are always along the lines of 'There is an obvious sex based preference being acted out every single day, which is always to my detriment' but there is never anything concrete. Just an endless stream of second hand examples.
Tracing the chain of causality that drove a bitter loser to complain about how unfair the system is, is practically impossible. But when so many of my smartest acquaintances tell the same story I'm left wondering how it's possible they are all just delusional.
If they are not all delusional, one would ask why nothing gets done about the state of affairs, and the answer is obvious. If you complain you are a loser. The big bosses of society have already decided that things will be like this. You don't have a say. And because it is true that anyone who notices and complains about this comical state of affairs is a loser, they can't do anything. They can't quit. They are completely replaceable and there is no place for them to go. They are not just losers, they are humiliated losers. Every day their hard work means less because there is some frivolous gender crap sucking up energy. It's in their face every single day and they have to suffer it. To that extent your post is pointing at a very important reality.
The only problem I have is with the men who don't notice or complain. Chances are their predicament is no better than that of a complainer. But because they don't notice or complain they delude themselves to feel superior to the losers who outed themselves as being emotionally disturbed by how things are. But it's fake. They are all in the same lot.
There's an interesting Culture War drama example of this on my YouTube feed. Comedian Akaash Singh had a small podcast beef with some manosphere guys. Akaash, along with his married friend, made it clear that they were not the losers, but the other guys. They were happily married, not complaining, the manosphere guys were unmarried losers complaining about women. Well, a few years later it looks like Akaash is, to borrow an old phrase, whipped. Similar to Will Smith and such. So whilst it might be true the manosphere guys were delusional losers complaining about women, it's obvious Akaash was also a delusional loser defending them.
Now, I don't think you can derive a lot of good truth from e-celeb drama on the nature of Akaash's marriage. Maybe it's being portrayed unfairly. But it's a good example to remind us of the fact that the world is filled with losers who won't look reality in the eye no matter what. And that they are delusional in all directions.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
This theory, similar to the latest Matrix movie, describes a sort of rebellion of the artist against the industry, medium and ultimately the audience. Like a band that is tired of playing their hit song again and again so they instead smash their instruments to close out the show.
To me it's always felt petty, childish and self absorbed. A critique I'd levy against many modern artists. Worse yet, it implies that the artist is above the audience. That they know how to make something great, but are choosing not to. Which is simply not true.
The proposition that the Wachowskis could make another thought provoking Matrix movie is unfounded. The proposition that Rian Johnson could make a great Star Wars movie is unfounded. If either had teased that they could deliver exactly the kind of experience everyone wanted, but instead took it all away at the end, then they would at least have the merit to call themselves trolls. But they could not muster even that. Worse yet, neither managed to rebel at all against the industry that owns them.
The Wachowskis were goaded into making another subpar action flick that could make Warner Brothers some money. Rian Johnson tried to sour the new to protect the old, but all we get is an endless stream of crap so bad the old gets stained with it anyway. Rian intentionally making a bad movie changed nothing, he just got the 'sub par directors makes shitty Star Wars slop' party started early.
This type of endeavor is perfectly described here.
In an age of mediocre slop and mass produced thoughtless timewasting, the rebellion is making something good, deep, pure and thoughtful. But Rian can't do that. Maybe he lacks the talent, maybe he was constrained by the industry, or maybe the mass audience is simply too fractured, deracinated and mentally fried to ever be reached with a meaningful message, or maybe it's something else. In any case, as an artist in a world of slop, Rian isn't above anything or anyone so long as he participates.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
Most content is not so compelling that I am willing to pay for it compared to all the other content that is out there and free.
Beyond that, getting an adblock is not a lot of hoops in my mind. If I cared a lot for my time I would not want to waste any of it on an ad. Or waste any of it by paying for something I don't have to. Given I had to spend time to get money in the first place.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
In defense of all who came after Buchanan, they are only where they are because of his failures.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
The right wing is sailing through an interesting storm at the moment.
On one hand you have a very public clash between the donor class and the pundit class on the topic of Israel. Where the donor class seems to have lost control over a portion of the latter. How or why is not necessarily clear but it seems like the long awaited beacon of solace that can deliver the USA from ZOG is finally lit. It took a decade or so longer than the earliest prophets would have hoped, but the internet is finally facilitating a mainstream zionist critical stance through some of the biggest right wing pundits in cyberspace. Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, and Nick Fuentes.
On the donor side, we still have Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham on FOX standing strong in televised media. With Mark Levin allegedly making a case for himself on the radio waves. Along with Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire. But all of these voices are far less impressive when it comes to internet reach. Whilst Shapiro does have a strong base and a large Youtube channel, the internet presence of every mentioned donor class pundit, along with the entirety of Daily Wire, fits snugly within Candace's Owens reach alone when it comes to active internet views. Which would be inconsequential if not for the fact that the youth of the republican party is not listening to radio or watching TV. They are on the internet.
It's worth noting that there are large portions of the right wing media sphere that are completely divorced from this discourse. Choosing to simply sail past it. To that extent it might be a step to far to say the right coalition or media sphere is crumbling. But judging by how things are developing, the topic of Israel is fast becoming something to avoid. Why risk saying something wrong on such a polarized topic and risk the ire of the youth mob or the zionist mob? Just keep your head down and talk about the loony left or the government shutdown.
There are plenty of online right wingers with large followings who are doing just that. What will be interesting is to see how much cross contamination there is between those shows and the zionist critical ones. But to that extent, any expressed support for Israel is effectively a step towards a landmine that risks blowing the discourse up again. This puts neutral pundits in an awkward position. What good are they to the donor class if they can't voice support for their cause? But on the flipside, what good are they to the donor class if they fracture and lose their own audience?
I doubt we will see any resolution soon. Barring any major blunders from the zionist critical side, which is not that unlikely all things considered. But it's hard to imagine that this won't leave a lasting mark on right wing politics. There is an entire right wing generation on the way that simply doesn't fit within the traditional GOP mold. And it's the one demographic they would have dared to rely on. Whether that will have a transcendental effect, or if the future political landscape of the US will be too alien to have it make a difference...
American politics is so much fun. I have a hard time believing it's real.
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
I was under the impression that 'the left' was coming off an election win high. Can they not just continue to do what they are doing and win over and over again as right wing policies like 'legal immigration' hand them victories like in NY?
hanikrummihundursvin
7mo ago
Unless you have a large enough mountain range and/or jungle. In which case you win. On the flipside, it's hard to say if there have been many successful wars waged without patriotism.
I'm not convinced. The girls famous enough for the argument that their 'OnlyFans fame will bite them in the ass one day' to be applicable are making more than 50k a year. If not on OnlyFans specifically then on Instagram and other things.
More options
Context Copy link