Tag Archives: culture

Should Christian Women Wear Pants?

One of my guilty pleasures is watching Pastor Steven Anderson of Faithful Word Baptist Church on youtube. A decade ago my other guilty pleasure was watching Westboro Baptist Church parody music videos but I don’t think they make them anymore. I find them refreshingly subversive to modernity and liberalism.

I don’t enjoy watching, say, Paul Washer videos. Anderson is a dork and not particularly bright. But Washer is a full fledged sociopath. So the difference is it’s fun to see Anderson ranting and railing against stuff, often getting it wrong in a hilarious way because he’s not that smart and a huge dork. But it’s not fun watching Paul Washer because he’s a competent, sadistic sociopath. It’s the difference between watching a crazy old man yelling “get off my lawn” to a bunch of naughty kids vesus an evil psycopath psychologically torturing children.

Anderson (and the Westboros) were known for their “homophobia” but really that’s what they used for publicity and controversy. As Anderson notes, the fact is most people don’t approve of homosexuality and are absolutely repulsed by transsexualism. That’s exactly why the media promotes LGBT constantly (and also, relatedly, why they promote Jews, Israel and Holocaust culture so much – and also why there is so much Afrophilia.) People have to be browbeaten by this stuff because they naturally don’t like it.

While the media will tell you Anderson is “hateful” it’s not true, he’s actually kind of dorky, which makes it fun.

You have to understand the role that Pastor or Preacher had in American society. Before the era of mass education, the only educated person in a community was the Minister. Harvard University, in fact, all of the universities, were started to train ministers. In an entire town, the Bible was very often the only book that anyone had. So the Pastor was not just a religious figure, he was essentially the only intellectual.

The precise reason that religion lost so much cultural clout is because people started to read more than one book – and more than one person started to read. So Pastors lost their place as the only educated person in town.

In any case, Anderson tries to fulfill the role as “general intellectual” for his small congregation of working class, mostly (but not exclusively) Whites in Arizona. He’ll read the news for them, discuss issues, etc.

In this particular video, he actually does a somewhat credible job of trying to explain the difference between SEX and GENDER. He wants to tell his congregation why women shouldn’t wear pants, because while putting on a pair of pants doesn’t change a woman’s sex, it can be seen as a form of cross-dressing.

But he even gets this wrong, mostly because he’s a) not that smart and b) kind of a dork.

So he writes three columns on the whiteboard and has the congregation categorize different kinds of clothing into either for men, for women, or both. He starts with easy stuff: skirts, dresses, bras, pantyhose – all for women. Then, he asks about shoes, hats, gloves, tee-shirts, etc., and everyone agrees they are for both women and men.

So then he comes up to his big point, his coup de grace. How comes there’s nothing in the men’s column? He wants to point out that the verse in the Bible that says women’s shouldn’t wear “what pertains to a man” would have no meaning if there’s no clothing specifically for men.

But one of his congregation helpfully points out – TIES. Oops. Here’s a clear case. In modern, American society, men wear ties, and women don’t. But that ruins his entire point. His point was to say that women shouldn’t wear pants and pants are exclusively for men and if women wear pants there’s no point in the Bible verse.

But it’s OBVIOUS to everyone that ties are more stereotypically men’s clothing than pants. So what does Anderson do? Well, he’s a dork, and not that bright, so he mocks the guy who helpfully tried to help him out and give him a CLEAR example of something in our culture that is for men only: ties.

So Anderson says, well, he’s seen women wear ties. (WHAT?) I do remember a school uniform that had a kind of “tie” for women, it was a short thing, more like a ribbon really, that they would wear over their right breast. It was never popular and never caught on.

But Anderson just tries to ignore this to make his point, that women shouldn’t wear pants – and throws his earnest, helpful congregant under the bus – even tries to make fun of him. He’s just not that smart, because it was the obvious answer. Essentially, his entire sermon is begging the question.

Besides – physically speaking, it would make a lot more sense for men to wear something like kilts, wouldn’t it? I mean, men have a penis and testicles that literally hang down inches between their legs, and wearing pants scrunches them up in a very often uncomfortable way. Wearing tight underwear is actually bad for fertility – men who are having trouble getting their wives pregnant are often told to wear boxers to give their balls some breathing room. In fact, the entire biological purpose of a scrotum is to keep the testicles at a lower temperature than the rest of their body, thus, not killing sperm.

