Idpol

[qcrisp]

YouTube

[New Devilry]

Quote Originally Posted by Liam Barden

I was under the impression that rich black NBA and NFL players were the ruling class in America? I wouldn't exactly call Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos a circle of tyrants. Being wealthy doesn't automatically make you evil. All this talk is nothing more than resentment by the dull and lazy for those who are bright and industrious. The richest Australian is a woman. Oh the injustice! She's not even attractive, how did she do it? Like James said, not everyone is an intellectual. More than half of ones success in life is predetermined before your parents even copulate. Attempting to reverse engineer society against nature is far more horrific than some people not having jobs because of automation and new technology, or being called nigger, or white dog, or fat bitch, or pin dick, or trans freak. Hierarchy will always exist, even if cash is removed from the equation. Social currency becomes the medium of exchange and the individual with the most is appointed aristocracy by those who have very little. This is an emergent phenomena in every society and culture. Even within a small circle of friends. There is nothing more disgusting than white people hating other white people for having privilege. I endured this garbage at university. As far as literature goes, I would never read anything that jerked off the cathedral. Like for instance, a story about a white prole, probably a coal miner with an IQ of around 75 who was recently laid off and loves nothing more than bashing his courageous wife . . . He turns out to be a big centipede . . . Muh weird fiction as weaponised idpol . . . Failed mortar strike . . .

I can't tell if this is "neo-reactionary" satire or a sincere expression of your own views.

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

Liam's a big fan of Nick Land, so there's a chance all of that was serious.

[Liam Barden]

Quote Originally Posted by Robert Adam Gilmour

Liam's a big fan of Nick Land, so there's a chance all of that was serious.

Everything but the first sentence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[New Devilry]

Ah, well I'll leave it at that for now, then.

Regarding weird ficiton, I thought Victor LaValle's The Ballad of Black Tom was a fine example of the genre from a perspective not typically represented.

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

Liam- The American elites don't really need to be tyrants because they have influence.
Nobody said anything about wealth making people evil. This doesn't seem like a place where people would be particularly jealous of such powerful people. I'd like to be rich but all sorts of people are rich.

Why is reverse engineering unnatural? What's natural? Why is attempts at more equality so horrible?

I think very few white people genuinely hate other white people. But there's lots of more disgusting things.

You'd never read any "cathedral" fiction? How do you know what it reads like and how do you know which writers and stories to avoid? This is sounding a lot like Sad Puppy stuff.

[Liam Barden]

Robert, you may be correct.

I'm speaking from my own experiences as a 28 yr old cishet white male who spent a few years in Australia's premier white-hating, dole-bludging, communist stronghold – The Humanities department. I admit, it was my choice to earn a double arts major and dabble as a musician for a couple of years in Melbourne. These experiences have shaped my political views.
And maybe I am a little sad puppy about it. But mostly, I'm disappointed in the people I met, even my friends who tremendously overvalue their "artistic talents" and believe they're entitled to taxpayer money so they can sit around all day (for years), punching bongs, creating rubbish art and whinging about muh capitalism because no one wants to purchase their rot, or because rapist white guys are suppressing their genius . . . (no joke)

Of course, this is not all millennials. I'm just out of place among some of them. I'm not against medicare, welfare for students and the truly poor. I'm not a savage. But many people abuse welfare in Australia and brag about it. Welfare here is almost too good to be true – $545 AUD a fortnight, starting rate. The middle class pays for this through taxation, they're the ones that suffer.

I believe in equality of freedom, equal opportunity and individual responsibility, not equality of outcome. No one is equal in talent and ability. If someone fails, they fail because they weren't good enough. If an entrepreneur fails it's because no one wanted his product, his business model sucked, he didn't do enough market research and so on. Rarely, will he blame systemic hierarchical factors. Like nature, the market doesn't care, it's totally indifferent. All attempts at social engineering, leveling the playing field, so to speak, creating a classless society and so on, are completely discordant with nature, with evolution, and have resulted in class genocide in Cambodia and race genocide Nazi Germany.

What's more disgusting than white people hating white people for being privileged? . . . I dunno . . . terrorism, communism, scat porn, a Hillsong concert.

Hahaha, I accidently read a couple of stories when I first began reading a lot of fiction. I'm a little more selective now. We all make mistakes.

Like I said at the beginning of this post. My views reflect my experiences and the discordance I felt at university being the only Libertarian/neoreactionary (I didn't know what neoreaction was at the time) among a hoard of commies and screeching SJWs. Of course, they thought I was wrong to not want to rig reality in favor of the weak. I'm more than happy to just laissez faire. A subtle difference in opinion that causes a lot of conflict. For the left, class is now is a fragmented assemblage of identities all vying for the top position as the poorest, most marginalised, retarded AF, self-victimising group in human history.

