Theme: Deception

TRYING TO REACH NORMIES WITH TOO-TOLERANT
BUT NON-FALSE FRAMING
by Bo Winegard @EPoe187
(My comments under CD: text in italic)

Modern radical progressives are unified by a demonization of historically successful groups, of “whiteness,” of “patriarchy,” of “heteronormativity.” In short, of everything that created Western civilization. Thus, inevitably, they disdain the West as it exists.
(CD: Meaning discovery, innovation, adaptation, and evolution to adherence to the laws of nature – particularly those we observed from domesticating animals, and as such domesticating ourselves.)

They want fundamentally to transform the West, to eliminate its historical characteristics, to turn it into a “diverse” civilization of variegated genders, sexes, races, et cetera, in which biology is overpowered by belief, by identity, by fiat as it were.
(CD: They want to devolve the west in to the middle east – and look how well that’s worked there…)

Because this requires a rejection of reality, a dismissal of stubborn, intransigent facts, modern radical progressives are forced to suppress science, especially genetics, and forced to hector those who still believe in man and women and rudimentary biological truths.
(CD: the modern left evolved supernatural abrahamism into pseudoscientific marxism and the spectrum behavioral pseudosciences. And yes they did it with malice of forethought. See Gramsci)

The celebration of every bizarre identity, every private sexual quirk, coupled with the abomination of straight, white males and traditional women, is a pervasive feature of modern radical progressivism, and is promoted so ardently that flags with thirty stripes now fly.
(CD: This is sedition and treason by colonization by a new religion using a new flag, just as islam spread by crescent, christianity by cross, judaism by star, communism by sickle.)

From a strictly anthropological perspective, this triumph of “diversity” and of “victims,” this elevation of alterity, is impressive, as is its attendant willingness and ability to force people to reject obvious truths, truths so primitive that even children grasp them.
(CD: The abrahamic revolts against reason like the marxist revolts against science, were and always will be revolts against greek reason and truth, roman legal reciprocity, and modern darwinian evolution. It’s a desperate attempt by the genetically defective for reversal of evolution in favor of dysgenia. (yes, that’s harsh but it’s true.))

But from a normative perspective, this triumph is, in my view, odious. It deserves relentless and forceful pushback. It’s not bigoted to love one’s civilization, one’s ancestors, or the roles and traditions that allowed one’s country to flourish.

The centrists, the liberals, the people who think we can make peace with progressivism and celebrate the radical transformation of the West while praising diversity and novel rights are, I think, misguided. Compromise is impossible.

Of course, any honest and unrestrained attack against the principles of modern radical progressivism will provoke a furious backlash. One will be ridiculed, berated, upbraided, demeaned, and slandered. That’s the cost of assailing the regnant ideology.

The calumnies are virtually endless in variety: Racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, transphobe, Islamophobe, et cetera. The important thing is not to play the game. Reject the fatuous name calling. Do not say, “I’m not sexist, but….” or “I’m not racist but…”
(CD: Dont play the game. The left has only one tactic, ‘baiting into hazard’. Never take the bait.)

These terms are virtually meaningless in modern discourse; they merely serve as bludgeons to attack those who question progressive pieties. Once one engages with the accusation, one loses.
(CD: Progressivism is feminine > jewish > abrahamic > marxist religion. ergo pieties applies. their use of shaming for violation of piety is instinctual.)

A source of both hope and despair is that privately many people agree with the above. They have reasonably traditional views of civilization, of sex, of gender, et cetera, and they do not think white men and women, conservatives, traditionalists, are wicked.

Thus, though attacks on progressive dogmas provoke vituperation, they also engender respect and admiration from others. Many will remain quiet, especially if they have jobs in leftists institutions. But they will see and enjoy the pushback.

I ought to add that although I disdain wokism, I think that people should be allowed to practice its principles in cities et cetera if they want. My objection is not that people choose to endorse it; rather, my objection is that it’s an imperial ideology.
(CD: Every civilization has had an inadequate response to the semitic abrahamic-sequence religions whether in the ancient superstitious or modern marxist-sequence forms. This is a cancer that only the chinese levels of suppression can prevent from spreading. Look how many civs have been destroyed by judaism, christianity, islam, communism, and socialism.)

It converts or vanquishes. And thus the fight is against its spread. If California wants to go woke, if a vast majority of its citizens love diversity and et cetera, then that is fine by me. The alternative to endless civil strife is some degree of pluralism.
(CD: the only solution is pluralism by separation into polities where we can outlaw every single criminal behavior the left promotes and punish it vehemently, and then leting economic and genetic consequences play out as natural selection.)

At any rate, traditional values are not loathsome, abhorrent, or bigoted. They are wise, prudent, and, in my view, indispensable for a healthy, prosperous community. They deserve enthusiastic defense, not cautious compromises.

— Bo Winegard@EPoe187