Tag Archives: nrx

Bang Gang: The Second Sexual Revolution: No Coloreds, No Fags, No Rape, No Jealousy

Revolution Next

By the 1990s, the AIDS scare was over and everyone realized that the plague was confined to male homosexuals, needle drugs, and Africans. The sexual chill of the 1980s was over: the popular culture of film and music had continued to get more and more explicit – some would say “degenerate” – even while people’s actual behavior had become puritanical. The social shift was centered around the mainstreaming of condoms. The official story was that teenagers were going to have sex anyway so they should use condoms to avoid AIDS and pregnancy.

While the first sexual revolution of the 1960s still had double standards and jealousy, the second sexual revolution had shifted. If everyone was promiscuous, then no one was a “slut.” Since no one was getting married or having children any time soon, teenage relationships were by nature temporary and among peers partners were swapped: Jane dated Billy for a while, then Jane hooked up with Billy’s friend Mike while Jane’s friend Sally started dating Billy. The timeline simply got shorter and the number of partners increased.

So it was only a matter of time until the timeline of the relationships got shorter and the partner swapping more immediate. High school parties where couples would disappear into a bedroom simply evolved into high school parties where more than one couple would be in the bedroom, or on the same bed. Or where there weren’t couples as much as groups.

The Rules

Still, there were some lines that were simply not crossed, at least in the 1990s middle to upper middle class Washington DC suburbs of the 1990s. The rules were essentially non-negotiable:

1. No coloreds. Maybe a half Korean girl would be in the mix occasionally, but like an Abercrombie and Fitch catalog, this was a very White affair. Washington DC, even in the 1990s, was most certainly a racially diverse area, but integrated schools had not led to integrated social circles, and rarely intimacy. All throughout the 1980s Black and White couples were lauded by the media (OJ & Nicole) and the United Colors of Bennetton had spent a decade trying to push a slightly less sexual version of the Abercrombie and Fitch orgy aesthetic, but to no avail.

2. No fags. Male homosexuality was simply not tolerated. This was an era when gays were “coming out of the closet” and TV shows like Friends made it clear that “homophobia” was uncool. Nevertheless, teenage boys, even if they talked the talk, were simply not going to walk the walk. They may not have been going around queer bashing but neither were they going to invited suspected gays, much less out gays, to their parties. And the occasional friend, suspected or known to be gay, that was invited to a social party were simply never invited to the after parties.

Of course “bi-curious” girls were not even considered “lesbian,” merely a form of exhibitionist foreplay.

3. No rape. This was the era of third wave feminism. It was not cool to do something to a girl who was passed out – that passed out girl was your friend. It simply was not considered manly and a rough form of “consent” was expected. Of course “peer pressure” wasn’t considered “coercion” and it would be another decade before concepts like “rape culture” would be popularized – quite possibly precisely because a decade or so of these attitudes created a backlash, and the teenage girls who organized these parties had to regain some plausible deniability.

4. No jealousy. Of course people did get jealous, but no one owned anyone and when people did pair off and form serious couples, they simply didn’t go to the parties anymore. This was in a sense, “sexual utopia in power” and F. Roger Devlin might say. Women – really, girls – were the organizers here. They decided which boys to invite and it was their consent that powered the whole culture.

The Style

The style was rave, baby doll dresses and neo-bohemian. The soundtrack was electronic dance music and alternative rock. The drugs were alcohol, marijuana, and MDMA. (LSD and mushrooms were quite often the initiation into the scene, but those aren’t party drugs.)

No one knew anything about “BDSM” or even what it meant, the blindfolds and bondage were simply party favors, a natural development. There was always a certain “switch” dynamic – both boys and girls could be the one being blindfolded and “worked,” but the few times when an actual male submissive would want some sort of humiliation play, it would skeeve the girls out; he would be labeled a “creep” and no longer invited to the parties.

The age to play? 16.

The Hangover

Of course, as always, standards began to slip after the first generation. LGBT became more militant. Consent became blurry. Jealousy, always present, became more pronounced as “experimentation” morphed into “lifestyle” and the window of opportunity to leave it all behind got smaller. It you’re in the scene from 16-26, you’ve had a decade of experience at temporary “relationships” and zero experience with keeping anything permanent. The color line started to blur, which ruined the entire concept of consent, as consent is a cultural norm, shared among those with the same race and culture. Little sisters were not rebelling against the sexual chill of the 1980s as their older sisters had done, thus had a “starting point” that was much further along than their older siblings.

The impact of internet pornography started to be felt. Before, the parties, the social scene, WAS the initiation – it WAS the porn. Once hard core internet pornography went mainstream, boys – and girls – already had expectations, and the expectations were no longer set by peers in their own social circles, but by professional pornographers and pimps from Los Angeles, always eager to “segment” a market in order to micro-market to fetishes with pin point accuracy.

