patrick.net

errc says

mell says

errc says

How else do you explain all my posts being pre screened by moderators and my inability to mark a personal attack ad a personal attack?

Other users mark those as personal, not the mods. Everything else was a follow-up determined by the logic in Patrick's code. It's not a perfect system, but it seems to work fairly well.

errc says

Something changed late 2016.

Some people couldn't handle the election outcome without frequent (or even more than the usual) expletive-filled tirades and when the new system was established left on their own volition. Others then became more and more confrontational when their spokes-person left while the rest moved on.

Goran...

I see the thread you bumped, but it doesn't make much sense to me. Free speech can be used to collectively find the truth, yes, but that is certainly not a prerequisite. For most free speech is simply voicing their opinions without repercussions. Which you can do on this site as long as you don't violate the law or use personal attacks. Nobody has covered up any lies, but if a comment gets jailed it obviously is not there anymore in the thread/discussion and it makes it harder to memorize, eventually it will get lost. When it comes to politics, it is simply a choice of what is most important to them. To give you an example, you keep referring to the Mexican boogeymen. For many living in/near border-towns with high violent crime or even some sanctuary cities and for those with depressed wages or out of a job those are real problems - likely much more important than weed - and making fun of grave problems likely won't win them over. In the end it's about priorities, as there is no universal truth. I want weed (pretty much all drugs) to be legalized and illegal immigration to be stopped entirely. If I only get both legal or illegal I would choose to live with illegal weed as it doesn't matter as much to me as illegal immigration. For you it's apparently the opposite, but that doesn't make the high crime in border towns and towns with many illegals/refugees less of a reality. So while Trump is far from perfect, one can agree with a majority of his policies and therefore become a "Trumpkin".

errc says

Almost everyone was actively rooting against her, so it just doesn’t jive with reality that anyone went off the deep end when she lost.

Being in academic environment, I know quite a few people who are still lamenting her loss, mostly feminist-type middle-aged or older womyn. They actively supported her in election, some even worked for her (or should I say xer) as volunteers. A few still can not stop talking about the election. Remember also "I will move to Canada if Trump wins" - I heard that kind of talk a few weeks ago.

You are extremely lucky if you do not hear this nonsense. I would love to be that sheltered.

Indeed my wife is in academia and many of her cohorts are die-hard Hillary fans who can’t help decrying Trump. While I understand the urge to shit on the Donald, since he is so very assholish, I can’t understand people who champion the Leftist cause. It’s unpatriotic, it’s unamerican, it’s anti- life, it’s frankly evil! Turn LIVE around and you get EVIL, and since Democrat polices seem to be anti-life at every point, I term them evil.

Quigley says

champion the Leftist cause.

Who is championing leftist causes in the US? I don't know anybody of significance.

errc says

It also explains the proliferation of guns that coincide the rise of the betas. Alphas handle business with our bare hands, betas clamor for daddy and guns to protect them from the boogeyman, while wearing suits and ties.

You're confused. Betas want nothing to do with guns. It's the Alphas that are the owners.

The Betas are busy holding their hot chocolate, wearing their onesies pajamas and living in mom's basement.

drB6 says

errc says

Almost everyone was actively rooting against her, so it just doesn’t jive with reality that anyone went off the deep end when she lost.

Being in academic environment, I know quite a few people who are still lamenting her loss, mostly feminist-type middle-aged or older womyn. They actively supported her in election, some even worked for her (or should I say xer) as volunteers. A few still can not stop talking about the election. Remember also "I will move to Canada if Trump wins" - I heard that kind of talk a few weeks ago.

You are extremely lucky if you do not hear this nonsense. I would love to be that sheltered.

It’s not about being sheltered, It’s about asserting yourself. Why do you choose to subject yourself to such nonsense?

I can’t imagine a situation where I’d subject myself to such torture. I have better things to do with my time then sit around and listen to aged broads whine about nonsense. I get more than enough of that here on Patnet

errc says

Why do you choose to subject yourself to such nonsense?

