ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, December 15, 2016

Mailvox: the ontology of existential idiocy

Wild Man keeps blithely repeating the same argumentative nonsense over and over again despite the fact that he can't even construct a basic syllogism or correctly understand what Western civilization is.
VD - you said - "Give it up, Wild Man. I already told you that you're full of it. You keep trying to work your false narrative of Western civilization being based on equality in there, which a) is not true, and, b) the Alt-Right openly opposes."

VD - you also said - "You're not (mystified). There are no deep contradictions, you're simply either a) a liar, or b) a stubborn idiot."

VD - In all fairness, I don't think anything I said implies that I am lying and therefore trolling and baiting around supposed mystification. My mystification with regards to fully groking the alt-right (particularly your conception of it) is real - and I am making a real effort to try and understand your position on this - and by way of this effort I have observed some deep contradictions ..... and these are the source of my mystification (nothing weird going on here with me - just straight forward rational discussion is what I am hoping for).

I also think you are wrong about anything I said implying I'm a stubborn idiot (but they all say that - right?) - but I try to be open minded and we'll see - I'm always hoping to learn something new, and maybe you will point me in that direction, but "idiot"! .... you know what they say about extraordinary claims .... but hey maybe you will show me something worthy of a face palm slap sufficient of the "idiot" voice-over. If so I will do my best to admit it!

Here are the reasons for my counter-claims:

1)Your claim that I keep trying to work in a particular narrative around western civilization, namely that it is partly based on some sense of equality, is true in general, with respect to many of the comments I have posted on previous threads - i.e. - I do believe that as per the 4 underlying precepts of the western egalitarian as I have defined, particularly as per precepts #1 + #2 ..... some sense of existential ontological equality does arise, by way of each man and woman enjoying, or perhaps suffering if you like, the same existential and ontological conditions around the operation of self-agency - namely the belief in the ever present power to choose, and the belief in the implied personal responsibilities that entails.
It's not a claim, it's a straightforward observation that Wild Man keeps saying the same thing over and over, then asserting a nonexistent contradiction on my part on the basis of his own false narrative, which action, you will note, he has now admitted. It is apparent that he is a low midwit enchanted by the fact that he actually has an idea. This is exactly the sort of behavior Mike Cernovich warned against, and is an object lesson in the importance of jettisoning bad ideas.

Wild Man doesn't realize that he's defined 2+2 as being equal to 37, then attempted to criticize everyone else's math on that basis. Worse, he's attempting to claim everyone who is doing math correctly is contradicting themselves, which is not possible since no one accepts the idea that 2+2=37 or that there exists a sense of existential ontological equality intrinsic to the West.

What part of "equality does not exist in ANY meaningful and material sense" is hard for the moron to grasp? If he had the ability to construct, or deconstruct, a logical syllogism, he would attempt to demonstrate that a) equality does exist, and, b) this equality is integral to Western civilization. He would fail, of course, since both statements are false, but at least he would stop subjecting every reader of this blog, and worse, me, to this interminable, nonsensical salad of words he observably does not understand.

Note to the midwits: using big words that impress you when others use them does not make you correct, convincing, or intellectual, particularly when you use them incorrectly.
In a previous thread I have outlined these 4 underlying precepts of this conception of the western egalitarian, which I could copy and paste here again on this thread if you like. You say it is not true (you are contending that there is no such sense of human equality - I discern you judge this as a fallacy) but you have not yet engaged as to precisely why the common existential ontological conditions of personhood do not support some sense of equality, so .... how can I possibly know your mind on this, if you don't engage on this topic and tell me? I assume your judgment as to the fallacious nature of my contention also conditions your conception of the Alt-Right. As such I trust you now see that this absolves me of the charge of lying about my mystification about your conception of the alt-right ..... now implying perhaps, that the charge, by default, is instead one of "stubborn idiot".
Oh Sweet Darwin, no, you've already done enough copy and pasting here. And no, you clearly understand perfectly well what the 16 Points mean, you're just too determined to cling to your egalitarian nonsense to accept them. This mewling "I'm so mystified, please prove the obvious to me or I'll post another thousand-word screed that says the same damn thing" is contemptible. So, I have concluded that the dichotomy was false and you happen to be both a) a liar, and b) a stubborn idiot.

The conditions of personhood are too trivial to support any sense of equality that is relevant to Western civilization, and moreover, have never served as a basis for any form of observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual equality in the West, or anywhere else. The fact that corporations are legal persons in the West should alone suffice to demonstrate the fact that Wild Man's "common existential ontological conditions of personhood" argument is a complete non-starter.
OK - You think I am a stubborn idiot for reasons that I am apparently too dense to see, I guess you are implying. Well humor an implied underling (by intellectual brilliance standards) then, good sir. Please now address my quandary. My prior discussion with respect to the underlying precepts #1 + #2 of the western egalitarian, as defined, implies some sense of existential ontological equality does arise by way of the condition of personhood. People are the same in some sense. The necessary conditions of personhood implies a sense of categorical equality. What are the necessary conditions of personhood? We all are going to die. Well prior to adulthood we all come to know this existential fact. We all are faced with the same challenge ..... as to grok the best way to conduct one's life. We each sense and undertake this challenge because of our common human belief in self-agency and the personal responsibility so implied. Where is this conception of the categorical equality of the existential ontological nature of personhood fallacious?
This is false on its face, and contains several false foundations as well. Corporations don't die, and yet they are legally recognized persons. Human embryos and fetuses do die, and they are not. Dogs and pigs and monkeys and plants are all going to die too, and they are not considered persons either. Many humans do not believe in self-agency or in a subsequent implication of personal responsibility; the current state of cognitive science specifically denies even the theoretical possibility of conscious self-agency. The conception of the categorical equality of the existential ontological nature of personhood is observably fallacious from start to finish, which is one reason why it is not, and has never been, recognized in any legal system in the history of the West.
Your more direct claim, that the particular narrative around western civilization that I have implied, namely that it is partly based on some sense of equality (as discussed in #2 above), is actually OPENLY opposed by the Alt-Right, is also, more directly, mystifying, given #(15) of your outline of the Alt-Right principles (i.e. - The Alt Right does not believe in the general supremacy of any race, nation, people, or sub-species. Every race, nation, people, and human sub-species has its own unique strengths and weaknesses, and possesses the sovereign right to dwell unmolested in the native culture it prefers.) Well what is the negation of supremacy so implied? Given that you stated principle #(15) in terms of racial/national existential preservation - does it not imply the negation of supremacy so implied, is some sense of equality (given what we know about the operation of darwinian evolution)?, and furthermore via the paraphrase of the embrace of the scientodific (alt-right principle #8) I provided in comment #72 above, the racial/national cultural profile is obviously contingent on the the make-up of the in-group individuals ..... and as such, the sense of darwinian existential equality implied by the principle of racial/national existential preservation as implied by Alt-Right principle #(15), is contingent on the make-up of the individuals ....... now what precise qualities expressed at the individual level might well account for said cultural darwinian existential equality implied by the principle of racial/national existential preservation? - well the categorical equality of the existential ontological nature of personhood is certainly a good candidate to account for that - is it not? Or, more succinctly ......the spirit of which can be summed up as "all men are created equal in the eyes of God", or the spirit of which could also be summed as "perhaps even God knows not (and certainly no man can know) the future existential conditions of nations and races". So VD - please tell me precisely how I am a stubborn idiot by way of being too dense to see how your conception of the Alt-Right is OPENLY opposed to some sense of human equality?
Wild Man is an idiot because a declaration of an absence of belief in SUPREMACY is not synonymous with a declaration of any sense of SAMENESS or EQUALITY. Quite the contrary, in fact, as the further from sameness one goes, the harder it is to even compare two things. What is supreme, a penguin or a satellite? It's a category error to even ask the question! Now consider the intrinsic dishonesty of the language to which he is forced to resort to even begin to try making his idiotic case.
  • "does it not imply" (no)
  • "the sense of darwinian existential equality implied" (there is no such thing, ergo it cannot imply anything)
  • "might well account for" (and yet does not)
  • "is certainly a good candidate" (it can't be, since it doesn't exist)
  • "could also be summed as" (no, it can't, and it isn't)
Very well, Wild Man. You are a stubborn idiot who is too dense to see that you have constructed a false narrative, claimed that because that false narrative can be imagined, it actually exists and thereby negates a vast range of material observations which have led me, and many others, to conclude that equality is an abstract concept which does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.

