/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>http://
uyghur?

Not your personal blog and not your personal adspace.

>>481134
You don't need the secure line without any forms the user submits. You know, how the internet would be as a library.

>>481142
You can get a free tls cert from lets-encrypt.

That (mostly) prevents Man In the Middle attacks that could potentially insert malicious shit into your website while it's being transported over the internet information highway.

>>481145
That would not be possible for a user.

The site is HTML with no javascript. There's no opening for malicious programming that would sit on the user's computer. There are no forms where a user would submit any information to the website. You'd only need SSL if the user is submitting sensitive information, but there is no opening for that.

>>481147
Dude, unencrypted packets can be swapped out along the way. A man in the middle attacker could replace the content of your website with anything they like. That includes adding java script.

I will admit that it's not a trivial thing to do an insertion faster than a tcp handshake. But why risk it. Get a free cert, there's 5 min tutorial videos on YT that show you how.

>>481149
I'm not as stupid as you think I am. If someone is determined, SSL won't save you. There is no such thing as perfect security. I run more risk with SSL because I'm adding another entity looking at my website to sign up for it.

I would suggest a user-end detection for forged data, since the site is all text and downloadables.

Ah my web host has a free service for this anyway.

Listen Eugene, I can only be bothered to read your book 4 on histmat, ok?

Also, if you're gonna reference Italian elitists, then you MUST reference Michels.

>>481173
I probably should. Fuck Pareto though - pseudo-economist.

>>481173
I wouldn't call it a "critique of histmat". I do think Marx's thinking on historical materialism is bowdlerized often to fit the imperial version of materialism. But then, I think Marx's thinking doesn't work for other reasons. I already make a bunch of arguments in the prior books about how "Being" is a bunch of bullshit, which is why my thinking will turn out very different. There is only really "doing", and we refer to acts and events when speaking of reality and especially history. It's only possible to talk about "Being" through metaphors and indirect knowledge. This has its uses to condense a lot of knowledge, but it requires people who know of what is referenced.

The bigger gripe I make is that history proper will never be a "straight line" in that sense, and there are political reasons for that which I refer to during what I wrote so far in the third book.

My approach has been to pick apart these things as if they were engineering problems or things to analyze for writing a worthwhile computer program, under the assumption that human thought and agency don't have any special quality over any other force in the universe. They do however have particular qualities that tell us a lot about what humans are - mainly that humans really are shitty to say the least.

Obviously this take would make me a hard historical materialist - but ideas that are relevant to history are in my view a type of technology, and that is my basis for a lot of how I look at "modes of production" and what economics became. The main technology I look at is the institution itself, rather than industrial machines which are one part technology and one part engineered phenomenon which have a life of their own. A lot of mashed up history arises from granting to industry spiritual qualities it does not possess and forgetting that industrial tools are employed by labor which has nothing to do with institutions at a basic level.

>>481644
There is a rather simple solution, people who advocate eugenics and try to infiltrate health care, should be designated the "undesirables" and subjected to what they promote.

Now for the definition side of things, imposed sterilization and forced abortions definitely are hard eugenics, and a firing squat is appropriate. However offering abortion to women who want it is not. It's just a means for exerting self-control over fertility, that is legitimate.

Of course women can be driven to choose abortions not by their own volition but by imposing bad conditions on them like economic precarity or environments that are hostile to child rearing. And that again is a form of indirect eugenics, which also has to be dealt with.

>>481644
They told you this back in 2008. That was them masking off. "Yes We Can" is saying "yes WE can do what we were clamoring for in the 1990s". A few souls in this country tried to say it, but it was coded as "right wing reactionary talk" thanks to such a stripped down demonic education as we got. Never mind that the most detailed complaints came from liberal types who knew what Obama really was and what the men with him wanted to do.

Also, population control was the entire point of Roe. It was a slavery argument, which is why the 14th amendment comes up. They were always interested in destroying that standard completely, and look at where we are now.

The same argument in Roe would effectively allow unlimited infanticide and killing of legal minors. There is not a single credible argument to say otherwise. Now that it was normalized and institutionally mandated, they didn't need that excuse, and it was always troublesome because it prescribed "unlimited freedom" for the slave power. The slave power needed to be more definite and restrict anyone operating outside of it.

It's all moot because the United States law will no longer exist as anything meaningful. You have the major factions all eager to get rid of it and replace it with some Nazified garbage that will be entirely worse.

>>481684
>>481685
>>481686
Meds.

>>481644
Honestly, I don't take anything Alveda King writes seriously. There's a reason she's the one member of MLK's family who right-wing fanatics like. These people can still be pieces of shit, though, but I don't know if I buy her rationale for why. This argument that, based on something Ruth Bader Ginsburg said at some point, abortion's broad legalization was about eugenics as opposed to being about rape babies and coat-hanger surgeries seems like a stretch.

>>481686
>The same argument in Roe would effectively allow unlimited infanticide and killing of legal minors. There is not a single credible argument to say otherwise.
A fetus, zygote, or unborn child is physically inside of another person, and typically cannot exist outside of the mother, whereas infants who have already been born are not. The basic contradiction which exists in the case of fetuses - that they are human, but not fully separate beings - does not exist with anyone who has already been born. That seems like a really easy argument unless I'm missing something specific about the terminology in Roe.

>>481691
I think zygotes are not sentient and there fore shouldnt spared in cases of abortion.

But I take it a step further.

Preventive hysterectomy

>>481687
booster

>>481690
This is commonly available knowledge. Emanuel and Holder are proud and open eugenists. Most of the liberals are. Were you not paying attention in the 1990s?

>>481691
That is not a credible argument unless you assume a lot of biopolitical shibboleths are automatically true, and many assumptions about political subjectivity. It makes eugenics the only possible world-system.