Did God design the male genitals incorrectly? Of course not, so men should wear kilts. Women’s vaginas are inside and their outer vulva doesn’t take up any room, making pants anatomically correct.

So the fact that men wear pants and women wear skirts is just cultural, in fact, biologically inappropriate.

Real Men Keep Their Balls Cool And Their Sperm Healthy To Impregnate Women!

So why do women wear skirts? It’s to signal sexually of course. It’s to make a show of “easy access.” You just have to hike up their skirt to penetrate them. So in theory, Christians who are against this sort of thing should point out that the modern American culture has it all wrong, and that CLEARLY it is more in tune with God’s creation – and sexual modesty and the “life culture” of fertility and natalism – for men to wear skirts – i.e., KILTS – and for women to wear pants, at least a piece of clothing that restricts access to their vaginas. Pants show less skin than skirts, after all.

Anderson, being not too smart and only reading one book, is actually THE WEAKEST LINK and exactly the reason why the sexual permissiveness and now transsexualism has been able to take hold. He – and people like him – were just outsmarted by the sexual revolutionaries. The irony is, of course, that if Anderson and the people like him were even slightly familiar with the context of the cultures of their own Bible, they would know that men actually did wear skirts – robes – in Biblical times and that women most certainly did NOT show their legs or signal easy access to their vaginas.

(White Anglo-American conservatives got stuck at Protestantism and left the culture to the most insane leftists instead of continuing our actual organic tradition, which should be post-Protestantism. The Enlightenment.)

The Nerds/Geeks Brought It On Themselves

Linus Torvalds has stepped down as the leader of his own project, Linux, after many years of complaints about his rudeness. Linux has now adopted a “Code of Conduct” which many correctly fear is an entry point for Social Justice Warriors (SJWs.) As soon as the Code of Conduct was adopted, a professional SJW, Sage Sharp, the same SJW behind the adoption of the Code of Conduct, tried to get a Linux developer, Ted Tso, fired for being a “rape apologist.” (Tso should have immediately pulled the race card, as Sharp is White and Tso is Asian…)

Now, computer nerds are in a state of panic, rightly worried that they are next and that these Codes of Conducts are going to be used against them and that their culture is under attack by outsiders.



But Computer Nerds brought this on themselves, because “Nerd” it itself a type of Social Justice Warrior identity.

There’s a fascinating article from a trade publication back in the 1970s where they are describing the typical “computer programmer.” They describe a stereotypical “autistic” type that likes “computers more than people.” This article was directed towards CEOs and Human Resource professionals who may have to hire computer programmers at a time when computers were just starting to appear outside of the military and businesses like IBM. This article may actually have been influential in the creation of the “nerd” stereotype.

What was fascinating about the article is its assertion that, unlike regular workers, “computer programmers were not motivated by money.” This was, of course, welcome news to business owners that didn’t understand computers and were worried about the cost of hiring computer programmers. The article went on to describe ways to recruit and motivate programmers without having to pay them too much money.

As computer technology began to become more important in all phases of business/capitalism, there appeared this new social identity, that of a “nerd.” These “nerds” would often wear their low social status as a badge of honor and quite often identified themselves as an “oppressed” minority that the majority didn’t understand. They often, in fact, engaged in a sort of “supremacy” where they declared they were “smarter” than “normal” people thus their “oppressors” were, in fact, inferior.

In the 1990s computer programmers – “nerds” or “geeks” – began to be seen by many women as desirable because these “nerds” and “geeks” were making money. Indeed, technology since the 1990s has been an excellent way for middle class white men to rise in the class hierarchy of America. But some of the original “nerds” and “geeks” complained about this, especially the rise of the “brogrammer.”

He Probably Deserved It

“Brogrammers” were not attacked because they were less intelligent or less skilled than the “nerds.” They were attacked for supposedly “only being in it for the money” and not really liking technology like the “nerds” do and thinking of their job as just a job, instead of an “identity.”