That being said, I will grant you that the common existential ontological conditions of personhood support equality in an imaginary sense. In your head, if nowhere else.
Now ...... if you happen to now agree with the conceptions around some sense of human equality that I have now repeatedly outlined, here and in prior threads, (which aren't my original conceptions in any event - these are simply the western egalitarian principles of the enlightenment period - wasn't it John Locke that fleshed out these ideas?) ...... then ....VD some of your conclusions don't follow.
I don't agree with any of the conceptions Wild Man has repeatedly outlined. And Western civilization long preceded the Enlightenment, nor does John Locke or any other Enlightenment philosopher define Western civilization, which is why the entire argument has been so prodigiously and obviously stupid from the start.

You had your shot, Wild Man. Now give it up and stop trying to argue your nonsensical point. If you are still mystified, then you will simply have to remain that way, because I have zero interest in continuing to explain the observable and the obvious to you.

I trust this explains why I am seldom inclined to do more than simply tell midwits and those of normal intelligence that they are wrong, and if egregiously so, stupid. My curt dismissals are not evidence that I cannot dismantle their arguments and demonstrate in detail why they are incorrect, they are instead an indication that doing so is so trivially obvious and easy that only long and painful experience of MPAI has made it possible for me to believe that it could ever be necessary.

Labels: ,

117 Comments:

Blogger The Kurgan December 15, 2016 5:16 AM  

I enjoy these vivisections so much I may start sending you emails impersonating a variety of midwits from throwaway accounts.

Blogger The Kurgan December 15, 2016 5:27 AM  

Also... A genuine: O M G

You really were not kidding when you told me you're a very patient man. I (mostly, as Dagos are won't to do) have little understanding for any supposed virtue of patience beyond that of waiting for prey to enter the kill zone, but I am nevertheless awed by this Titanic expression of it.

Blogger Marsh 01701 December 15, 2016 5:43 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous jml1911a1 December 15, 2016 5:51 AM  

His MBA from Harvard gives him a vocabulary.

His MBA from Harvard also renders impotent any abilities to actually think.

Anonymous SciVo de Plorable December 15, 2016 5:52 AM  

Pre-Enlightenment Western Civ is the most culturally rich, and also the most traditionally Christian -- except for the part before that, when it was pagan.

Cultural richness is alluring, so it would take a strong aversion to avoid it; and the joyful, all-pervasive, unabashed and militant Christianity that immediately preceded the Enlightenment is the most salient distinguishing characteristic.

Therefore, we may reasonably infer that an insistence on equating the Enlightenment with Western Civ (and ignoring the preceding couple dozen centuries) is a sign of either anti-Christianity or an even broader anti-religion, or at least anti-Western religions.

(I have to make that last qualifier because so much of that sort of sentiment is apparently motivated by an irrational "eff you Dad" that it's not uncommon for avowed secularists to have a fondness for Islam, presumably just because it's so anti-West.)

Blogger Lovekraft December 15, 2016 5:57 AM  

Not surprising that a society given an outlet, combined with sustained media propaganda and general mischievousness, would be emerging with an over-inflated sense of worth.

The underlying emotion behind marxists is fear. Fear that they'll be found out as frauds, fear that the truth will stamp out their ideology, fear that the monsters they are fighting are in fact the heroes.

So fear motivates them to ignore argument and logic in favor of pushing that which they see as their fundamental beliefs.

Blogger Jew613 December 15, 2016 6:06 AM  

It always makes my day when VD slaps down a midwit. But it's also kind of sad, like watching a 100 pound 14 year old kid going up against Mike Tyson in his prime.

Blogger JACIII December 15, 2016 6:09 AM  

Where is Wheeler when you need him?

Blogger SteelPalm December 15, 2016 6:13 AM  

How did you manage to read through, let alone reply to all of that?

My eyes glazed over halfway through his first post. Not because any of it was complicated, but because it was so damn tedious, poorly-written, and stupid.

As for what inspired Western civilization, I had a better grasp of this question at the age of 8 then "Wild Man" has now.

Back then, I read it was

1. The Bible
2. Greco-Roman civilization

Neither entity, to my knowledge (I will admit to being far more familiar with 2. than 1.), supports "equality" in any sense. QED.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 6:22 AM  

'Wild Man is an idiot because a declaration of an absence of belief in SUPREMACY is not synonymous with a declaration of any sense of SAMENESS or EQUALITY.'

Haaavahd, huh? Yeah, that makes sense. Universities are uniformly producing a generation of manicheans, and then brainwashing them into believing they're not. On top of that, a so-called upper echelon school like Haaavahd produces an ingrained sense of entitlement and false superiority. So this guy will never be disabused of his equality nonsense, he'll just keep running that catch-phrase "existential ontological equality" inside his brainpan for the rest of his absurd existence.