Faculty dinners with visitors, either here or when I am lecturing somewhere else. Can not escape, unfortunately. In more open areas I rapidly retreat when hearing Hillary laments.

May be it is environment, but in personal interactions I can talk at least limited amount of sense into Trump supporters, but never into Hillary fans (e.i. fucking white male hater club). Then again, I can see, at least in theory if not in practice, that a few things advocated by Trump make sense - not that he is doing those things in a rational or any way at all - but I really can not find anything rational in Hillary as she was the candidate of status quo in corrupt and fucked up political system.

Quigley says

While I understand the urge to shit on the Donald, since he is so very assholish, I can’t understand people who champion the Leftist cause. It’s unpatriotic, it’s unamerican, it’s anti- life, it’s frankly evil!

@Quigley I think the ultimate reason is that the leftist cause is simply a religion:

A basic feature of inclusiveness that explains a great deal of its power is its religious quality. Inclusiveness presents a vision of unity in a world without outsiders and without borders. one in which there is no "they" but only "we." That vision is seen as an overriding goal, always to be striven for, though never quite achieved. Inclusiveness thus functions as a religion, and indeed as the established religion that determines how things must be discussed and what can be treated as real. Every view must align with it to be legitimate, and those who express doubts-the Watsons and Summerses-are treated as heretics.

...

Other religions that want to remain socially acceptable must assimilate to inclusiveness and become something other than they were. Respectable Western Christianity has largely done so. In mainline churches, the Gospel is now said to be radically inclusive above all else. In that setting, as in society at large, inclusiveness has become a principle of justification that covers a multitude of sins. Whatever his other qualities, anyone can become superior to the traditionally moral by invoking it. The latter are presumed guilty of bigotry, an unforgivable sin that requires perpetual confession and atonement that are never sufficient to restore the offender's moral standing.

https://patrick.net/post/1314416/2018-03-14-how-the-diversity-regime-is-flattening-america-and-the-west-and-what-to-do-about-it

The leftist goal is actually to destroy the country and indeed all countries and borders, so that humans may all live in peace and harmony as generic consumers in globo-corporate paradise.

The left's vision of paradise corresponds very well with the deepest desires of the biggest shareholders in the stock markets, and so it is heavily funded by those shareholders. To the left, Trump represents the hell of distinct countries with distinct characteristics, delaying the coming of the borderless corporate paradise.

The leftist goal is actually to destroy the country and indeed all countries and borders, so that humans may all live in peace and harmony as generic consumers in globo-corporate paradise.

The left's vision of paradise corresponds very well with the deepest desires of the biggest shareholders in the stock markets, and so it is heavily funded by those shareholders. To the left, Trump represents the hell of distinct countries with distinct characteristics, delaying the coming of the borderless corporate paradise.

——————

Interesting take. What about the “right”? What is their goal and vision of paradise?

@errc there is no right. It’s an illusion, a deliberate farce. Or haven’t you been paying attention to #nevertrump and the extreme resistance he incurred by daring to be nationalist in spite of the globalist agenda championed by the “right?”

Trump has no political party, or at least his message doesn’t. Socially he’s left, fiscally he’s right, but the important bit is that nationally he’s American. When it comes to whether we tear down this country as both the Left and the Right have been doing to usher in the new corporate paradise, he says no.

Don’t worry I still think he’s an asshole and he is wrong on marijuana, but these are peripheral issues to the EXISTENTIAL issue of whether we remain as a nation or devolve into a corporate interest.

The Left's vision is simply this...eliminate all competition. Competing is hard and requires having winners and losers, but it's at the heart of evolving any species. Without it, you artificially support the weak, who thereby become entitled, and perpetuate further weakness in humanity. The Right drives to keep competition, but that's now viewed by the Left as immoral or harsh under the guise of charitable thinking. Little do the Left know that their "charity" is destroying our race (e.g., rise of the beta male, feminazis) only to leave women wondering, "Where are all the manly men??"