These “nerds” also claim that technologists are into “comic books” and “sci fi” and were bullied in high school because of how smart they were. “Nerd” culture is full of fantasies of “getting back” at the “jocks” who supposedly attacked them in high school and how technology will make the “nerds” the “alpha males.”

This “nerd” identity coincided with the understanding of autism and Aspberger’s syndrome. Notice that “aspies” – or those “on the spectrum” – are also an SJW identity – just as obnoxious as “transgendered” people are. Autistics come up with “rules” on how other people are supposed to treat them – differently than “neurotypical” people are treated. Autistics don’t yet have their own pronouns, but it’s only a matter of time.

So these nerds in their nerd culture spent the last 30 years whining about the “normals” and how “oppressed” they were, and how they were, in fact, morally superior to other because of their nerdiness (we only care about the tech! We’re more objective than others!)

Autistics and nerds all think they are Mr. Spock, when in reality they tend to be Sheldon Coopers – immature, emotionally vacuous, petty, cruel, self-important, blind to their own faults. They are the opposite of objective.

An aside: no one has ever explained to me why reading Spiderman comics – as a child or an adult – somehow magically maps to a high IQ or some sort of talent for computer programming. Certainly that hasn’t been my experience, the “comic book nerds” I’ve known in my life with intellectual (and artistic) mediocrities. The original Star Trek was a good show – a bit hokey, but decent for its time. But considering that all it did was take the best science fiction plots from actual science fiction literature and simplified them for a one hour show, was pretty derivative and not particularly original.

The Next Generation was an awful show, horribly acted, lame plots, wooden dialogue. While the original Star Trek was all about Cold War liberalism, Next Generation WAS Social Justice Warriorism – a white collar office – IN SPACE – racially diverse, and even added in homosexuality and transgenderism.

So now these nerds – especially the straight white males – are being hoisted on their own petards. They spent 30 years whining how “oppressed” they were, they complained about “jocks” and “brogrammers” that “bullied” them, they complained about how “normal” people just didn’t understand them because they were just smarter and more morally “pure” than everyone else.

So along comes the SJWs with even MORE moral superiority, even MORE fringe interests, even MORE “oppressed” status, and the straight white male nerds are getting kicked down the Hierarchy of Oppression.

Here’s a thought: maybe you were bullied in school because you were an asshole. Maybe YOU need to learn how to adapt to “normal” people, not the other way around. Maybe your skills in a very narrow field do not make you “morally superior.”

And maybe the fact you are into low-brow crap like comic books does not, in fact, have anything to do with skill as a computer programmer.

You whined like a victim for 30 years, now even BIGGER VICTIMS are coming to take away your status.

Take it from a “brogrammer” (who got laid like tile in high school and college, thank you very much) who made a bit of “fuck you” money back in the day by leveraging actual skills, NOT by “identifying as a geek” …


The Explicit Whiteness of Goth

There is some anti-white troll on AltRight.com that calls himself “Gothic Joe” and is supposedly into the “goth scene.” Me, personally, I’m not into the “goth scene” and never have been, although I do like some of the music and music that is closely related, like industrial.

But I do have to admit I’ve had a long kind of fascination with and obsession with “goth chicks.”

I just like the style – the “Suicide Girl” thing. I totally have the hots for women who dress up in “Dominatrix” types outfits. No, I’m not at all a “sub” and don’t get off to being “topped” by a Dominatrix – my sexuality tends to go the opposite direction, to be blunt. Watching the dominatrix slowly yield and turn into a submissive puppy is really, really hot.

I just like the boots, the leather, the little, subtle “restraints” that they wear. And the more these goth chicks dress up like Dommes, the more you know they are total submissives in private.

There is of course a HUGE element of BDSM in the “goth scene” – they are practically synonymous in many people’s minds. Goth tends to be a place where suburban girls can sort of “experiment” with BDSM fashion – and sex – while just making it a sort of “style” and “play.”