Blogger Arithtoddle December 15, 2016 6:23 AM  

But...but...muh Constitution! Wild Man sounds like a cuck who hasn't reached the 5th stage of grief regarding the death of "conservatism." Repeated use of the word "equality" implies cuck or leftist.

Blogger Leo Littlebook in Shenzhen December 15, 2016 6:23 AM  

There is a greater genetic tendency towards egalitarian impartial justice in the heart of the white West than in the other races.

Towards this, Wildman babbles - one of those cheery tributaries which never reaches the ocean.

I wonder whether this is another instance of VD the Indian watching the English gentleman in genuine puzzlement.

All I saw was a birdbrain building her nest by ancient instinct from the latest gaudy scraps.

Such proles make honest neighbors, if not commenters.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 6:23 AM  

'Wild Man is an idiot because a declaration of an absence of belief in SUPREMACY is not synonymous with a declaration of any sense of SAMENESS or EQUALITY.'

Haaavahd, huh? Yeah, that makes sense. Universities are uniformly producing a generation of manicheans, and then brainwashing them into believing they're not. On top of that, a so-called upper echelon school like Haaavahd produces an ingrained sense of entitlement and false superiority. So this guy will never be disabused of his equality nonsense, he'll just keep running that catch-phrase "existential ontological equality" inside his brainpan for the rest of his absurd existence.

Blogger Duke Norfolk December 15, 2016 6:23 AM  

That was painful. The guy must be in academia; or a wannabe.

Blogger wreckage December 15, 2016 6:25 AM  

Isn't "the ontological sameness of the existential experience of human agency" so limited as to define itself out of any discussion of actual observable sameness?

Isn't it just deliberately taking a class of decision, and giving it a definition wherein anything even vaguely within the same category, including the cognitive processes of a sheep, are the same thing, and then arguing that since it is possible to construct such a tortured conception as to include the decision to vote versus the decision to nibble THIS PARTICULAR GRASS RIGHT HERE as essentially equal, that, by extension, sameness is a useful and observable phenomenon?

Wouldn't it have been better to say "We all run on a neural net and in that respect we are all the same"? At least that's a terrible stretch of accepted definitions, instead of inventing a new one to disguise one's own circular reasoning.

Is this guy evidence of the observed phenomenon of white guys being way better at sounding smart than being smart?

Blogger wreckage December 15, 2016 6:28 AM  

I ask all this as someone with a strong sentimental attachment to some sort of "equality", at least before the law. But such is an ideal rule of behaviour, not an observable reality; I will give the alt-right that straightaway, in order to avoid embarrassment.

Dammit. Reading this guy has me constructing the shittest sentences ever.

Anonymous TS December 15, 2016 6:48 AM  

"Is this guy evidence of the observed phenomenon of white guys being way better at sounding smart than being smart?"

"If you can't dazzle, baffle them with BS" - W.C. Fields (paraphrase). A tactic long used by various unscrupulous characters/organizations and an all around dodge. Enlarge the Venn diagram to include lefTARDS.

Blogger VD December 15, 2016 6:49 AM  

Isn't "the ontological sameness of the existential experience of human agency" so limited as to define itself out of any discussion of actual observable sameness?

Yes. It's basically the Dishonest Pedant tactic, where you attack someone saying "always" or "never" on some irrelevant grounds, then use that pedantic disproof as the basis for asserting proof of the opposite. This is commonly seen in matters related to equality. It is a silly and stupid tactic, but for some reason, people tend to think they're being clever when they resort to it.

"We all breathe methane and it says "all men are created equal" in the Constitution, therefore we have no choice but to allow unlimited immigration from Azerbaijan.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 7:08 AM  

"the ontological sameness of the existential experience of human agency" is basically the Dishonest Pedant tactic.

Yes. But also, is it an excuse for sweeping generalization fallacy? Isn't this fallacy the hallmark of leftist thinking?

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 7:09 AM  

"the ontological sameness of the existential experience of human agency" is basically the Dishonest Pedant tactic.

Yes. But also, is it an excuse for sweeping generalization fallacy? Isn't this fallacy the hallmark of leftist thinking?

Blogger Sherwood family December 15, 2016 7:10 AM  

Leave Azerbaijan out of this...those guys are legit. I'm joking of course, but as former Soviet Republics go, it's not too bad.

Blogger Cassandros the Elder December 15, 2016 7:20 AM  

I exist and have self-agency. Therefore, I am purple. And you can, too.

Anonymous Fisher December 15, 2016 7:21 AM  

It's like reading a lobotomized, significantly-more-inclined-towards milksopery Heidegger.

*falls asleep, chokes to death on own tongue*

(An aside: Do ellipses fetishes make anyone else want to beat the shit out of something?)

Anonymous jacopo December 15, 2016 7:25 AM  

Forsooth and forsooth, the Secret (Philosopher) King doth protest too much.

Blogger Boko Harambe December 15, 2016 7:32 AM  

@ Fisher, yes in. re. ellipses. I catch myself doing it and stop, after I cringe and wash my hands.

Harvard. But he's not superior to anyone else at all! Why, the barely literate but kindly woman who helps me with household projects from time to time could be just like him, if only she was loved/fed/educated enough.

Blogger ZhukovG December 15, 2016 7:39 AM  

It seems that Jefferson and company were swept up in a kind of 'revolutionary euphoria' as it is clear from their behavior that they did not believe 'All Men are Created Equal'.

Saying that men are equal before God or the law just places an equal responsibility toward God and the law while throwing into sharp relief the lack of any real equality between men.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 15, 2016 7:55 AM  

He lost me at "grok." In my view, the use of that word is one step off speaking in Klingon.

Blogger wreckage December 15, 2016 8:00 AM  

@25 "Grok" really is a freaking stupid word to use. There are plenty of perfectly acceptable words that work just as well, without being an irritating rehash of a joke that was only mildly amusing the first time.

Blogger KSC December 15, 2016 8:02 AM  

It seems that there is at least one sense in which spiritual equality exists (at least for those of us who acknowledge the Bible as authoritative): the fact that each human is created in the image of God. This is why, for example, aborting fetuses in the womb is wrong.

But this may not be what VD means by spiritual equality; I'm not sure.

Anonymous John Scalzi Unfinished Asimov Project December 15, 2016 8:04 AM  

"If during the whole of his life a fool lives with a wise man, he never knows the path of wisdom as the spoon never knows the taste of the soup."

Blogger 4499 December 15, 2016 8:05 AM  

Harvard - Use Big Words, Win Fabulous Cash Prizes!

