Author Topic: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations  (Read 1024 times)

guest55

  • Guest
Quote
97% of "white" bloodlines, 90% of "Asian" bloodlines and 67% of "Latino" bloodlines in the US must be prohibited from reproducing in order for the US to become 100% American.

Speaking of which, what's going on in Madagascar these days? The reason I bring it up in conjunction with the above point is because it made me think of this:

Madagascar Plan
Quote
The Madagascar Plan was a proposal by the Nazi German government to forcibly relocate the Jewish population of Europe to the island of Madagascar. Franz Rademacher, head of the Jewish Department of the German Foreign Office, proposed the idea in June 1940, shortly before the Fall of France. The proposal called for the handing over of control of Madagascar, then a French colony, to Germany as part of the eventual peace terms.

The idea of re-settling Polish Jews in Madagascar, then part of the French Empire, was investigated by the Polish government in 1937,[1][2] but the task force sent to evaluate the island's potential determined that only 5,000 to 7,000 families could be accommodated, or even as few as 500 families by some estimates.[a] Because efforts by the Nazis to encourage the emigration of the Jewish population of Germany before World War II were only partially successful, the idea of deporting Jews to Madagascar was revived by the Nazi government in 1940.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan

BONUS:
Wir lagen vo Madagaskar Kriegsmarine Song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRR-GdErmN0

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7384
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI2QE_3ATtw

While undoubtedly there were men unable to find sexual partners in all civilizations, I am quite sure that only Western civilization that could come up with calling such men "incels" (with the connotation that someone is supposed to be assigned to provide them with sex). In all other historical civilizations, where polygamy was generally legal, it would have been considered entirely normal for some people to have more spouses and hence others to have none. It is only the (supremely patriarchal) Western civilization with its ban on legal polygamy that caused Western men to feel automatically entitled to one spouse each, and hence consider failure to acquire this sufficient reason to become misogynistic.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2022, 08:58:02 pm by 90sRetroFan »

guest55

  • Guest
I'd rather have sex with a cactus than a Westerner at this point. Succulents are much nicer to look at anyway. Speaking of which, some Western lady has been driving around my neighborhood in her Lexus and stealing succulents right out of my neighbors front yards....

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7384
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Funny Funny x 1 View List

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Quote
Supporters of Democratic candidates tend to be less cognitively rigid and more interpersonally warm than Trump supporters, according to new research published in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology. This was found to be true even for supporters of left-wing Democratic candidates such as Bernie Sanders, suggesting that extreme liberals and extreme conservatives do not share similar psychological dispositions.
https://www.psypost.org/2022/01/trump-supporters-exhibit-greater-cognitive-rigidity-and-less-interpersonal-warmth-than-supporters-of-liberal-candidates-study-finds-62400

Just reading that shows how intuitive it is. Why would a so-called "extreme liberal" Sanders supporter be less empathetic than a mainstream liberal? Intuitively, we would expect the opposite--the Sanders-supporting liberals are motivated by social justice, whereas the mainstream liberals are just corporate elitists.

Quote
“There is an ongoing debate in psychology about whether liberals and conservatives fundamentally differ from each other (asymmetry), or whether both extreme liberals and conservatives are similar to each other on various psychological dimensions (symmetry),” explained study author Jake Womick, a postdoctoral research associate at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

“So, for instance, past work has shown cognitive rigidity and interpersonal coldness are linked to conservatism. There is a question of whether this is unique to conservatives, or if these might apply to anyone who endorses extreme ideology, regardless of whether they are on the left or right.

???

This is why people don't give a **** about what "experts" have to say. The left literally says they are motivated by social justice, and left-leaning journalists write articles with headlines titled "I Don't Know How To Explain To You That You Should Care About Other People". Anyone who has spent 3 milliseconds examining politics would know how obvious the left-right empathy divide is.

Quote
The participants also completed psychological assessments of four variables representing cognitive rigidity (openness to experience, active open-minded thinking, dogmatism, and preference for one right answer) and two variables representing interpersonal warmth (compassion and empathy).

“In general, we primarily found support for the asymmetry hypothesis,” Womick told PsyPost. “Supporters of relatively extreme Democratic candidates (Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren) were similar to supporters of more moderate Democratic candidates (Joe Biden and Michael Bloomberg) and were not similar to Trump supporters. This trend was particularly strong for interpersonal warmth.”

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7384
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
They have the same attitude to religion, assuming all religious extremists share a stereotype despite them being extreme about religions with different teachings! This never made any sense to me. There was also the underlying presumption that all religious extremism is bad. Why? If the religion itself is good, the more extreme you are about following it, clearly the better you are!