Probably the two biggest “goth” acts that went mainstream in the last 20 years were Nine Inch Nails (great) and Marilyn Manson (lame.) Both acts filled their videos and stage shows with hints of BDSM. Marilyn Manson’s video for his cover of “Tainted Love” (ironically, a Motown song by a Black woman that was also covered by the White “New Wave” band Soft Cell in the 1980s, an exception that proves the rule) was a pretty good short film full of that sort of style with plenty of suburban degeneracy – and it was full out “racist” too, Manson’s “goth thugs” were the “alphas” over the Blacks and Wiggers and White preppies – and turned the Cheerleader into a Suicide Girl at the end. It’s cute, not to be taken seriously, but still kind of cute.

Anyway I got into it with “Gothic Joe” by pointing out just how WHITE the goth scene is. Like all “alternative” subculture scenes, it’s a way for White people to SEGREGATE themselves from mainstream integrated society. Consider the original “alternative” scene of the 1990s. The mainstream pop music at the time was heavily dominated by Black artists – Prince, Michael Jackson, and a host of black and brown women “divas.” Even the metal scene, long a bastion of uber-whiteness, had started incorporating hip hop and featuring Black lead singers.

Then along comes “grunge” – the Whitest of the White – based on bands in uber-White Seattle. What distinguished “grunge” music like Nirvana and Pearl Jam from the mainstream pop music of the time?

The complete, 100% absence of ANY black musical influence. Grunge even took it farther by cutting out the guitar solos lest there be any hint of even a light skinned, white presetning Black guitar hero like Jimi Hendrix!

I was at the very first Lollapolloza in the 1990s – I think the only Black person at the entire festival was the lead singer of Living Color.

Goth is much the same way. One of the earliest and most influential “goth” bands was England’s Bauhaus. Look at the band, watch their videos, listen to their music. It’s whiter than white. Over the top theatrical even, lots of references to theater culture – another bastion of whiteness.

If you go to any major city in America and want to go out dancing, and you want to be sure the scene will be 99.99% White people? Go to the goth nightclub. Because the scene is so White, the women feel much safer to go all out, dress really sexy, get drunk and be exhibitionist. They do NOT feel as safe in a mixed race environment. Of course no one will admit it – they will all point to the single token Black goth – likely gay, thus not a threat to the women. But everyone knows the deal.

Also, the goth scene tends to be very Catholic I’ve noticed, and had goth friends say the same thing to me. Goth’s “dark” and even “satanic” image is really just based on the darker side of Catholicism itself. Of course even the name is based on the architectural style of old Catholic cathedrals. Yes, there’s a certain kind of pagan element to it, but it’s the same pagan element embedded in Catholicism itself. So that means the goth scene is also relatively kosher-free (hint, hint.)

I’m pro-White and of course support White people having our own cultural spaces where we are free to be us, express our own inner selves and our own culture. Goth is rather silly and often pretty goofy – but it is sincerely white.

Creeping up the backstairs
Slinking into dark stalls
Shapeless and slumped in bath chairs
Furtive eyes peep out of holes

She has many guises
She’ll do what you want her to
Playing dead and sweet submission
Cracks the whip deadpan on cue

Reeking like a pigsty
Peeling back and gagging free
Flaccid ego in your hand
Chokes on dry tears, can you understand?

She’s jeering at the shadows
Sneering behind a smile
Lunge and thrust to pout and pucker
Into the face of the beguiled

Peek-a-boo (Golly jeepers)
Peek-a-boo (Where’d you get those peepers?)
Peek-a-boo (Peepshow, creepshow)
Peek-a-boo (Where did you get those eyes?)
Strobe lights pump and flicker
Dry lips crack out for more
Come bite …

Guess My Ethnicity: Round 1 (Race, Religion, Culture, etc.)

“Hipster Racist” is a fictional character. But due to some constant arguments at Aryan Skynet over culture, especially pop culture and sexuality, I figured I’d play a fun game.

Similar issues over the fights over the (((Daily Stormer’s))) Andrew Anglin (whom some have suggested is an octoroon) and Weev (read name: Aurenheimer,who has identified as a Jew before he started posing as a “Nazi” who wants “genocide and race war.”

Considering that this supposed “alt-right” movement is really into the Japanese “anime” stuff – wholly foreign to this author (the only one I remember is “Speed Racer”) …

These, the author, believes are authentic representations of the author’s culture.

So – what is it?