Blogger rumpole5 December 15, 2016 8:05 AM  

In the Western context there are only two ways in which we are or can be equal. Both are founded in the "Jerusalem" factor of the Athens/Jerusalem equation that rightly constitutes our civilization.

Firstly, we are all dead in our trespasses and sins.

Secondly, to quote St. Paul, who is a not paragon of equality:

Galatians 3:27-28

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ.

Anonymous John Scalzi Unfinished Asimov Project December 15, 2016 8:08 AM  

"so .... how can I possibly know your mind on this, if you don't engage on this topic and tell me?"

Girl talk.

I'm tempted to try and massage this screed into a parody Whitney Houston lyric.

Anonymous teapartydoc December 15, 2016 8:19 AM  

I understand what it is to be stuck on an idea. Back in college I took some psychological tests because I didn't seem to be interested in anything, and lo and behold they told me that I had no occupational predispositions and, indeed, wasn't interested in anything. So I just decided out of the blue to major in chemistry (ended up doubling in bio-chem). The problem I came into immediately in chemistry was dimensional analysis. It made no sense to me that the units, say grams, could be divided by grams, many other examples. I simply had to eventually conclude that because doing so worked in practice that it could be acceptable to me. If I had been unable to accept this, I would not have been successful. Yet it still makes no sense at all to me, despite the fact that I used this concept to get into a highly competitive profession and am now retired out of it.

Blogger wreckage December 15, 2016 8:28 AM  

@32 I know the feeling. I am accustomed to understanding things quickly and easily, but in a very idiosyncratic way, it's a bit of a shock when I have to just accept something as fact and learn to use it, rather than having it modeled in my head.

Blogger Billy Boy December 15, 2016 8:31 AM  

lol this Wild guy writes like a retard. He also shares a common trait with a lot of Enlightenment larpers - an obsession with Locke, as if he were a god, an obsession with "self-agency", a confusion between prescriptive facts and descriptive facts, and lastly (most importantly) retardedly equating "equality" with "similarity". lol people like him think cuz two people look and act similarly, they are "equal". people like him think cause most people don't like getting shot in the knee, everyone has a "right" to not get shot in the knee.

Blogger Billy Boy December 15, 2016 8:33 AM  

The most retarded thing of all is when guys like this think Enlightenment == Western Civilization. lol read a goddamnnn history book

Blogger allyn71 December 15, 2016 8:37 AM  

Did anyone else get an image of Vox as a professor going through homework while he anatomized Wild Man's word vomit?

Hopefully Wild Man can learn from this kindly lesson but experience says he will not.

This all reminds me of something Nate said about monkey poo.

Anonymous lurker. December 15, 2016 8:47 AM  

"Did anyone else get an image of Vox as a professor going through homework while he anatomized Wild Man's word vomit?"

Vox almost appears to be doing a form of Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT)

Blogger Nate December 15, 2016 8:57 AM  

Its like Wildman is so enamored with his reflection in his monitor that he cannot see the obvious errors and indisputable refutations it is actually displaying.

Blogger Cail Corishev December 15, 2016 9:05 AM  

Wild Man reminded me (before I started ignoring him) of early Phil Sandifer, when he was being polite and claiming to really really want to understand, but consistently missed the point and moved the goalposts each time, using walls of text with big words to obfuscate his purpose. Heck, maybe he is Phil.

When he said he was "mystified," that was clearly a lie, and he confirmed his dishonesty when he tried to assert agreement on points you'd already denied. There's more than one way to try to derail a conversation and waste the blogger's time; this is the very-smart-boy version.

OpenID elijahrhodes December 15, 2016 9:24 AM  

I would propose a drinking game in which one takes a shot every time Wild Man uses "existential ontological" but I fear the alcohol poisoning would threaten the drinker's existential ontological personhood.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 15, 2016 9:25 AM  

Does that guy in that word salad put forth any proof of human equality?

Blogger dc.sunsets December 15, 2016 9:36 AM  

@26 "Grok" really is a freaking stupid word to use. There are plenty of perfectly acceptable words that work just as well, without being an irritating rehash of a joke that was only mildly amusing the first time.

Stranger in a Strange Land was a fun read----for a horny, geeky teenager. People who think they're hip because they're locked into that 15 year old's mindset are nothing but embarrassing.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 15, 2016 9:43 AM  

Locke is the brainiac who gave us blank slate theory. Some bathwater is too turgid to be worth the baby.

Blogger Salt December 15, 2016 9:46 AM  

People are the same in some sense.

"If you cut us, do we not bleed?" Cut a cat and it bleeds too. Perhaps being alive, in some "existential ontological condition", is sufficient for him?

"Lawyer: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Did you check for blood pressure?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Did you check for breathing?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
Witness: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
Lawyer: But could the patient have still been alive nevertheless?
Witness: It is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere."

Wild Man, are you a lawyer?

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 15, 2016 9:47 AM  

Teapartydoc, try inserting the word "per" anywhere you see a division symbol, see if that helps you understand ratios. E.g. miles per gallon, feet per mile.

Anonymous BBGKB December 15, 2016 9:49 AM  

it's a straightforward observation that Wild Man keeps saying the same thing over and over

Yet another internet wild man who turned out to be milquetoast pink boa/bow tie wearing manchild in real life.

Wild Man is an idiot because a declaration of an absence of belief in SUPREMACY is not synonymous with a declaration of any sense of SAMENESS

Is it really that hard to believe that one group could be as good at math+science as another group is at short distance runs and outbreeding disease?

Haaavahd produces an ingrained sense of entitlement and false superiority. So this guy will never be disabused of his equality nonsense

Since Asians with perfect SATs sued Harvard for not being admitted while blacks with a 2.5GPA and 22MCAT got free ride scholarships I have "mentioned" that fact to everyone I saw with a Harvard shirt.

Blogger Cail Corishev December 15, 2016 9:49 AM  

Do ellipses fetishes make anyone else want to beat the shit out of something?

Here the ellipsis is supposed to imply a logical connection between the two points, as if it represents deep thought after point A leading to point B. Like a professor saying, "We know such-and-such, therefore .... [waiting for the students to get the connection] other-such." You're supposed to assume that he thought it through and it makes sense, and try to rationalize a way to the same conclusion -- or just accept it.

Blogger bob kek mando: i can't be racist. why, some of my best friends are ((( Literally Hitler ))). { Vox Gayness intensifies } December 15, 2016 9:50 AM  

(nothing weird going on here with me - just straight forward rational discussion is what I am hoping for).


obvious slightly more lucid than normal Chuck Tingle posting.


darwinian existential equality


this ... may be the MOST EXQUISITE joke ever constructed?