I'm going to leave it there.

[Evans]

Taking one's racial characteristics, something beyond one's control, as relevant to one's moral worth is a category mistake = an agent's status is only determined based on their agency, that is the actions and intentions they will. Identity Politics has, on the whole, been a disastrous step back from the correct stance on race and background, that is Difference Blind Liberalism.

Racial Identity Politics should be looked at as 'cosmetic identity' - one might have aesthetic preferences for a certain look, but really what bearing does that have on there worth as people? Black Supremacy makes as much sense as Brunette Supremacy

Quote Originally Posted by Robert Adam Gilmour

I think very few white people genuinely hate other white people. But there's lots of more disgusting things.

I presume you mean very few white people hate other white people for being white people? It's funny: a lot of 'self-hating white' rhetoric presumes the key premise of White Supremacism, that the imperialist culturally dominating characteristics white (let's face what they really mean is Anglo-Saxon but never mind) people display is biologically inherent.

[New Devilry]

Quote Originally Posted by Evans

Taking one's racial characteristics, something beyond one's control, as relevant to one's moral worth is a category mistake = an agent's status is only determined based on their agency, that is the actions and intentions they will.

Is anyone here actually making the argument that race is relevant to one's moral worth? And what do you mean by an agent's status? There's much about our positions in society that is not determined by our agency.

Quote

Identity Politics has, on the whole, been a disastrous step back from the correct stance on race and background, that is Difference Blind Liberalism.

Being blind to differences sounds like a good thing, but it's too simplistic. In theory, yes, we should all be blind to skin color and other cosmetic features. But many people are not blind to those characteristics, and so people who are different are treated differently. If you are the "different" one, this doesn't usually go well for you.

When we're blind to differences, we're also blind to the suffering that people experience because of those differences. Obviously, we still need to convince people that the color of a person's skin is not relevant to who they are. But we also need to acknowledge that people suffer because far too many of us still think that it is relevant.

Racial Identity Politics should be looked at as 'cosmetic identity' - one might have aesthetic preferences for a certain look, but really what bearing does that have on there worth as people?

Identity politics are a reaction to marginalization, to categorization from external sources. People are asserting rights to be treated equally and justly, not their supremacy. Black power and white power are not equivalent movements.

[Evans]

Quote Originally Posted by Trau

Quote Originally Posted by Evans Taking one's racial characteristics, something beyond one's control, as relevant to one's moral worth is a category mistake = an agent's status is only determined based on their agency, that is the actions and intentions they will. Is anyone here actually making the argument that race is relevant to one's moral worth? And what do you mean by an agent's status? There's much about our positions in society that is not determined by our agency.

The statement I gave there was meant as a succinct explanation of why racialism is wrong. As to what I meant by 'status', whether one is a good or a bad person. Our position in society is definitely not determined by our moral status (whether we should seek to remedy to that or whether it would even be possible is a whole other debate).

Quote Originally Posted by Trau

When we're blind to differences, we're also blind to the suffering that people experience because of those differences. Obviously, we still need to convince people that the color of a person's skin is not relevant to who they are. But we also need to acknowledge that people suffer because far too many of us still think that it is relevant.

I agree with everything here save for the first sentence. Not taking into account a person's race doesn't mean ignoring others hostile actions towards them. Of course 'difference blindness' is the term associated with not taking race and such into consideration when weighing a person's worth - it doesn't literally mean ignoring cosmetic features i.e. if they have African features.

Quote Originally Posted by Trau

Identity politics are a reaction to marginalization, to categorization from external sources. People are asserting rights to be treated equally and justly, not their supremacy. Black power and white power are not equivalent movements.

Could explain what you mean by categorization from external sources? I don't see how any race or group should have privileged access on categorizing actions or things; that goes too close to relativism.

Notice I used the term 'black supremacy' rather than 'black power' - may be the term 'black nationalism' would have been even better. I wouldn't claim that an organization or action group that highlights persecution or injustice towards members of a certain group based on racial prejudice is wrong - only that this persecution is a problem for all moral persons to deal with (for instance if black people are unfairly victimized by US law enforcement then black people have no special moratorium on fixing it as all involved are obliged too).

Where I will draw a parallel with the errors of White Nationalism is in situations where black thinkers or action groups claim that it's possible to 'act black' or 'not act black' (which is where we get accusations of 'race treachery' - pejoratives like 'Uncle Tom' violate the anti-racialism maxim just as much as the 'N' word does).