Julie catch a rabbit by his hair
Come back step, like to walk on air
Get back home where you belong
and don’t you run off no more

Don’t hang your head let the two-time roll
Grass shack nailed to a pine wood floor
Ask the time? Baby I don’t know
Come back later, we’ll let it show

And I say row, Jimmy row
Gonna get there?
I don’t know
Seems a common way to go
Get down, row, row, row
row, row

Here’s my half a dollar if you dare
double twist when you hit the air
Look at Julie down below
the levee doin the do-pas-o

And I say row, Jimmy, row
Gonna get there?
I don’t know
Seems a common way to go
Get down, row, row, row
row, row

Broken heart don’t feel so bad
Ain’t got half a what you thought you had
Rock your baby to and fro
Not too fast and not too slow

And I say row, Jimmy, row
Gonna get there?
I don’t know
Seems a common way to go
Get down, row, row, row
row, row

That’s the way it’s been in town
ever since they tore the juke box down
Two-bit piece don’t buy no more
not so much as it done before

And I say row, Jimmy, row
Gonna get there?
I don’t know
Seems a common way to go
Get down, row, row, row
row, row

It’s criminal
There ought to be a law
There ought to be a whole lot more
You get nothin’ for nothin’
Tell me who can you trust
We got what you want
And you got the lust
If you want blood, you got it
If you want blood, you got it
Blood on the streets
Blood on the rocks
Blood in the gutter
Every last drop
You want blood
You got it
Yes you have

It’s animal
Livin’ in the human zoo
The shit that they toss to you
Feelin’ like a christian
Locked in a cage
Thrown to the lions
On the second page
If you want blood, you got it
If you want blood, you got it
Blood on the street
Blood on the rocks
Blood in the gutter
Every last drop
You want blood
You got it
O positive

Blood on the rocks
Blood on the streets
Blood in the sky
Blood on the sheets
If you want blood
You got it

I want you to bleed for me


Mark Yuray: Doing Social Conservatism Right #nRX #SocialMatter


The problem with social conservatism is that is generally devolves into psuedo-Christian fundamentalism and/or some sort of “white knighting” ideal that men just aren’t being selfless enough. Social conservatism has typically been better at pointing to degeneracy and shrieking, “gross evil” (outrage porn) and much worse at actually setting a good example.

Yuray has done a great job explaining the importance of sexual morality, a great job of explaining the “Mannerbund” concept (I refer readers to my article three or so years ago that discussed many of the same concepts – even getting me coverage as an “Evil Misogynist” by the once-popular “male feminist” Manboobz.com.)

SocialMatter.net is the only “NRx” blog I’ve found that isn’t cringingly philo-semitic nor terrified of being more than implicitly pro-white. And Yuray is by far the best at SocialMatter.net.

Usually, when I hear someone discussing “culture” – I reach for my revolver. But I’ll make an exception for Yuray at SocialMatter.net.

Mind Control Notes 1

I’ve been reading ANolen’s “Systems of Control” articles.

So one time I’m hanging out with this dude Kurt and his girlfriend and I’m like, is there anything to this “magic” stuff? Or, like, “the occult?” Because I’ve never believed any of it, nor its nice “New Agey” happiness and rainbows version either.

So Kurt says, “yeah.” He takes this strap/handle from a bike bag or something, you know a flat piece of cloth, and he says “hold out your hands.” So I do. He wraps the strap around my hands, gives the other end to his woman, and says, “now you’re her slave.”

Immediately, I became enlightened.

Anyway, I had read a tiny bit of Crowley and the like early on and simply dismissed it as a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, but I always knew or suspected that there was something under the surface to it. A while back I read that Crowley was MI6 and I though maybe his “ceremonial magic” had something to do with his intelligence work. I had also read that John Dee was British intel and the origin of the “007” moniker, so I figured his “Angelic language” was essentially early forms of codes and encryption and “contacting your guardian angel” meant “getting in touch with your handler” in some way. I’m guessing there is both more and less than meets the eye, depending on how you look at it.

got_one_that_can_seeApparently a lot of people have read E. Michael Jones and have been discussing his various concepts but I was utterly surprised he discusses things like the Illuminati.