Darwinian evolution is an exclusively materialist explanation identifying minute INEQUALITIES as the drivers of speciation via reproduction efficiency.

my jaw is on the floor at your audacity Chu ... uh, WildMan.

truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

Blogger Nate December 15, 2016 9:52 AM  

"truly, you have a dizzying intellect."

He's just getting warmed up.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 15, 2016 9:53 AM  

I'm happy to see your mind working this way, because it indicates a rare sort of honesty that usually gets beaten out of people desperately racing through regularly scheduled programming to get ahead, i.e. school. I can't promise it will do you any good in your career, but it will do good for the people around you.

Incidentally, I had the same career testing results. Qualified for everything, interested in nothing particularly.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 15, 2016 9:54 AM  

(Re: teapartudoc still.)

OpenID basementhomebrewer December 15, 2016 10:04 AM  

The only true angle he has on equality is that we are all equal in that we all Sin. From there you can build to the fact that we all need the grace of Christ to enter Heaven. It's really hard to extend that logic to unlimited immigration, or to allow Muslims to use your Church as a Mosque.

Blogger Ceasar December 15, 2016 10:08 AM  

The ability of people to spend time on what they want in life (Growth, Spirituality, Community, etc) is due to not having to spend most of their time trying to fend off those that want to control them, their time and resources. (Think about this election and the Alt-right's effort stopping the election of Hillary). Did anyone really want to have to spend all this time/effort? No, but there wasn't really an option if you wanted to live a life of free of SJWs/Control Freaks.

"1) Live YOUR life 2)YOU choose how you respond to life's successes, failures and tragedies 3) Treat your neighbor as YOU would like to be treated." That is my short definition of what Western Civilization should be. Notice that Equality is not mentioned because it would require me to look at others and compare. That is something that will make anyone miserable.

There are many things that helped develop Western Civilization but strong belief in Equality wasn't one of them.

Blogger frigger611 December 15, 2016 10:11 AM  

Jeez, that was painful. When reading his attempts at argument it felt like someone put the words of Ayn Rand, Moldbug, Dawkins and some random retard in a blender.

Anonymous fop December 15, 2016 10:12 AM  

Wild Man = moron.

Hey, look - equality!

Blogger James December 15, 2016 10:15 AM  

It's time for me to say it again, like a broken record: When Thomas Jefferson said "all men are created equal," he was referring to the illogical and invalid practice of aristocracy, in which some men were born lords and barons and dukes and earls and counts, whilst most others were born lowly and innately socially and legally inferior peasants. Note that the phrase is "created" equal. The point being made is that the circumstances of birth should not limit what an individual is allowed by society to achieve. The point is NOT NOT NOT that there should be an equality of result. Also, this idea does not mean to imply that anyone is allowed to immigrate to whatever country they feel like going to. The people who wrote and edited and signed the Declaration of Independence would be horrified at what the Marxist scumbags have done with it.

Anonymous cheddarman December 15, 2016 10:16 AM  

As a midwit, I have no desire to get my arse kicked by the intelectual equivalent of an 800 pound Silverback Gorilla

Anonymous dagwood December 15, 2016 10:17 AM  

The whole argument is, as some great physicist once said, "not even wrong." First of all, Wild Man deserves a ride in a catapult for constructing the breathtakingly stupid combination "existential ontological." I thought I was listening to a Ray Davies song. Second, the word "equality" is extremely politically charged at present, and therefore should not be used in such a debate with any seriousness because it is a political word, not a philosophical or scientific one. Its use is essentially a sand trap on an intellectual golf course. Other words must be found to denote whatever it is he's babbling about. It's kind of like using Emmett Till as some mega-example of something which instantly refutes everything in its path, it's childish.

A behavioral anthropologist might make the argument that since pretty much all humans can recognize other humans as being humans and not say elephants (they may treat them as sub-humans, but they do this deliberately for advantage, not because they can't tell other humans are humans, but think they're cats or something), this implies some sort of baseline status recognition capability which is evenly or 'equally' distributed. The same way all elephants can recognize other elements as being elephants, and also know that lions are not elephants, this implies that on a really basic instinctive level, (could we even call it "cognitive"?) all elephants are "equally" elephants.

But I don't know if an anthropologist would even make such a claim (no idea what those guys are up to these days), I'm just using it as an example of the only way Wild Man could save himself from being tossed into a volcano. Or a Vox-cano.

Hmm... "Arma virumque vox-cano", there's some fun to be had there I reckon.

Blogger Sillon Bono December 15, 2016 10:23 AM  

Gosh, VOX is a patient man...

Blogger John Morris December 15, 2016 10:26 AM  

Making the mistake is not a problem, it was failing to figure out it was a mistake after having his nose rubbed in it a few times.

I see the progression like this, correct me if I'm wrong.

1. The United States most certainly fits into the progression of Western Civ / Enlightenment.

2. The whole "We hold these Truths...." bit is most certainly embedded now into the Western tradition.

3. Many people take the "that all men are created equal" phrase as requiring we all worship at the equalist altar.

4. The Alt-Right considers #3 an error. We believe the phrase is about rejecting divine right monarchy, the class system that goes with it, and ensuring the State treat everyone equally; equality before the law. That is clear from context of the document, the times it was written in and the explicit writings of the people who signed the document that it in no way endorses the idea every person is a blank slate, exactly equal. But even had the American Founders meant it in an equalist way it would only mean they too were in error.

Blogger JDC December 15, 2016 10:37 AM  

As a midwit, I have no desire to get my arse kicked by the intelectual equivalent of an 800 pound Silverback Gorilla

In most circles his statements would go unchallenged. That's one of the things this blog has taught me...don't bring a banana to a gunfight.

Blogger VD December 15, 2016 10:39 AM  

The whole "We hold these Truths...." bit is most certainly embedded now into the Western tradition.

So is the welfare state. That doesn't make it an integral or necessary aspect of Western civilization. "We hold these Truths..." is an American concept, not a European one, and America is a subset of the West, it is not the whole set.

Your progression is not wrong, it's merely incomplete. The Alt-Right also rejects equality before the law and equality of opportunity as observable fictions.

Blogger VD December 15, 2016 10:40 AM  

That's one of the things this blog has taught me...don't bring a banana to a gunfight.

I am pleased that I have managed to accomplish something here.

Blogger Forge the Sky December 15, 2016 10:44 AM  

Oh god, this guy.

He tortured us for a year on The Rational Male before gaining the distinction of being one of the few people Rollo has banned.

I didn't even read the quoted portions, and I still knew exactly the points Vox was addressing. The man is a monomaniac.