If you regard life as morally valuable at all, then the state not only legalizing infanticide but glorifying it and insisting "infanticide on demand" means exactly that. Anyone who is a minor, anyone who is deemed invalid, may be killed with impunity. Those are the conditions of Eugenics, and the bare minimum they will take with such a claim. It is dishonest to pretend this is not what they have done with it, and sophist's arguments only reduce to dithering and excuses. Once the dithering begins - and the eugenist philosophers admonish everyone that once it begins, eugenist victory is inevitable and a fait accompli - any legal principle suggesting anything can be different is moot. You've already placed the power of life and death in the hands of a monopoly of experts, who are not legally required to abide anything the court rules is "scientific truth". The very nature of expert testimony is that the expert is the expert, not the judge. The judge and court merely judge the facts - and here you are asserting that the experts' judgement is absolute and must override even the judge, who would inveigh on whether this act that he is judging is moral or in line with the society he serves. The expert has no obligation to society at all, and has shown his contempt for society. The judge has to at least appear fair, or the judge has to rule that the eugenic interest has untrammeled authority over private life. This is what has always been at stake - nothing less.

If the court deems fit to place reasonable restrictions on abortion - and that was the standing law, not "abortion on demand" - then you start having this argument "for real". Except, we never did. Eugenics never gives up an inch, and it won victory after victory. There is nothing whatsoever that can appeal its decisions.

The relevant decision for the court is not about whether you can say this killing is okay because biological science says it's kosher and another is not. That falls really on the doctor and the woman aborting the child. The judge's position would be entirely about the interests of the state. He has no authority to dictate private practice or personal life in that way because "the science says the abortion is kosher". The only reason this comes up is because the fetus is "life unworthy of life" or a slave. By what standard is a child free, then? You've already invoked a biopolitical argument for who is free and who is not - and this is the same argument for chattel slavery on a eugenic basis (an argument that was never upheld in the bad old days, which tells you of the eugenic creed's depravity). In the most sweeping declaration, anyone who is not granted specific status of "life worthy of life" may be killed with impunity. That is the standard of legal and political freedom - just as it was for slaves, who weren't free until they were ruled free and the papers of manumission were signed, or emancipation was forced. Also same with prisoners, and anyone who is suspect of invalidity of any sort. There is no barrier that eugenics would have to regard or that the law can erect based on ability or viability. That whole line of argument rested on where life can be said to begin for the state's interest to hold. On one hand, there is a claim that the state's interest starts purely with a biopolitical or natural claim, and on the other, the state's claim over life and death is absolute and PRECEDES conception. They can mandate sterilization against all due process and any decency once known, upheld since 1927 with thunderous applause from the creed.

Since infanticide has been justified on this basis already, I need not "prove" my claim. They kill in the open and dare you to stop them. That's what happens when the state considers this a pretext to govern life at all levels.

My solution is that the only real interest here is the conduct of the doctor and medical profession, and possibly whether the law could punish someone for intentionally killing their own unborn child / killing another's unborn child. The doctors have no sacrosanctity and their work can be policed for the good of society. The bodies of women by tradition and history really can't - there's nothing stopping a woman from killing a child if she really doesn't want to carry it, and no good rationale to say she can't. It is another for the doctor to have a stake in promoting abortion, and another still for the state to declare explicitly that infanticide is not just legal but its policy goal for population control. It is ritual sacrifice just like in Carthage.

I believe any regulation would happen at the level of medical practitioners - that any pushing of abortion or eugenics law would be watched, and those found to advance the eugenic creed would be rooted out. Other than that, the state already allowed self-inflicted infanticide and the sale of aborting drugs, and never had a firm law against abortion in history. It is difficult to enforce except by fear or shame.

Most people don't think aborting their child is no big deal, but many abortions happen. The state looked the other way for nearly all of human history, yet now they insist that a strident imposition of population control under eugenist monopoly - people who glorify ritual sacrifice and the thrill of torture - is a right and the highest freedom. That tells you what they think about society.

For all intents and purposes the Constitution was a dead letter after Buck v. Bell, if it weren't already. That was the point - eugenics was above all law. That is the only way it can be interpreted, and that went further than Dred Scott ever could.

Eugene, is it true you voted Biden?

>>482537
I fail to see how that is relevant to my writing. I've written elsewhere about what voting is, and people who look for gotchas and soundbites are exactly what I refer to when I speak of incorrigible fags.

Given what the US was, if you're going to go out to vote, the only thing to vote for was to reject Trump faggotry and everything it stood for. I expected Trump would lose and paid little attention to the outcome, but people near me wanted me to so I could sell my vote for cheap. I don't know why anyone insinuates Trump is anything other than a disaster, and anyone who goes out of their way to promote that should just hang themselves and not bother me. It's sad that a single person gave any credence to that, and if they were serious about burning down the world, they wouldn't say "hurr durr I'm so smart" and spend this much effort promoting rank faggotry. Most people who voted Trump vote for any dogshit the Republicans put up, contrary to these retarded narratives, so I don't want to hear this posturing from progressive retards.

I won't be voting this time around, mostly because it's clear to me that the country is lost, and they're going to do whatever they're going to do. It's pretty clear to most people that the Trump faggotry is just that - faggotry - and whatever organic support there was for that has given up. I was happy to see Trumptard tears, sad that anyone actually believed dying for Retard-Man was worth anything.

I'll tell you now though my only motive for voting was a hatred of the Republican Party, rather than anything these assholes promise. If you vote for ideology and bullbaiting, you really are retarded. It's insulting that this hectoring is allowed on a supposedly dissident website, but that's what online "dissidents" are - sniveling fags.

Aside from the futility of the party system in this country, none of these socialist outfits are remotely credible or try to be. There is no base whatsoever for it. I'm not going to throw my vote away to encourage that stupidity. If they're going to run a third party, I'd ask that they be at least as credible as Nader, and that's not asking for much.