My working hypothesis, especially since I discovered ANolen, roughly sketches the history like this: you have the Jesuits, Masons, Illuminatis etc., who develop psychological profiles of the people that confess to them, and share those profiles up the hierarchy. “Mind control” has been somewhat of a folk art based on various tactics to manipulate people based on both the information in their profile and their “type” of personality.

There’s always been an instinct to systematize the “types” of people, you see it in astrology and fortune telling, and in folk sayings like “Tuesday’s Child.” Then there are the pseudo-scientific versions like Freud and Meyers-Briggs. Hubbard’s early “Dianetics” stuff was a particularly low-rent version of pseudo-psychology he used to build his cult, but an “e-meter” probably wowed a lot of people back then.

Don’t make fun of the Scientologists for putting too much stock in their e-meter. I would like to point out that virtually all Americans spend hours staring into an electric box with blinking lights and believe it’s “real” – that’s “mind control” folks.

You see this sort of thing developing from a folk art to more scientific rigor with Bernays. With broadcasting, the amount of data they could get in and out scaled up considerably.

The “systems of control” developed into … some online ad network asking me if I want to meet foreign ladies.

It’s a handler’s advertiser’s wet dream – you’ll be a profiled consumer since birth. The ultimate “system of control” is global capitalism, money, the international network of central banks and the militaries backing them up, giving the consumer what they want which is what you told them to want.

But back in the days of Crowley and L. Ron, and before the computer revolution made mass SIGINT and data-crunching trivial both for the NSA and the private sector, the IC did it the old fashioned way. Befriending rich and important people, and usable disposable people, and manipulating them into doing what they wanted.

There’s another Hubbard that has long been overlooked in this history, Alfred Matthew Hubbard.

Hubbard introduced more than 6,000 people to LSD, including scientists, politicians, intelligence officials, diplomats, and church figures.

I wondered if “Alfred Matthew Hubbard” is simply a character meant to distance the more famous L. Ron Hubbard from an early part of his career, or perhaps a relative, but I never looked up the dates.

Hubbard used to sell a Christian themed version that later demphasized Christianity for a more general Utopia-like cult. He was going to bring world peace and the like. I’m guessing that back during the Space Race some crackpot had the idea of staging a “UFO invasion.” There were various UFO cults that functioned as a more “scientific” religion.

Here’s how I would have done it back in the 1950s. You find some dupe, dose him with LSD, then he interacts with various people in costumes – “the aliens.” Imagine how powerful of a “mind control” effect that would have had on an average person back in 1950s, back when USA and Russia are in a race to build a Moon Base and goofy alien movies were all the rage.


There are potions which can turn people into monsters. There are ‘magic words’; there are golem and succubae. These things don’t work through Harry-Potter-like bolts of lighting, they seem to have a psychological basis

Sex and drugs make a potent mix! Add in some role playing and, let me tell you, you can program a beta sex kitten. She’ll be crawling around on all fours on a leash and loving every minute of it. I recall that Jack McGeorge used to advertise for a “service-oriented submissive.” You see, it’s only cuckolding if you love her and get off on watching her. Otherwise it’s just pimping, or “handling” as the case may be.

In the Eyes Wide Shut orgy scene, the Red Priest sends the women out to particular men.

Every magician knows that props are just that – props. When we tame animals, we use physical restraints, collars and leashes. When we tame women, we sometimes use restraints, collars and leashes but mostly that’s just costumes and role playing to get her off.

The best restraint is, of course, being her source of money. If she’s a party girl you can send her to seduce chumps. This will actually enhance your status to her, you are the Big Daddy and the guys she’s seducing are the chumps.

You can do amazing things with a party gal from 18-28.

For low ranking dudes, you just need some hot thing that likes to drink and party to spend a month or so hanging out. For high ranking men, you strategically send in your daughters to, quite literally, steal the precious bodily fluid of their sons.

Now when you want to do handling that is above an individual level, that’s when you are building a cult.

Wilhelm Reich wrote quite a bit about sex. When some of the old fashioned Communists would write to him complaining that the gals in the Young Communist League were “going from boy to boy” he said, “so what? Let her go from boy to boy.” She’s in control of her own body, she has scientific birth control, and she wants to try out a few different men before she settles down.