Anonymous dagwood December 15, 2016 10:51 AM  

For an analogy to Wild Man's argument, check out the epic trolling masterpiece (and I mean EPIC!), a scholarly paper titled "Chicken, Chicken: Chicken/Chicken" complete with graphs, charts, and footnotes, the only word in the entire endless document being "chicken". Over at Ace of Spades.

Blogger Forge the Sky December 15, 2016 10:55 AM  

"The Alt-Right also rejects equality before the law and equality of opportunity as observable fictions."

VD, this is true. Do you think it's reasonable for a society to attempt to reduce these inequalities so far as is reasonably possible?

I recognize it's a broad question and so may not have a ready answer, but it does seem to me that it's beneficial for a society to reduce rampant elitism and nepotism.

Also, did you happen to get my email about the 16 points SD +1? It's fine if you didn't think much of it, I'm just not sure if I got your email address correct. I was reminded of it as the intention was to make a version more comprehensible for that IQ range.

Blogger John Morris December 15, 2016 11:06 AM  

Well equality of opportunity can't really work perfectly unless everyone starts equal and has equal education, etc. And reality is equality before the law is never going to actually occur in practice, the rich and powerful will always be able to get away with some things ordinary folk can't.

But is it an Alt-Right belief that these are be goals to aim for, even admitting the are not to be entirely attained in an imperfect world, or is it that it is wrong to even try for equal justice, allowing anyone to pursue opportunity to the extent they are capable, etc?

I know there are corners of NRx and the Alt-Right that wouldn't mind restoring divine right monarchy, writing off both the American and French Revolutions as wrong turns. Where do you fall on that spectrum?

Anonymous lurker December 15, 2016 11:19 AM  

His nom was the only thing truthful about him.

Anonymous Susan December 15, 2016 11:23 AM  

This puts me in mind of the arguments in the early days of this blog when Nate, Bane and VD would gang up on ChuckE. That guy was King of trolldom. I have never seen another troll like ChuckE.

I am of course referring to "the subject that shall never be named" lest we accidentally bring it back to life.

Watching the 3 beating him down with logical arguments was fascinating. The fool never figured out he should just stay DOWN.

Now that was some quality troll beating.

Blogger Cluebat Vanexodar December 15, 2016 11:34 AM  

Ima bookmark this post.

Blogger Wild Man December 15, 2016 11:34 AM  

VD - as general rebuttal - I will restate a portion of my commenting from the earlier thread that you failed to cut and paste:

"5) Also note that if you do successfully refute the conceptions around some sense of human equality as outlined above, then you will have to drastically modify Alt-Right principle #(4) (i.e. - The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.) The meritocracy implied by the western egalitarian of the enlightenment, is the Graeco-Roman philosophical legacy. And as well, Christianity implies that the Christian message of Jesus is meant for the ears of all men so predisposed to listening, however your conception of the Alt-Right does not."

Since John Locke's conception of the underlying foundational precepts of western cultural ideals are too controversial for your consideration at this time, let's just focus on your Alt-Right claim on the Christian legacy.

VD - Please answer: Does the Alt-Right support that the Christian message of Jesus is meant for the ears of all men so predisposed to listening, despite their culture or origin, or not?

Blogger VD December 15, 2016 11:40 AM  

Also note that if you do successfully refute the conceptions around some sense of human equality as outlined above, then you will have to drastically modify Alt-Right principle #(4) (i.e. - The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.) The meritocracy implied by the western egalitarian of the enlightenment, is the Graeco-Roman philosophical legacy. And as well, Christianity implies that the Christian message of Jesus is meant for the ears of all men so predisposed to listening, however your conception of the Alt-Right does not."

No, it does not need to be drastically modified. You are absolutely wrong, again. It does not need to be modified at all.

You are an ignoramus, an idiot, and a liar. I will not answer any more of your ridiculous questions.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 15, 2016 11:40 AM  

cheddarman wrote:As a midwit, I have no desire to get my arse kicked by the intelectual equivalent of an 800 pound Silverback Gorilla

Some people think they could win a fistfight with a neanderthal. Because they're so smart.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor December 15, 2016 11:41 AM  

"underlying foundational precepts"

So many superfluous, unnecessarily redundant tautologies.

Blogger Shimshon December 15, 2016 11:49 AM  

"VD - Please answer: Does the Alt-Right support that the Christian message of Jesus is meant for the ears of all men so predisposed to listening, despite their culture or origin, or not?"

Please explain how your picayune question is relevant to the statement:

"The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy."

I'll answer for you. It's not relevant at all.

Blogger VD December 15, 2016 11:56 AM  

Depending upon how you answer the question, Alt-Right principle #4 may well require drastic modification, for clarity-sake. Cut the obfuscation and avoidance and answer the question.

You're wrong. There is no obfuscation or avoidance. And now you're banned. Don't comment here again.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor December 15, 2016 12:00 PM  

@76 Since you believe everyone is equal, do you let strangers sleep with your wife?

Blogger pdwalker December 15, 2016 12:01 PM  

I confess, I cannot follow wildman's verbal salad. I see the words, but they refuse to cohere into anything resembling rational thought.

VD, I can follow just fine because his points are clear and succinct.

Wildman, perhaps you need to working on your writing skills in order to make your ideas actually intelligible. Don't use a string of 10 dollar words where a 2 dollar word will suffice.

Blogger Sam vfm #111 December 15, 2016 12:03 PM  

Why am I banned? - I didn't break any rules.

Because you aren't tall enough for this ride.

Blogger James Dixon December 15, 2016 12:05 PM  

> I confess, I cannot follow wildman's verbal salad. I see the words, but they refuse to cohere into anything resembling rational thought.

There's a reason for that. Whether it's deliberate or results from a lack of ability is a debatable point.

Blogger RobertT December 15, 2016 12:06 PM  

It is amazing how much of this kind of stuff there is out there. How any times a week do I listen to someone lay out their completely false reasoning and continue to argue citing what they just said as proof? Oddly enough, not so much from clients, but from employees. I don't even respond any more. It's fruitless. I just tell them how the cow ate the cabbage and walk off. It's irritating, but if I got worked up about it, I'd be in the hospital.

Blogger VD December 15, 2016 12:06 PM  

Why are you banned? For three reasons:

1) You falsely accused me of obfuscating and avoiding your questions.
2) You're not tall enough for this ride.
3) You are incapable of learning from instruction.