They just fear extremism for being extreme, without regard for the content of the extremism. These are probably the same types who lack the ability to tell the difference between initiated violence and retaliatory violence, instead considering both equally bad. (They have annoyed me since childhood with bullshit about how I will only succeed in converting meat-eaters to veganism by being nice to them in all circumstances (even when they are literally killing animals in front of me) "so that they cease to fear veganism as something extreme". WTF?! The reason meat-eaters aren't vegan is not because they "consider veganism extreme" but because they don't care about the animals! I don't want to convert meat-eaters in the first place; I want to kill them using the same methods they are OK with being used to kill their victims! But when I say this, I am accused of "making vegans look extreme".)

"left-leaning"

Which means we are the ones constantly having to expend extra energy to distinguish ourselves from them and clarify that they do not represent serious leftist thinking, thereby putting us at an even bigger disadvantage compared to rightists who do not have this problem.
 
« Last Edit: January 25, 2022, 07:40:00 pm by 90sRetroFan »

SirGalahad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
    • View Profile
Not to mention that very often, massive problems require extreme solutions to solve in the first place. Using "extremist" or "radical" as a specifically negative catch-all term is foolish.

"They have annoyed me since childhood with bullshit about how I will only succeed in converting meat-eaters to veganism by being nice to them in all circumstances"

This drives me (quite literally) mad. What irks me the most is that 99% of the people saying this are non-vegan themselves. If you couldn't convince yourself to be vegan, why the **** would anyone take YOUR advice when you claim to know how to convert people? You're unintentionally admitting that you shouldn't be listened to. They're basically politely telling you to shut up, because non-humans are so oppressed that nobody even wants to hear about or be bothered with their plight, and on the rare occasions that it IS brought up in discussions, people forget entirely about the non-human's perspective in all of this. "It's all up to dietary choice. I'll respect vegans as long as they respect my right to eat meat." "I just don't like the vegans that force it on people" (neglecting the fact that carnism is forced on non-humans). "We need to eat plant-based for the environment." Etc etc. The psychopathic tunnel vision is so strong in carnists, that they register merely bringing up and vouching for veganism as force, and the exploitation and murder of billions of living beings as non-force. Cows, pigs, chickens, and really any non-human deemed socially acceptable to imprison, exploit and slaughter, are openly and proudly viewed as complete non-entities. Now, if only I had the power to snap my fingers and put any carnist in the situation they willingly place non-humans in
« Last Edit: January 25, 2022, 05:30:08 pm by SirGalahad »

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Quote
They just fear extremism for being extreme, without regard for the content of the extremism.

As an additional coping mechanism for their fear, they have turned to self-aggrandizement! For example, I've seen countless people seriously bring up the "horseshoe theory" (which is not even a "theory", much less a logically-consistent idea)--which is basically a way to say "Anyone who is unideological like me is good; anyone who has an ideology is bad."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

And for fun, here is a forum to make fun of these morons who make a false equivalency between leftism and rightism:
https://old.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/



Quote
This drives me (quite literally) mad. What irks me the most is that 99% of the people saying this are non-vegan themselves.

It reveals their exploitive character in its rawest form.

They are basically saying "Gratify me first, and if I am entertained enough, _maybe_ I will consider your perspective. But, if you slip up, I will mock you, because even in defiance I can derive gratification from you."

i.e. "I am going to attempt to exploit you, because I don't value you in the first place."

guest55

  • Guest
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2022, 01:50:01 pm »
Quote
It reveals their exploitive character in its rawest form.

They are basically saying "Gratify me first, and if I am entertained enough, _maybe_ I will consider your perspective. But, if you slip up, I will mock you, because even in defiance I can derive gratification from you."

i.e. "I am going to attempt to exploit you, because I don't value you in the first place."

Alot of this going on out there!

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7384
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #24 on: February 09, 2022, 09:37:59 pm »
https://archive.is/j9e22

Quote
Status Anxiety Is Blowing Wind Into Trump’s Sails
...
Over the past six decades, according to Petersen, there has been a realignment of the parties in respect to their position as pro-establishment or anti-establishment: “In the 1960s and 1970s the left was associated with an anti-systemic stance but this position is now more aligned with the right-wing.”

Yes, because in the 60s-70s the establishment had been shaped by traditional Western civilization. Today's establishment, on the other hand, has been significantly shaped by the Counterculture.