>>482560
tbh I think imageboard users dont really care about actual pokitics beyond a substitue for having a life.
theyre so morally obsessed with cultural norms

>>482577
I'll be honest, at the time in 2016 I didn't think Trump was going to win, because I was naive - not that I believed this was an actual contest, but I believed that the country was putting up Trump as a trial balloon and would give the Democrats what they needed to move as far right as they cculd and jettison what was left of labor. I didn't think the rulers of this place really were that evil and that degenerate in their thought. I still believed they had some scheme or plan to keep going, but it turns out all they ever needed was faggotry.

>>482580
Well, I think the reason why Trump won is because he appeals to indignation.
And the Democrats love tussling with him.

>>482593
Trump won because that was the script, not because "you" chose anything. There's enough insinuation to nudge numbers to whatever they need to be, and they wanted a "close, thrilling race" for this operation.

For all intents and purposes, the Patriot Act put an end to any part of the republic that functioned as you would think a republic would. The only thing that remained was eugenics and the general fear, and that refuses to die.

>>482593
I don't buy the "Trump is the candidate of the downtrodden" horseshit. A few desperate rubes latched on to any faggotry that was going on and given to them, but most of us were too defeated to expect much. Then you consider that many who vote at all are motivated by hatred of the other assholes, and I don't mean a fickle or performative hatred. There are people who believe that Obama and Biden would be the end of them, and that they'd rather be dead than live under that… except, they're getting that anyway, and Trump didn't give those people a single thing. Their thinking was purely defensive for what little the Republicans might have offered them (because believe it or not, the Republicans aren't 100% starve and austerity when they have to go down to the yokels and do a little pandering, and when you look at the Democrats, they play the same game of placating parts of their base and playing interests in their tent against each other). The political system in the US relies on this poverty pimping where desperate people latch on to the few things that they sense they have some control over. Most of those people were not voting for anything Trump said but against the Democrats and the stated liberal agenda, and had no reason to care about any of the pablum in the discourse. Whatever Trump said was some bullshit that wasn't unfamiliar to them.

After the fact, the narrative of "the useless eaters actually love Trump" was just more child abuse, and affirming a story aristocracy always tells itself. Trump offered not one substantial thing. It was ridiculous how he talked about his plan to destroy Obamacare, because he had none and had no intention of doing any such thing. Why would the Republicans cancel a policy they had a large part in manufacturing, that the entrenched interests like just fine? The entire thing is a gigantic cash grab. They'll never give that up. They only think about how to build new excuses to give less and charge more rent. Any time it would turn to anything substantive delivered in health care, it must be attacked. That was always about maintaining the doctor/eugenics cartel on health care.

>>482601
>I don't buy the "Trump is the candidate of the downtrodden" horseshit.
<be a straight white male
<everbody in politics and media hates you because of your skin color and sexual orientation
<along comes trump
<trump doesn't hate you because of your skin color and sexual orientation
<you vote for trump
It's not rocket science.

>>482632
Actually Trump has called conservatives stupid back in a late 1990s interview.


Trump also appeals to minorites due to his appealimg to non-Angloid machismo.

Also we have many other conservative presidenrial candidtaes whom were far more calm amd rational and actually have credentials compared to Trump.
And they were discarded.

>>482632
My god you fags. If there's anything people like voting for, it's a white man. If Trump is your idea of "standing up for the white man", you're an idiot. They're laughing at you - making the white petty-manager a uyghur.

>>482638
Trump appeals to sniveling fags of all nations. His nation is the nation of the purest faggotry, distilled and marketed to those who want the performance.

It's hilarious how the Rightoid conforms to the Judith Butler theory of sexualism, and they exemplify it. What a Satanic race of animals - natural slaves and proud of it.

>>482638
>Actually Trump has called conservatives stupid back in a late 1990s interview.
>1990s
People are mystified by inflation and cost of living crisis can't even remember what the government did 2 years ago you expect them to remember something a non-politician said 30 years ago.

>Trump also appeals to minorites due to his appealimg to non-Angloid machismo.
True.

>we have many other conservative presidenrial candidtaes whom were far more calm amd rational and actually have credentials compared to Trump.
All politicians are losers by definition. A strong leader who understands economics makes 10-100x more in the private sector. That's why all politicians are spineless socialists selling political favors and insider trading to get cash. Trump is a notable exception he is in politics just for the ego which is not necessarily better but it does make him different.

>>482643
>If Trump is your idea of "standing up for the white man", you're an idiot.
The side of empathy speaks. Fine I'll expand on this, what are the major talking points for modern Democrats?
>abortion (i.e. killing future democrat voters)
>transing kids (i.e. sterilizing future future democrat voters)
>feminism (i.e. preventing democrat voters finding mates)
>mass immigration
Democrats are literally killing off their future white voters so they need mass immigration to survive which means they need to tell white people they are racist assholes who need to shut up and accept their impending minority status. And then everyone on the left is shocked pikachu face when working class white men vote for Trump.

>>482644
No idea what this is supposed to mean. Try reading an economics book instead of irrelevant feminist queer theory autism.

>>482654
My god you idiot, no one outside of your echo chamber / scripted bullshit cares about the trans faggotry. Trans people themselves have gone out to say how much they hate this ideology and that it's not theirs, because they're being set up as eugenics sacrifices. You faggots are worse than any transhumanist lib I can possibly imagine.

Also, Trump is basically "culture war 24/7" - nothing but the faggotry. There is no substance and not even a hint that he's going to offer anything real. The Trump base doesn't want anything real. They want to scream like retards and feel big. Anyone who joined any part of that for Trump the Man should just blow their brains out and stop wasting their time on this mortal coil, because they're going to be used up and killed as such idiots always are.

I say this will all sympathy. I would wish they not do this, or beg for redemption. All they'd have to do is say they were wrong. But, they won't, even though they have nothing to show for this faggotry and can't even say why they did it. The people who voted Trump because they hate Democrats have already made clear they have no interest in the same faggotry on repeat. Those people were always going to vote for any dogshit with an R next to the name. They didn't change their mind because the influencer said any magic words. The entire function of the influencer is to promote fear and eugenics - that's what the "meme" is, eugenist ideology.

>>482656
>My god you idiot, no one outside of your echo chamber / scripted bullshit cares about the trans faggotry.
Dude there was a trans flag attached to the White House through all of June. You are the one who is in an echo chamber. Democrats have been passing laws allowing schools to transition children without telling their parents and make it illegal for parents to interfere if they do find out. I don't want to argue why they are doing it (malthusianism, corporate greed, white genocide, take your pick) the point is it's happening and it will cost them voters in the future that's why they are hysterically pro-immigrant which means they also need to be hysterically anti-nationalist.

>Trans people themselves have gone out to say how much they hate this ideology
If you think this is about governments and corporations trying to help trans people then you are the idiot.

>>482657
>Also, Trump is basically "culture war 24/7" - nothing but the faggotry. There is no substance and not even a hint that he's going to offer anything real.
True. Can you understand how that appeals to white working class men who are portrayed by the media as villains in said culture war.

>Trump base doesn't want anything real.
Their choice is to vote for the guy who hates them and wants to replace them which cheap mexican labor. Or vote for the guy who doesn't hate them and wants to build a wall. Obviously they will vote for the latter. How are you not getting this.

>Anyone who joined any part of that for Trump the Man should just blow their brains out and stop wasting their time on this mortal coil
The side of empathy speaks again.

>>482658
>I would wish they not do this, or beg for redemption. All they'd have to do is say they were wrong.
Wrong about what? Trump was and still is the best (realistic) vote for working class men. You're a privileged middle class brat who has never done a day of manual labor that's why you don't understand.

>>482659
I'm not going to respond to someone this dishonest and trolly.

In better news, I am two chapters away from finishing the rough draft of book 3. So, I wind up repeating myself a lot and it feels like I don't get anywhere "big", but it's not easy to get through the latter half of the book. I kind of petered out because religion muddies things up, and the nation cannot be described without history and the political thinking I mention is transhistorical - i.e., what it means for humans to speak of "politics" in any sense we would recognize it. A future hypothetical can only do so much with politics, since it is fixated on a singular question - temporal authority and how to win it in struggles. The major arc of the book is that a philosophy of struggle is pointless because the struggle is definitionally unwinnable, and this serves to benefit aristocracy and the "man in the middle" who can insinuate endlessly, if it proliferates to the extent it has and is backed by technology and energy sources that can fuel it.

>>482660
>I'm not going to respond to someone this dishonest and trolly.
Just because you are upset doesn't mean anyone was trolling. It is called cognitive dissonance. Your brain is struggling to hold onto ideas which are no longer rational to believe in light of the facts and arguments I have presented to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognative_dissonance

<You're a privileged middle class brat who has never done a day of manual labor that's why you don't understand.
>I am two chapters away from finishing the rough draft of book 3
I rest my case.

>>482659
Everything you said here is propagabda especially about "white genocide."

As for kids transitioning? Its not really legal or allowed. And alot of hose that do wanna transition arent under 12. Theyre 15+.

Also, illegal immigrants coming here is due to corporations not wanting to deal with entitled native born residents whom dont eanna do elbow grease.

>>482661
Alot of Trump voters are privileged middle class brats. And theyre not all white either.

>>482661
>Just because you are upset doesn't mean anyone was trolling. It is called cognitive dissonance
Based Eugene is right, you are a fag

>>482682
I never said anything about "da troo working class". If you read my book, I'm not too fond of labor, and place the fount of human genius and anything that is actually done in the lowest class, which labor takes credit for. It happens in every workplace - the people who work the hardest are treated the worst and mocked religiously, and no one who is valid gives a shit. The only thing humans respond to is fear and the thrill of beating down something. That's their nature. It only was any other way temporarily because it had to be, and once those impediments to the human spirit were removed, its essence guided it to what we see - all of it enshrined by the aristocratic principle, rather than something that we truly "need to be" or should be, or that is functional for anything except continuing the scam. Any time a fag appeals to nature, they commit a fallacy a child could see through, and I will never understand why there are people so ready to do that when it is clear they will never see any benefit from joining the club. It is far from universal. Most humans accept what they and the society they create is because they didn't have a choice in it, and to speak of it being significantly different remains a fantasy. They have children to feed and lives to live, and cannot indulge in anything that risks that, for good reason.

>As for kids transitioning?
This is very much a proxy for them to continue doing what they did to us in the 1990s. Too many kids and parents adapted, now that the generation put through what we lived through in the 1990s had children and spoke to each other, against the taboo to acknowledge what was done to us. In short, they couldn't openly pursue eugenics and sterilization. It was so atrocious and terrible that the AMA (or was it the APA or a similar body) stepped in to stop what schools pushed with forced medication, to some extent. Too many parents complained and any private doctor would see the ruin coming into their office, which made their job harder and forced them to compromise even more to the legal coup. State doctors have to manage this and their jobs become unbearable due to the schools destroying so many people so fast, without regard for consequences - because the holders of the institution saw anyone who wasn't a Nazi like them as expendable, and the doctors themselves would be broken unless they became Nazis. Germans never change. So, how do they get away with it? Now they're "trans", over the objections of everyone involved. It's ritualized child abuse, and they will MAKE the parents go along with it with ever-increasing threats. They were trying it on me, insinuating I was gay before saying I was a rapist, a pedophile, and this is a routine they do with anyone who is a target of eugenics - to make us living abortions, where everything we do is wrong just as a crime of Being. That's what all of the sexual politics shit has always been.

There had been transition before this "teaching the controversy". It's not a brand new technology. It was not a culture war issue then, like it was our business to litigate private life or care that much about people who were otherwise valid. There was then, like now, a push to make the lowest class into prostitutes, catamites, and every foul thing, and ritual sacrifice around lurid sexual practices, but it was seen for what it was when it got this bad, and "trans ideology" was advanced. Where you see trans ideology, it's very much pushed by the right wing, hence why they never shut up about it. When you look at what liberals actually do, what laws are passed, and what they believe, they hate the gays more than conservatives. Makes sense, since conservatism is brazenly homosexual and depraved, and fake as fuck. This idea that the left is "pro-gay" was never believed until the rightists won and became rewriting history to fit their Nazified narrative. The left has a long history of contempt for sexual perverts, and this was weaponized against them when considering the base that would remain interested in "the left".

>>482682
>Everything you said here is propagabda especially about "white genocide."
I said
>I don't want to argue why they are doing it (malthusianism, corporate greed, white genocide, take your pick) the point is it's happening
Corporate greed explains it too. A transexual patient needs drugs and medial care for the rest of their lives that is a massive cash cow for medical professionals especially if they can trick children into falling into this lifestyle trap at an early age. I bet it's not "propagabda" anymore if you can blame it on evil capitalism.

Like I said it doesn't matter why it's happening. Democrat policies are killing future Democrat voters. That's why they are obsessed with immigration. But immigration hurts the native population. So Trump has positioned himself to be the defender of the natives. That's why they vote for him.

>illegal immigrants coming here is due to corporations not wanting to deal with entitled native born residents whom dont eanna do elbow grease.
Perhaps. And the Democrats are the party the corporations have bribed to get their way. Which means Trump is the one who is standing up to corporations on the side of worker's rights.

>>482686
>literally walls of text
You want us to believe you are a writer and this is how you organize your thoughts. Jeez.

>I never said anything about "da troo working class".
I did. I said you don't understand why the working class supports Trump because you are not working class.

>The only thing humans respond to is fear and the thrill of beating down something.
Could not disagree more. Humans respond to rewards. The problem with abolishing property rights is that you now how no way to reward people for working. All you can do is punish people for not working. That's why the west won the cold war. We had mustangs, you had gulags. Rewards work better than fear.

>words words words
Fuck you need to learn to be more concise.

>It's ritualized child abuse, and they will MAKE the parents go along with it with ever-increasing threats.
It sounds you're on the same page as conservatives there.

>Where you see trans ideology, it's very much pushed by the right wing, hence why they never shut up about it
Yes I know you alone are the real left wing and everyone else is right wing. Very enlightened.

>This idea that the left is "pro-gay" was never believed until the rightists won and became rewriting history to fit their Nazified narrative.
Nazis lost WW2. Communists won WW2. If you don't believe it then get a friend and stand in the middle of a major city. One of you hold a swastika flag and one of you hold a hammer & sickle flag. See which one of you gets arrested. We live in a society where being outed as a nazi is worse than being outed as a pedo. You are completely detached from reality if you think nazis are any kind of relevant political force.

>The left has a long history of contempt for sexual perverts, and this was weaponized against them when considering the base that would remain interested in "the left".
You are no-true-scotsman'ing again. Presumably you accept that ultra-zionist Ben Shaipro and gas-the-jews White Power Bill are both "right wing" even though they conflict on a major issue. I understand that your special snowflake corner of the left hates fags but the fact is a much larger cultural marxist part of the left very much supports if not worships sexual perverts and racial minorities. They are on the left because like you their highest value is egalitarianism. They just want egalitarianism on an intersectionalist social axis instead of the traditional marxist economic axis.

You rambled on for so long you forgot to counter any of my points. I guess you assumed I wouldn't read your whole post.

>>482686
>If you read my book
Jesus imagine being so high on your own deluded ravings that you think anyone is interested in reading an entire book of it. This is icycalm levels of narcissism. Take some anti-psychotics and take a break from a internet for a while.

>>482691
booklet

>>482690
Not responding directly to this dishonest drivel but one thing stuck out:
>Humans respond to rewards.
What is the greatest reward for us, and the only one that lasts and refers to history? Security. Property. Wealth. If you do not hold that, no reward is worth anything, because it will always be taken away the moment you are not actively defending it. This has been basic to every slavery and management when people do things that they do not want to do.

One thing that motivates people is that they have a mutual interest in cooperation without the promise of reward - because they would need to cooperate if they are to live. The greatest objective humans face is how they're going to face the greatest threat to them - other humans. None of that cooperation can happen in service to ulterior motives, and anyone who insists on such a crass thinking is an incorrigible fag. Such faggotry only exists because they hold security as a monopoly and want to drive up the price. But, there are many enablers who only know that. A Satanic race does not need to think of anything else.

So, there are interests humans have other that property and security - things I identified with the "eugenic interest" of life, that would be weaponized by ideology. There is much in this world that we need that has nothing to do with security or competition in struggle. But, any time you speak of "reward", you refer to imperatives that can be measured in terms of security, or you speak of something ephermeal that disappears at any crisis - and so, by believing as you do, you consign the world to government-by-crisis, and you're such a fag that you think such a condition is sustainable and natural.

We don't extirpate enough Nazis in my opinion. This fag-enabling society has one silver lining - it makes clear who the fags are. I don't know how these people live with themselves, knowing they're enablers and can do nothing else, and they did it all for pure faggotry and no other.