I don't want people like you commenting here. You do not add to the discourse, you detract and distract from it. It's fine if you want to read here; I don't have anything against you. But I will not waste any more time on your inane and irrelevant questions. I understand you don't see them that way. I understand you think they are very pertinent and important. But that does not change the fact that they are not.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab December 15, 2016 12:34 PM  

It's got to be tiny sick duck.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash December 15, 2016 1:15 PM  

lurker wrote:His nom was the only thing truthful about him.
Really? Wild Man? That's the opposite of truthful. It's three lies in only two words.

Brick Hardslab wrote:It's got to be tiny sick duck.
No, Dick Suck is capable of short statements.

Blogger Joe Doakes December 15, 2016 1:16 PM  

I'm pretty sure that guy was in my Poli Sci class, trying to score points for class participation to make up for lack of actual understanding. The instructor's eye-roll was a dead give-away but the babbler never noticed, same as here. Gotta say, Vox, you waded through more tedious and tendentious effluvium than I would have.

Blogger allyn71 December 15, 2016 1:30 PM  

Sad to see you go Wild Man. Your snowflake truly was special.

Anonymous VFM #7916 December 15, 2016 1:45 PM  

Having to read the quotes is worse punishment that being told to report to Malwyn.

Blogger James Dixon December 15, 2016 1:58 PM  

> Having to read the quotes is worse punishment that being told to report to Malwyn.

Uh oh. I'm afraid Malwyn was listening. :)

Blogger John Williams December 15, 2016 2:16 PM  

"humor me", "My quandary..."
He probably impresses the damsels at the local renaissance fair & is wondering why it doesn't work here.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 2:17 PM  

Somehow, the left have sneakily substituted the gaseous concept of equality for what instead should be consistency. We don't need equality before the law, we need consistent application of the law. Even with God, He will judge each unequal person with consistent righteousness.

The bottom line is this: Equality is evil. Only Satan and his oblivious marxist acolytes are pushing for equality.

Blogger Blastman December 15, 2016 2:21 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Master Dbater December 15, 2016 2:24 PM  

"What are the necessary conditions of personhood? We all are going to die..."

-Wild Man


"Necessarily means of the body, uh, uh, the niggaz is not able to survive..."

-Ameena Ruffin, National Debate Champion

Blogger Blastman December 15, 2016 2:26 PM  

"We all breathe methane and it says "all men are created equal" in the Constitution, therefore we have no choice but to allow unlimited immigration from Azerbaijan."

With egalitarianism being pounded into students heads these days at colleges, I think the left, and particularly feminists, confuse existential equality with equality of rights, or equality before the law.

We can have equal fundamental human rights, or be treated equally before the law without having to be equal. Big difference between that and thinking we have to be equal to have the same rights or equality before the law. Feminism espouses a false notion of equality that is not achievable.

When the constitution states "all men are created equal," … it continues with " … ,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, …" So even the constitution is only saying all men are equal in the sense that the have the same fundamental human rights.

Seems like Wild is making an error in his thinking about categorization. To use an analogy, one would never say the two numbers 3 and 10 are equal (3 = 10), yet 3 is every bit as much a number as is 10. Two humans don't have to be equal to be fully human as the human category includes differences between people.

There are other rights like social rights that vary from time to place among people for the good of society. A person who has a law degree and has passed the bar exam, has the social right to practice law. This social right is not given out to everyone, except those that have met certain qualifications. Same for practicing medicine and other professions like engineering.

Blogger mrparabolic December 15, 2016 2:29 PM  

That guy was awful. He must not think as highly of the ideals of the American founders as he pretends, seeing as his treatment of the English language is clearly cruel and unusual punishment.

Blogger buzzardist December 15, 2016 2:36 PM  

At least Wild Man recognizes that all of the egalitarian ideas he's pushing are Enlightenment products. That he conflates "Enlightenment" with all of Western civilization is an error. Now Wild Man simply needs to learn beyond the Enlightenment, and maybe he will start to have a clue.

Really, anyone who is trying to construct a positive claim about society rooted in the same thought that drove the French Revolution is setting himself up for ridicule.

Here's a claim for Wild Man to chew on: The misguided notion of equality that was introduced into Western civilization at the time of the Enlightenment has killed more people than any other political viewpoint since that time.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 2:43 PM  

My first guess is that the guy is black. Typical black edumacation behavior: memorize some high-falutin' words so you can string them together in a word salad without any understanding of their intrinsic meaning. It's a way to play the white man game and impress the gullible progressives, who will then trot you out as their latest pet minority and reward you with scraps from massa's banquet table.

Of course the trouble with that scripted play-acting is that blacks start believing they are actually intelligent.

Blogger JohnofAustria December 15, 2016 3:40 PM  

@93, I would argue even that is up for contention. In fact, has been successfully defeated. Consider the retarded. They are not seen as agents equal to you and I. So we know that the physical limitations of a man's brain may render him legally unequal, or unfit to live under certain laws.

To assert equality under law, you first have to show that all men are capable of understand the same things, and living by the same rules. If not, they cannot live together in the same system, but must have different systems or places. There is strong evidence both from genetics and experience that men are not the same. So the choice now is, place or system? Which separation do you want?

Blogger the bandit December 15, 2016 3:50 PM  

pdwalker wrote:I confess, I cannot follow wildman's verbal salad. I see the words, but they refuse to cohere into anything resembling rational thought.

VD, I can follow just fine because his points are clear and succinct.

It's a window into a certain type of mind: If I didn't understand what VD just wrote, it must be because he used overly clever words like "suffice" and "current state of cognitive science." Therefore, I must use even cleverer words. And I must mash them up all together in a row. It's the only way to show him that I am his intellectual equal. Because that's what intelligence appears to be from my unintelligent perspective.

It's a confusion of the markers of something for its cause, which pops up a lot of liberal thought (education and success, wage gap and sexism, &c.).

Blogger KSC December 15, 2016 3:51 PM  

When we say "equality does not exist in any meaningful ... spiritual sense" what do we mean when we talk about spiritual equality? This is not a rhetorical question: I'm not sure I'm in agreement because I'm not sure what spiritual equality is purported to mean. If this has been discussed elsewhere I'd appreciate a pointer.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash December 15, 2016 4:01 PM  

If the concept of equality under American law means anything, it can mean only this: "no man is born with the right to rule others."
By a later codicil it has also come to mean "No man can be forced to serve others."

That's it, the sum and whole meaning of "All men are created equal."

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable December 15, 2016 4:07 PM  

what do we mean when we talk about spiritual equality?

That God is equally disposed to accept men and women from all walks of life, nations, economic strata, IQ, etc. provided they approach him on his terms (meaning through his Son); and that therefore Christians have an obligation to treat all genuine fellow Christians as equally precious to God because he sees them "in Christ", not in the flesh.