Quote
Instead of focusing on the economic system and its elites, Hartwich continued,

    Right-wing populists usually identify what they call liberal elites in culture, politics and the media as the “enemies of the people.” Combined with the rejection of marginalized groups like immigrants, this creates targets to blame for dissatisfaction with one’s personal situation or the state of society as a whole while leaving a highly unequal economic system intact. Right-wing populists’ focus on the so-called culture wars, the narrative that one’s culture is under attack from liberal elites, is very effective because culture can be an important source of identity and self-worth for people. It is also effective in organizing political conflicts along cultural, rather than economic lines.
...
Diana Mutz, a political scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, described the political consequences of white status decline in her 2018 paper, “Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote.”
...
Mutz found that:

    Change in financial well-being had little impact on candidate preference. Instead, changing preferences were related to changes in the party’s positions on issues related to American global dominance and the rise of a majority-minority America: issues that threaten white Americans’ sense of dominant group status.
...
Status anxiety has become a driving force, Mitrea and her colleagues note: “It is not so much current economic standing, but rather anxiety concerning future socioeconomic decline and déclassement, that influences electoral behavior.”

Hence offering to improve their financial well-being will not placate them. The only thing that will placate them is to give them permanent "white" supremacy. This is morally unacceptable. Therefore we should not be trying to placate them at all. We should be trying to destroy them.

Quote
Michael Bang Petersen puts it this way:

    We know that humans essentially have two routes to acquire status: prestige and dominance. Prestige is earned respect from having skills that are useful to others. Dominance is status gained from intimidation and fear. Individuals who are high in the pursuit of dominance play a central role in political destabilization. They are more likely to commit political violence, to engage in hateful online interactions and to be motivated to share misinformation.

That this is dangerous does not need repeating.

See also:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-we-lose/

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7384
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7384
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
"But not the majority "white" school! They are Eurocentrists."
Literally this. I know many Indian immigrant parents who moved all the way to another **** city just to get their children into a "good" school. But I do not know if it was because they wanted their children to attend a "White" majority school, or if it was simply because those schools had shown better academic performance among their students.

They are still Westerners, as they view academic performance in the Western education system positively.


Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Quote
A series of 13 studies with over 10,000 participants tested the change in Americans’ prejudice following the presidency of Donald Trump. The researchers found that explicit racial and religious prejudice increased amongst Trump’s supporters, while prejudice decreased among those who opposed him. This research was published in Nature Human Behavior.
[...]
Across Studies 1-9, Ruisch and Ferguson found that support for Donald Trump predicted “a significant increase in prejudice towards a range of social, racial and religious minoritized groups.” Those who generally opposed Trump, including liberals and conservatives, showed decreases in prejudice in the same time period. Studies 10-13 provided indirect support for the mechanism behind the shift in social norms.

Trump supporters perceived that expressing prejudice had become more acceptable since his election, and this perception predicted greater personal prejudice among them. As well, “experimentally leading participants to feel that Trump supporters approved of his controversial rhetoric significantly increased Trump supporters’ personal expressions of prejudice .”
https://www.psypost.org/2022/04/donald-trumps-presidency-associated-with-significant-changes-in-the-topography-of-prejudice-in-the-united-states-62880


I.e., tolerating tribalism makes tribalists more tribalist:
Quote
Although these correlational studies cannot speak to causality, our final four studies provided indirect support for our proposed causal mechanism of shifting social norms: Trump supporters perceive that it has become more acceptable to express prejudice since Trump’s election (study 10), and the perception that prejudice is more acceptable predicts greater personal prejudice amongst Trump supporters (study 11). Providing more decisive causal evidence for this proposed norms mechanism, we found (studies 12 and 13) that experimentally leading participants to feel that Trump supporters approved of his controversial rhetoric significantly increased Trump supporters’ personal expressions of prejudice.

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Quote
More than 60 percent of Americans who voted for former President Trump agree with the core tenet of the “great replacement theory,” according to a new Yahoo News-YouGov poll.

The poll, published on Tuesday, found that 61 percent of Trump supporters agree with the statement that “a group of people in this country are trying to replace native-born Americans with immigrants and people of color who share their political views.” Twenty-two percent of Trump supporters surveyed said they disagreed with the conspiracy theory.

Meanwhile, 16 percent of respondents who voted for President Biden said they agree with the statement, while 71 percent said otherwise.

Seventy-three percent of Trump supporters agreed with the statement that there is discrimination against white people in the U.S. and 18 percent disagreed, compared with 20 percent of Biden supporters who agreed and 74 percent who disagreed.

Sixty-nine percent of respondents who voted for Trump said that they are concerned U.S.-born citizens are losing​​ economic, political and cultural influence in the country to immigrants, while 30 percent of those who voted for Biden agreed with that statement, the poll said.

The new poll comes a week after the massacre at a Tops Friendly Markets location in Buffalo, N.Y., that resulted in the deaths of 10 people and injuries to three others.
https://thehill.com/news/state-watch/3499877-6-in-10-trump-voters-agree-with-core-tenet-of-great-replacement-theory-survey/

Who are those 16% of Biden voters who believe this?