But, purges aren't my area, and I'm not in the position to judge who lives and who dies. I'm fortunate that I don't have to care about that, and if the worst happens, I suffer, die, and wash my hands clean of all of this. The one thing I told myself to never do was bring a child into this nightmare, and I accomplished that dubious goal… so, I'm freed of that cycle at least, not that it's any comfort to the others who will live through this. That's something the torture cult can't take away from me. If they were to extract my seed forcibly, I have no moral obligation to such an offspring and only have the sin of being raped… and since these people are monsters, they'll hold anything to make more people suffer. I doubt it will come to that, so I don't have that particular concern. I think you see then what the thinking of utilitarian fags is meant for, right?

Based comrade Eugene doing the hard work

Eugene, what do you think of Hideo Kojima and the Metal Gear series?

>>482738
I only watched someone play Metal Gear Solid 2. It's a fun game series that got into the meta-storytelling angle but it's not some big revelation or anywhere near the paranoid style that was prominent in American cinema during the 1970s, when shit got a lot uglier. Kojima took a particular interest in controlling the localization after the first Metal Gear's translation was disastrous, and that probably informed where he took the series from MGS on. There's a whole thing about Japanese-to-English localizations that give off familiar tells regarding some things. When you see what the zaibatsu in Japan get away with, you can see a real mindfuck, and what Japan was put through during the 1990s.

I didn't have much interest in the later games of the series. MGS2 was enough for me. I think that leading "flagship" titles in video games are at an impasse - not ready to make the leap to novel technology that would offer something new to the gaming experience, but becoming too expensive to keep making new stuff. Games were at their best when hardware allowed potentials that weren't there before. The NES/Famicom allowed smooth scrolling and a novel-for-the-time gamepad, and worked out the basic setup of the console game. You can even see in early NES games how anything went and how experimental so many games were, because the games were usually made by one or a few guys. The SNES updated controller setups to negate some of the limitations of the NES controller, and that was the thing that made the SNES a better console than the Genesis (souped up NES in a lot of ways). There hasn't been a similar leap in function since the Gamecube/PS2 overcame the processing limitations and controller flaws of the prior generation. After that consoles seem like more of the same, except for HD and internet integration being more common, the latter being problematic when we think about what smartphones are for. Nintendo wound up making a portable as their main "console" and that is the future of consoles as far as I care. So, I don't see the XBox/Playstation spectacles continuing unless there is a novel control scheme that is affordable and accessible.
My expectation is that a future console will get back to the basics of a "family computer", and would become the standard "kids console" at a cheap price point, without the complications of excessive internet functionality. I don't know if something like that already exists, but I see the development budgets getting too large for games that offer less interesting material, and a growing number of small developers who will work for peanuts and players who want that more than the latest and greatest thing. I expect development of basic 2D and 3D games that are "Retro" today will become even easier and encouraged as a way to keep people busy with simple and cheap games, and there will be too much interest in those games being actually fun or compelling to play, so they can't be shittified in the way that can become standard. We've seen enough shitty games and learn from the mistakes, so much that even poor developers know what doesn't work by now.

The one thing I would like to see stay in place is to not succumb to the "internet of things" thinking where everything is mobile and "smart". I just need a computer that plays a game for fun - simple, easy, flexible, and available worldwide. Today, a cheap computer can do a lot more than video games basically for free. Probably the hardest part is ensuring compatibility with monitors, but there's already a lot more standardization there than there was with old television sets. I don't want the personal computer to be abolish in favor of "smart" devices.

I think, if the market firms aren't going to make such a machine, there is enough know-how by now for someone to build such a machine as a hobby, and it can catch on. Of course, people can use Raspberry pis now as the basis for such a console.

As much of a doomer as I am about humanity, I do not believe we are doomed by technology, or that technology abides the laws of the eugenic creed. I have noticed that, in spite of the ruling ideas, there are many who ask the same questions I do, who wanted something functional and are in a position to produce that. I'm not one of those people, and I devoted myself to shouting down the bastards instead of productive aims. Everything I touch turns to shit, I'm afraid. But, since 2000, I've noticed there has been a necessary healing after what they did to us in the 1990s. I've had nothing to do with my life but ask myself why it was like this. The usual suspects shouted me down most of all because it is forbidden for us to speak of anything different from "historical progress".

https://apnews.com/article/euthanasia-autism-intellectual-disabilities-netherlands-b5c4906d0305dd97e16da363575c03ae
>Some Dutch people seeking euthanasia cite autism or intellectual disabilities, researchers say
Thoughts? Is it an outlier or sign of things already in motion?

Eugene, where does pedophilia/ephebophilia etc. lie in the eugenics trend?

>>482741
Sounds like you don't have much opinion on MGS, which is fair ofc. I thought you might have more thoughts on it bc the series puts a lot of focus on stuff like genetics/eugenics, "memes", mind control, forced injections/medication, and similar topics that you write about a lot. It comes across to me on the one hand as criticizing those things, but also reifying/reinforcing those narratives at the same time.

>>482943
Not him, but my 2c are that if eugenics is a ruling class cult, the child trafficking is 100% expected behavior that is normal for the ruling class, cults, and ruling class cults in history.

For example, Engels:
>Among the Scots, as among the Welsh, a relic even of the punaluan family persisted into the Middle Ages in the form of the right of the first night, which the head of the clan or the king, as last representative of the former community of husbands, had the right to exercise with every bride, unless it was compounded for money.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family/ch07.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur#

Or this stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_rites_of_passage

I can't find a source for this, but I also read that some ancient cult societies had a practice where a girl would be sexually initiated by the priests when she had her first period.

Think of all the slave masters, kings, princes, emperors etc in history. Did they obey AOC laws? Lol, no they didn't. Present-day laws and taboo around AOC are not really different from the ancient taboos, they apply to commoners and not the rulers so that the rulers get first dibs.

>>482940
This was at the heart of the euthanasia push. It was in the discourse during the 1990s, then as a "hypothetical" - but they were making us public humiliation targets and attacking the family for "genetic sin". Behind the curtain, where "real society" happened, they bragged they would kill us, and there was nothing we would do to stop it. Cue "euthanasia" and the push-back when it was rammed through, against law and reason and all sentiment. Everything about so-called "euthanasia" is illegal on multiple grounds, violates any possibility that there can be law, and is a declaration of open season on anyone not granted explicit license to live. It is an extension of "papers please" in every institution - so you could see this happen from the moment it became obligatory for human beings to be tracked from cradle to grave. In principle, states always did this as is their right - there's nothing preventing the state from knowing what happens within its domain, and record-keeping regarding the people is basic to any concept of the state. But, the new innovation was occulting the state and denying any basis for law as such - and eugenism and euthanasia are deliberate assaults on any law that is anything other than a procedure for glorifying eugenics. That was what was always at stake, rather than the moral sentiment regarding the death of any one person or genocide. It would be horrifying if very few people were actually killed, and one way they "mollified" people is to assure that this would be a rare, edge case "for those that needed it". Then you get MAiD gone haywire.

What gets me about the autism thing isn't that they're being killed and a good person is put to death because of the label. Most of us have long been ready to die, knowing that this world will never be different and humans will always hate us. The point is that they wish to control how we live and how we die. We don't get "clean death", and this is exemplified throughout the "euthanasia" discourse. They do not believe in "clean death", yet that is sometimes sold to the damned as a way to impose unlimited torture and the thrill of torture for the valid. Such are the values of eugenism.
Like I say, this is the worst thing humanity has ever done. Much worse than the Nazis.

>>482943
To answer your question,
>>482967
is pretty much on the money. I don't see pederasty as a uniquely eugenist thing, as if this were a new idea. Aristocratic pederasty goes back a long way, and rarely does it link directly to the eugenic creed. Eugenics is a thorough and total aristocratic religion, and so pederasty is weaponized and glorified for their class, and anything that will promote rot and death is rewarded by its logic.

Pedophilia and pederasty are different things. Philia implies a sentiment, pederasty is a practice. The pederast is not a "pedophile" - they do what they do because they believe they are ordained by God to "teach these savages a lesson" and conduct a ritual sacrifice. The pederasty that is most dangerous, that is never going to be punished and has been tacitly accepted, has nothing to do with "philia" or love. The men doing it are "good men" and not men with pathologies of any sort. They're given the signal that they have sanction to do it. You see this stuff in military elite cults a lot.

The pedophilia/ephebophilia "discourse" is aware of this and intentionally re-directs. It exists to make this large-scale ritual abuse inadmissible and unstoppable. So, they show escaped young boys and girls on those posters, to brag "this is what we can do to you, and there are millions of us party to this, you can't escape". I have very good authority on this matter, but I won't say exactly how, except that I didn't go through it personally and want to keep myself away from all forms of child rape… really I don't like childhood at all and hated being a child.

Another aim of the pedophilia discourse is infantilization and internalization - to teach failed men that they are intellectually children, and then intellectually "pure retarded", autism score 0. So, it relates to autism and the wank about it. They would accuse me of such things, but some lines are too far for society, even in this degraded state.
One thing I have found is that, outside of the socially approved discourse, there are a lot more men and women who understand what this really is, and there is more sympathy or understanding with pedophiles than you'd think. There are pedophiles with the pathology who will speak of why they turned out this way and publicize that, so this isn't exactly a secret.
There is another angle with the insinuation game, PUA types (who are introduced as "change agents" with intel and Tavistock ties), who want rot by any vector they can push it. I am very familiar with the incel mentality, having done my time before getting over it and seeing "hey, these assholes are just grooming for Nazi faggotry". When it started though, "incel" did not have the meaning it acquired, and it was a lot of men and women who were forced alone. The main incel board was libtarded and so much of the incel mentality exists as a direct response to that forum and its culture. Somehow, the lib forum was worse than what exists now, but the discourse has been completely Nazified. What I've seen since then is that mainstream society has largely stopped pretending that anything about the dominant sexual mores worked, and the people who pushed that are guilty as sin for enabling the rise of eugenism and the thrill of torture. Natural slaves will never be different.

>>482965
Well yeah, Kojima I imagine is someone "in the know". Nothing in that game is a new revelation.
It's still a pretty cool game, and as far as I know there weren't games like it up to that point. The paranoid style is difficult to pull off in a video game.

Now, if you want to have a video game discussion, the subtext of Undertale and Undertale Yellow is a whole other thing, for good or bad. It's the definitional "Zoomer" game.

>>482967
Why are rites of passaes for girls centered around consumation while for boys its about physical endurance?

>>482981
I think pederasty/hebephilia is more for recreational tham actual practice.

Like, alot of aristocrats were married by contract not by choice.

They probably had to put with spouses whom were ugly/mediocre in physique, personality, or talent.

Eugene,

what do you think of the black national question?

What about the national question in general in regards to USA/Canada?

What about the landback question in regards to the USA/Canada?

What about landback in Israel/Palestine?

>>483085
I'll try to answer each briefly.

>what do you think of the black national question?
Attempt to shoehorn a Germanic understanding where it doesn't belong. Go to black Americans and most consider the black nationalists to be silly hoteps who will make their situation worse. The prevalent strain of black nationalism isn't the Panthers or what these ideologues think. It's the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan, which lifts a lot of Freemason stuff but it's for black people and says that they are the real Israelites.
There isn't a burning desire for "black identity", let alone a "black nation-state" which would be enclosed and segregated. The communists promoting that were doing a lot of damage and promoting their own brand of racism. About the only desire for that from the black people was that they were pushed against so much that they believed they had no choice but to resist. The overriding aim was to simply be able to live, after being left with nothing after emancipation. If that simple thing were granted, there wouldn't be a "Negro Question". That was always an insinuation of eugenics. If you look at America of the past, ideological racism was not what the narrative theory of history insisted it "should" be. You'd probably find that this would have gone away within a couple of generations if the economic basis of the country were at all sane. When that started to happen, it was necessary to "teach the controversy" and restore segregation on explicitly eugenicist grounds. By now, black Americans have no solidarity with each other, and you can go ask them yourself or judge what you would do in their situation, instead of defaulting to pigheaded assumptions.