It has nothing to do with equality of material or spiritual outcome, spiritual reward, or anything else.

Blogger Leo Littlebook in Shenzhen December 15, 2016 4:10 PM  

Equality under American law means nothing but white slavery.

Blogger KSC December 15, 2016 4:17 PM  

@101

Does the alt-right deny that all humans are acceptable to God if they approach him through Christ? Because that, along with the truth that all humans are created in the image of God, is what I take to be spiritual equality and the classical Christian position.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash December 15, 2016 4:20 PM  

KSC wrote:what do we mean when we talk about spiritual equality? This is not a rhetorical question: I'm not sure I'm in agreement because I'm not sure what spiritual equality is purported to mean.
I am not the spiritual equal of Paul of Tarsus, nor Dymphna, nor Valentinus. Christ loves us all, but to the extent that His love is real in this limited universe, even the love of Christ is not equal.
What Paul meant was that no-one could assert greater spiritual master, greater love of God, being more loved of God, on the basis of who he was, only on what he had done. This was a particular problem in the early Church because of the majority of Jews, who were trained up in the tradition of being God's chosen people. Some of them would claim some sort of superiority based on that. And Paul, rightly, chastised them for it.
Onesimus might be Philemon's inferior in all worldly meanings, and yet his spiritual superior.

A similar effect happens here on a regular basis. A Catholic like me is not inherently spiritually superior to a Protestant, nor vice versa. To assert such would be to deny the evidence of my own life, full of apostate Catholics and Christ-filled Protestants. And yet you will regularly see fools claiming just that.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable December 15, 2016 4:33 PM  

Does the alt-right deny that all humans are acceptable to God if they approach him through Christ?

I do not think the alt-Right has anything to say about it.

Anonymous Reader December 15, 2016 4:56 PM  

"... declaration of an absence of belief in SUPREMACY is not synonymous with a declaration of any sense of SAMENESS or EQUALITY."


I agree to this statement. And I agree that we are not the same or equal based on observable reality. We see duality around; tall-short, dark-light, ugly-easy on the eyes, etc.

What I understand about western civilization are the principles by which societies under it live by -- freedom of speech/expression, property rights, freedom of religion. Equality in western civ is about equality before the law and equality to opportunity.

And that brings me to say that western civ is not about skin colour, but about embracing its values and principles. And even low IQ people can have a place in it. You need people to collect garbage, don't you?

-------

Regarding bashing up Harvard. That's just enviousness, like the poor hating the rich; like all people that got rich did it by cheating.

You can go to Harvard and NOT be dumb. They are not mutually exclusive.

I looked at the resume and achievements of the leaders of the alt-right. Not very strong.

______________

And if you think Trump noticed the alt-white, he nominated in his cabinet, a Taiwanese migrant, an American born of Indian descent. Trump even met with Tulsi Gabbard, of Samoan-irish descent, but was not appointed because, well, she's a Democrat.

Blogger Nick S December 15, 2016 5:16 PM  

I still want the book.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 15, 2016 6:38 PM  

@106 Reader...

Let's see, how many things did you get wrong?

- There is no equality before the law; any attempt to do so leads to special pleading for unequal circumstances.
- There is no equality of opportunity; attempts to obtain such a thing means the forced dumbing down of anyone innately superior based on the State's idea of equality.
- You read the quote, and yet interpreted it as being about duality. You are very wrong, it is exactly NOT about duality.
- Have you done a complete survey of each and everyone who may be a member of the alt-right or who subscribes to their ideas? How many millions of people is that BTW? Did it take you a long time to survey? Otherwise, you lie.
- Trump's nominations neither prove nor disprove the ideas and goals of the alt-right. Obviously you understand nothing about it.
- Since all universities are today nothing but leftist propaganda factories, and since that includes Harvard, there is no envy here. BTW are you a Harvard grad??? If so, the extent of your errors proves the school is bad.
- Don't attempt to teach us elementary logic, we're much better at it than you.

Blogger James Dixon December 15, 2016 6:57 PM  

> ...and equality to opportunity.

Traditionally, there has been very little equality of opportunity even in Western Civilization.

> And that brings me to say that western civ is not about skin colour, but about embracing its values and principles.

And what if it can be shown that the majority of certain skin colors are incapable of embracing those values and principles? What then?

> Regarding bashing up Harvard. That's just enviousness, l

No, it's a rational assessment of what Harvard has become.

> I looked at the resume and achievements of the leaders of the alt-right. Not very strong.

The alt-right has no leaders as such, so you're lying.

Blogger Were-Puppy December 15, 2016 10:39 PM  

@78 pdwalker

I confess, I cannot follow wildman's verbal salad. I see the words, but they refuse to cohere into anything resembling rational thought.
---

I can make out what he is saying, but it is a brain ache. Reminds me a little of that "actionics" guy .

Anonymous Beau December 16, 2016 12:09 AM  

OT

Heavenly Father, I lift up the nation of Venezuela to you. Deliver her people from evil. Turn their hearts to turn to you. Father, the first institution established on earth by you is the family. Evil has so strangled this nation that parents are giving away their children. Help them Lord. Send them help from the sanctuary. Lord Jesus you blessed children brought to you by their parents. Give Venezuelan's wisdom, hope, food and work. Be the shepherd of their families. Protect them. Show yourself strong on their behalf, Savior.

Anonymous Beau December 16, 2016 12:15 AM  

OT

Thank you Lord for the reunification of Korea. Thank you Lord Jesus the long nightmare comes to an end. Thank you. Your work is marvelous in our eyes.

Anonymous Beau December 16, 2016 12:23 AM  

OT

Thank you for sparing America from ebola last summer. Thank you for staying your hand of judgment. Instead you have granted us an opportunity to reject evil and embrace good. We are a foolish, feckless, flighty people. Return us from peace protests to peace that surpasses understanding. Bring our hearts back to you. Let America worship you in spirit and in truth. In Jesus' Name, amen.

Anonymous Lucius Somesuch December 16, 2016 2:08 AM  

Telling tales out of school, but over at heartiste Wild Man displays a somewhat less equaninimous side of his persona:

"Lucius Fuckwad – you be so dumb …… to confuse the shiv for buttkissing. What else goes over you head buddy? Fuck ….. I bet you be owned by the women in you life.

John Locke inconsequential as to western institutions? …… fuck you stupid (like Beale)."

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/12/15/revenge-is-a-dish-best-served-to-psychopaths/#comment-828488

Blogger VD December 16, 2016 8:13 AM  

Gammas going to gamma. Good to see my instincts for whom to ban remain reliable.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts