We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day And so, an alcoholic stalker of ex-boyfriends, and who bases intimate relationships on revenge, has fathomed society’s problems. And it’s all Whitey’s fault.
– David Thompson.
I urge you to read the whole article (from 2018) as it is, to use the technical term, fuckin’ hilarious 😛
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
I am flattered.
https://brandnewtube.com/
Interesting new resource. Icke–nah –but Coleman is worth watching in my opinion as a counter-balance to the increasingly unlikely “it is all stupidity” approach.
But the channel itself–a Youtube w’out censors– is good. And the format seems a bit more user-friendly than Bitchute etc . GAB/PARLER/BITCHUTE–all the alternatives to left controlled crap are not user friendly enuf. If they were they would grow to rival the Kalifornia Kommie Kontrolled crew.
The worst thing you can do for a broken person is give them a cause. It allows them to ignore that they’re broken.
“’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that, if your preferred candidate doesn’t win an election and you immediately spiral into serious depression, and watching Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, then the wheels on the wagon may already be rattling loose, and a little perspective may be in order. Say, a wider and more politically varied social circle, in which demurral is routine and diverging opinions don’t necessarily result in chronic rage.“
Gosh! What an idea!
I wonder if any of the women whom Thompson cites are still puzzled as to why ‘MGTOW’ is a thing?
If Trump wins then watching these nutjobs melt down is going to give me a schadenboner that risks bursting. There’s some crazy crazy people in the Feminist / Lefty / Marxist alliance.
bobby b. wrote
and I would moderate that slightly. In my experience, which may be limited, the worst thing that can happen to a broken person is that they find themselves a cause. It allows them to claim that you, and everyone else, must ignore the fact that they’re broken. As we see in the instant case described, and in many other current areas of controversy – it allows people who are deeply troubled, deeply flawed and, sometimes, deeply unpleasant, to claim both moral superiority and suspension of judgement because of their attachment to whatever cause it is that they have attached themselves to. It’s just this war, and that lying sonofabitch Johnson!
Sure, it’s going to be two-bags-of-popcorn fun to watch the crazier leftist Youtubers have their crises when President Trump is re-elected. But we would do well to remember that many of these folks are acting-out their more-or-less-serious personality disorders, and that their attachment to this cause may well justify, in their minds, things a lot-more serious than crying and wailing on social media.
llater,
llamas
“the worst thing that can happen to a broken person is that they find themselves a cause.”
A few years ago someone decided that his mental impairment (extreme autism) was not a defect he should try to overcome but something we should all celebrate. It spiraled down from there into such causes as Antifa and BLM.
I read the article and one thing this has reminded me of is how large a bullet I dodged when I broke with an American animal “rights” lass about 20 years ago. (She regaled me with her world view on our second date. It did not go that well.) Her mother was an alcoholic and I think her cause was a sort of displacement activity for a lot of pain. In the end I had enough of the nonsense, partly increased when I ordered steak in a restaurant one evening. I think I also may have mentioned that I was a libertarian, which really set her off the edge.
There’s a reason women were denied the vote in the U.S. through 1920. Though de Tocqueville attributed America’s success to “the superiority of their women” (1843), this was because females of necessity exhibit formative private vs. public virtues.
Not doers but talkers, wives and mothers express what they know best, and Hobbesian dog-eat-dog realpolitik is not to gossipy socializers’ taste.
Anyone who doubts this best review the last century’s pervasive feminization of every socio-cultural sphere: Two generations past Amendment XIX, since the mid-1960s a degraded popcult has
seen no major musical pieces, operas or symphonies composed; no epochal artistic school; no iconic poet or literary figure worthy of a Chaucer, Cervantes, Rabelais; Goethe, Dickens, Tolstoy or Dostoevsky; Joyce or Kafka, Proust…
As a Regency wag put it, regarding France’s descent to Bonapartism through 1815– “In great cultures, men create civilization, women wear great hats.”