Of course, women are just as easy to manipulate as men. She’s hypergamous, which means the higher ranking boys in the mixed-gender Young Communist League are going to get a lot of female attention while the lower ranking dudes won’t, “rank” of course being a bit more subtle than just whatever you’re wearing on your collar.

So, you see, you don’t manipulate people one at a time and you don’t micro-manage people. It’s more like herding animals. You simply put groups of young men and young women together in an environment you control and let nature take its course. In some sense, they are “making their own choices” but of course it’s like choosing option A or option B. That is one reason why people are so picky about where their daughter goes to high school and college – and should probably be a lot more concerned with where their son goes to high school and college too.

At the end of the day, the best form of “mind control” is simply controlling the culture. You can give people plenty of liberty and they will still do what you want. The trick is giving someone the goal and letting them figure out how to attain the goal himself.

… I N C E P T I O N …


Postcapitalist Cultural Theory and Discourse

“Class is fundamentally used in the service of colonialist perceptions of truth,” says Bataille; however, according to Prinn[1] , it is not so much class that is fundamentally used in the service of colonialist perceptions of truth, but rather the fatal flaw, and subsequent stasis, of class. In Models, Inc., Spelling analyses postcapitalist cultural theory; in Beverly Hills 90210, however, he denies postcultural deconstructivism. In a sense, Sontag suggests the use of postcapitalist cultural theory to read reality.

The main theme of de Selby’s[2] essay on cultural discourse is not, in fact, narrative, but neonarrative. The subject is interpolated into a textual paradigm of consensus that includes culture as a reality. It could be said that the premise of postcapitalist cultural theory holds that reality is capable of truth.

Several discourses concerning substructural narrative exist. Therefore, Baudrillard promotes the use of postcapitalist cultural theory to attack the status quo.

The example of cultural discourse intrinsic to Burroughs’s Naked Lunch is also evident in Junky. Thus, the subject is contextualised into a textual narrative that includes narrativity as a totality.

Derrida uses the term ‘textual postdialectic theory’ to denote the role of the observer as participant. In a sense, the characteristic theme of the works of Burroughs is the common ground between class and sexual identity.

Many constructions concerning the paradigm, and hence the stasis, of semioticist class may be revealed. Thus, Lyotard uses the term ‘cultural discourse’ to denote a pretextual reality.

“Sexual identity is unattainable,” says Foucault. Capitalist deappropriation states that society has significance. It could be said that an abundance of narratives concerning postcapitalist cultural theory exist.

The primary theme of Wilson’s[3] analysis of Sontagist camp is not discourse as such, but subdiscourse. The characteristic theme of the works of Burroughs is the absurdity of postcultural class. However, any number of theories concerning the difference between society and sexual identity may be found.

If one examines cultural discourse, one is faced with a choice: either accept semantic neosemioticist theory or conclude that the collective is capable of deconstruction. The subject is interpolated into a Sontagist camp that includes narrativity as a totality. In a sense, Derrida suggests the use of capitalist sublimation to modify and analyse reality.

The main theme of Dietrich’s[4] essay on Sontagist camp is a self-justifying paradox. The subject is contextualised into a dialectic narrative that includes sexuality as a totality. It could be said that the premise of Sontagist camp suggests that class, ironically, has objective value, given that reality is interchangeable with culture.

In The Last Words of Dutch Schultz, Burroughs examines postcapitalist cultural theory; in Naked Lunch, although, he denies cultural discourse. Therefore, if postcapitalist cultural theory holds, we have to choose between Sontagist camp and the neocultural paradigm of reality.

The subject is interpolated into a postcapitalist cultural theory that includes art as a paradox. But Baudrillard uses the term ‘cultural discourse’ to denote the common ground between reality and sexual identity.

The fatal flaw, and eventually the absurdity, of Sontagist camp which is a central theme of Burroughs’s The Last Words of Dutch Schultz emerges again in Naked Lunch, although in a more textual sense. Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a cultural discourse that includes art as a totality.

The primary theme of the works of Burroughs is not discourse, but postdiscourse. Thus, Sontag’s critique of Sontagist camp states that the significance of the writer is significant form.

Many dematerialisms concerning cultural discourse exist. But Debord promotes the use of presemioticist dialectic theory to deconstruct outdated perceptions of sexuality.