>What about the national question in general in regards to USA/Canada?
This ties into the above. America/ the US isn't a nation-state in the Germanic sense (which itself was an intentional parody of nationalism as a democratizing force in the late 18th century). It started as 13 colonies in British America, and they understood themselves as British during the Revolutionary War. None of that was about a "national identity". It happened because "well, we've already been at war for a year", and there were expectations that the Empire would not be centered around a racial idea in England. There were people in the early United States looking at France and seeing what was going on there as examples to learn from, rather than believing they had "perfected America" after independence.
"The national question" was always a Germanic (and later Israeli) conceit. It has no proper place, and the Soviet Union rejected it for itself. For the USSR, it was a union of nations, and so "national questions" were an internal affair, which they say explicitly. The Soviets certainly called out the insanity of American racism and the eugenic creed's democidal aims, but they weren't above their own bigotry when push came to shove. The "communists promoting the black belt" thing was the American communists faceplanting and making asses of themselves.

Really though, the US was neither a nation-state nor a collection of historical nations. It was a mercantile project. Nearly everyone was an indentured servant or a slave, and the "nobles" were just rich guys looking to make a buck. America was the dumping ground of Europe, and that conceit dominated the discourse for all of the pigheaded reasons intellectuals always believed in their heart. They always believed that they were a different race from us, and laughed at the idea of equality.
One thing to note about the three superstates of the 20th century is that all of them were built on the back of a very large peasant and slave population, who were systematically mocked and denied by the imperial system centered in Europe.

>What about the landback question in regards to the USA/Canada?
Scam to seize property and add it to oligarchy. The Indians know they're not getting any land, and have no one to settle on that land. They're being killed off and bred out of existence. This ideology is Israeli and Germanic, alien to the conflict between the Indians and Americans at any point and wholly inappropriate for the present situation.

>What about landback in Israel/Palestine?
And Israeli agentur are the prime motivator for the "settler-colonialist" propaganda - so they have their excuse to confiscate American land "for justice". It's a naked cash grab intended to punish poor people. They are the same people who poison the reservations and sterilize them. Fuck Israel.
The Israelis insist that everyone should be like them. They stink to high heaven. The Muslims and everyone dispossessed by Jewish Palestine are not the Indians. They have armies and the Empire doesn't need "Israel". The world is sick of Israel's bullshit and I will be happy when the betrayal happens and I don't have to listen to their whining any more.

In any event, the invocation of "justice" is crocodile tears. Nothing about landgrabs and enclosure is "just" or can be made just. The Palestinian demand is not for a nation-state idea or symbolism, but to be allowed to join the Muslim world and not be evicted by Shitraeli eugenist monsters.

If someone says "Eugene, you're an American hypocrite" - I don't profit from any further enclosure of Indian land, and what was done was done. America has a lot of questions to ask itself if it is to be a "thing" in the future. But, those questions won't be asked. Eugenics won. This is the world eugenics creates. So, I think only about that, and I will work with anyone who will kill eugenist filth.

Amazing read Eugene, after you finish your work here, I would like you to reconsider seeking a Phd or Masters at Cambridge.

Also publish on demand is a thing, I would very much like to read your work in hard copy.

If you need help typesetting, which tbh fam I reckon you could do yourself; We can help.

>>483102
I know how to format it to look "professional" or something close to it. Just a matter of obtaining materials to make the hard copy.
I have most of Book 3 finished but want to edit it for clarity, to make it clearer what I'm referring to. It looks like "rant at highest volume", which it will be since Books 4 and 5 tone down the "doom is nigh". It comes off as doomer because I'm writing about concepts which are basically trans-historical - that is, what it means to speak of the concept of the political and economic, which are rather grody if they are distilled to their essential characteristics, how we speak of them. I really need to make the point that you won't find answers to the political within the political itself, especially formulations of it written by aristocracy - written traditionally by religion and for the purposes religion serves. Religion itself gives some of the answers of where to look, since no religion is a "total system" in that sense, and I'm opposed to "total systems" as an explanation of anything useful for us. The only total system that is relevant for me is the world itself, and even there, the world is not a "system" in that sense.

I have a supplemental I was writing but it needs to be edited, since I want to avoid "rant mode" and clarify what I wrote in the first book about the concept of systems, and how this concept could be worked with in the future. My main goal there is to demonstrate how a systems thought could be reconstructed from simple components, rather than reliant on pedagogy to assert a fixed system in minds that aren't able to defend themselves against it. My more long-term hope would be to write something accessible to a young reader, so they can do something to guard against the poison of education and we might have far less of this toxicity. I believe this will happen without me doing anything out of necessity, but the fear is very strong now and there is something very real to fear. If there is nothing but "the system" that we're getting - if what they did to us in the 1990s is allowed to continue but worse when the brats around me are the elders - it will be terrible to live through that. That whole thing was set up so that the favored would have their private and special education and everyone else will get nothing but "retard! retard!" shouted at them from cradle to grave. Since it's not really possible to reason with that or "refute" it, the only way out is a world apart from the institutions, if such a thing can happen. So many of the socialists lost that sense and believe (or used to believe) there really is nothing outside of society. But, it's hard to see the reality with a knife held at their throats by the sadistic gangsters of the institutions, and the great hope was to be one of the sadistic gangsters.

Moved to >>>/leftypol_archive/22975.