Lloyd Martin Hendaye (September 21, 2020 at 2:09 pm), rumour has it that Trump will appoint either Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa to the Supreme Court. Neither of them are wearing hats of any kind, ‘great’ or otherwise, in the pictures I’ve seen – though I’d say that each looked good nevertheless. So I’d be careful what you argue for. There was a time when US ‘liberals’ would have disdained using arguments such as yours against appointing Amy or Barbara, but since Kavanaugh I think they are, ah, ‘above’ such self-restraint now. 🙂 If either of these ladies do indeed prove the ‘staunch conservative judge’ that is being suggested, then I – and you, unless your devotion to your views is truly dedicated 🙂 – may yet be urging them to do much to preserve the civilisation the founders created.
@Lloyd Martin Hendaye
There’s a reason women were denied the vote in the U.S. through 1920.
Yes, indeed. And that reason was sexism.
Many of the same arguments you use can simply substitute “black person” for “woman” and be applied in exactly the same ugly way you do. There are a lot of parallels between sexism and racism. I find the propensity to treat people as if they were the inevitable outcome of their genes instead of the choices they make, the content of their character — so to speak, rather repugnant.
@bobby b
The worst thing you can do for a broken person is give them a cause. It allows them to ignore that they’re broken.
I think that can be true, but certainly isn’t always true, and, I’d say isn’t even mostly true.
People who are broken can often be fixed by engaging themselves in some sort of external cause. Often it is excessive navel gazing that causes brokeness, and being less focused on oneself can often alleviate that. Although I am an atheist I can certainly recognize that “getting religion” often transforms deeply injured people for the better — I have witnessed this personally many times.
A fascinating book is “Chasing the Dragon” that I read many years ago. It is about this young naive young woman, Jackie Pulinger, who “felt the call of God” and moved from leafy Surrey in England to the walled city in Hong Kong back in the 1950s when it was dominated by the Triads and a den of prostitution, vice and heroin. She set up an organization, all on her lonesome, that reached out to people there and helped them get off heroin and lead productive and useful lives, and somehow managed to work it out with the Triads that she wasn’t raped and murdered even though she was stealing from her customers. I think it was called the St. Stephens Society. Her writing is a bit religiousy for my liking, but if you are looking for an interesting read, to get you out of your box, I’d recommend it.
However, people who get involved in political causes, broken or not, can quickly spiral down the tubes. Politics is almost universally utterly toxic.
Fraser Orr wrote:
‘A fascinating book is “Chasing the Dragon” that I read many years ago. It is about this young naive young woman, Jackie Pulinger, who “felt the call of God” and moved from leafy Surrey in England to the walled city in Hong Kong back in the 1950s.
It’s Pullinger. Two ‘ells’.
And she shipped out to Hong Kong, if my ageing memory cells are correct, in 1967.
And the young Ms Pullinger – that I remember – was many things, but naïve was not one of them. Nor was she ‘broken’ in the sense that we are using that term here. She had a strong religious calling from a very young age.
llater,
llamas
@llamas
It’s Pullinger. Two ‘ells’. And she shipped out to Hong Kong, if my ageing memory cells are correct, in 1967.
Thanks for the correction.
And the young Ms Pullinger – that I remember – was many things, but naïve was not one of them. Nor was she ‘broken’ in the sense that we are using that term here. She had a strong religious calling from a very young age.
If I remember right she had a degree in music, and, from my memory, she was very unsure of what to do before she hopped a boat to China, totally unprepared. She could not even speak Cantonese if I remember rightly.
However, the “broken” people I was thinking of were the heroin addicts and gang members in the Walled City rather than she herself. I’m not a religious person myself, in fact I am fairly virulent opponent of religion, but people like her make me think it is worth a look to see what I am missing.
Most of it fits together – the feminism, the hatred of white people (the self hatred – because the lady is white) the hated of Republicans (she assumes, without evidence, that her rapist was a Republican – and forms sexual relationship with a totally different man because he is a Republican, I admit that bit did confuse me).
It is all basically Marxist stuff – including the hatred of the family (forget the Frankfurt School – Fred and Karl themselves hated the family).
Perhaps it does indeed go back to the parents – neither the mother or the father or the step father gave the lady any alternative to leftism (in both politics and culture – truly the left hand path of the goats leading to….).
So the lady was a de facto Frankfurt School type before she ever took her Class attacking “whiteness”
As the lady says the class only told her what she had always been – a politically and culturally.
Remember “whiteness” is not really a skin colour – it is a term for the principles of civilisation.
By “make the world a better place” the lady meas “complete the process of making the world Hell on Earth”.