There’s all the difference in the world between BEING the product, and watching a product being advertised.

The End

What finally killed it off was camera phones and social media. Rumors can be denied, video evidence broadcast instantly to thousands could not.

Toronto Film Review: ‘Bang Gang (A Modern Love Story)’

The Future

As the Unabomber Ted Kazinsky might say, technology affects everything and society gets further and further away from the natural order. Only an industrial society would postpone marriage and family formation long past a biologically appropriate age in order to spend the youth’s most productive years learning to run the machines and push the paperwork. Feeding the machine becomes more important that reproducing the race; the machines become more important than the biology. So society will go back and forth between repression and degeneracy as long as it suppresses biology.

The Onion: Teen Wastes Prime Childbearing Years Going To High School

http://www.theonion.com/article/teen-wastes-prime-childbearing-years-going-to-high-33891

The Truth About Pizzagate, Pedophiles, and Sex Cults

Clicking around I wound up on the ISGP again and read their breakdown/debunking of “Pizzagate:”

https://isgp-studies.com/pizzagate

While they debunk the particulars of “Pizzagate” and suggest it was a partisan psy-op against the Clinton campaign (very likely) they do not discount the notion of high level “sex cults” which may include pedophilia, torture, and perhaps even actual murder.

It seems quite likely that such “elite” cults do, in fact, exist. But the “conspiracy theories” of such cults are likely an example of regular people displacing their own demons, as it were, on the elites.

People are greedy; greed is one of the 7 deadly sins. Average normal people are greedy, but their greed is small, because their lives are small. Therefore it’s normal and understandable. The rich, the Wall Street elites, they are greedy too, but of course their greed is much larger in scope, much more flashy, much more ostentatious.

As no less than Adolph Hitler pointed out about Communist propaganda: people might be skeptical of a little lie, because in their lives they tell little lies all the time. But they wouldn’t imagine telling big lies – lies as big as the Communists told – because those aren’t the kind of little lies they tell in their own lives.

There’s an amusing song by country singer Hank Williams called “Naked Women and Beer.” Some of the lyrics:

Now we have got some strange laws
The most hypocritical thing around these days
Cause where I live in Tennessee
Why an auto parts calander
Hey thats pornography
But go right down the road, read what the sign says

Naked women and beer
We got it all in here
For your eyes and your ears
They show it all in the clear
Way up north and down south
Whoo, somebody shut my mouth

If you want to find a “cult” that engages in public sexual acts, where women’s youth is fetishized, women wearing schoolgirl outfits, something that may even include a little “kink” and a little S&M?

You don’t have to look to the wealthy elites in Manhattan and London. Just go to any suburb anywhere in America and go to your local, working and middle class strip club. It’s all there.

Exploitation of youth? Strippers are at the height of their demand the day after their 18th birthday – that’s a teenager. Child molestation? What kind of girls become strippers and porn stars anyway? The stereotype is that they were molested, likely by their father, step-father, or an uncle. Stereotypes exist for a reason.

Some women may claim to have been sexually absued by a powerful cult of politicians, “high society” men, and elites – but the more likely case is that it was men of their own class, their own social circles, and their own families.

But it’s comforting for people to project such things on far away “elites.” Their sex clubs are likely cleaner with better lighting, and the participants better dressed, not the run down strip club in a warehouse district on the wrong side of town.

But isn’t the substance the same?

The feminists in the 1960s and 1970s rebelled against beauty pageants, complaining that women were lined up “like cattle” their bodies judged on their “parts” like a side of beef. Weren’t they right? Isn’t that exactly how it operates? Feminists complain that men “objectify” women’s bodies – isn’t that true? The neurology shows that men’s brains light up in the same places when looking at women as they do when contemplating … power tools. They are literally thinking about them objectively and how they will “use” them, as tools, for a specific end.

Traditional societies have always understood this, and Western societies in particular have always understood this, which is why sex was deemed a private affair, why monogamy was encouraged, why boys and girls were raised separately, why segregation of the sexes was the rule, and pornography and sexual imagery was forbidden. Why women and girls were to dress modestly, so as not to tempt men and boys.

When I was young the murder of Jon Benet Ramsey, a little six year old girl, was the tabloid story of the year. What made the story so salacious is that her parents – an upper class family active in local GOP party politics – had entered her in “baby beauty pageants” which were considered by most to over-sexualize little girls. Yet the participants – the mothers, usually – seemed to be fine with this and encouraged and/or forced their daughters – children – to participate.

In 2017, the Current Year, more conservative leaning mothers are constantly complaining that they can’t even go to the mall and find modest apparel for the daughters, even daughters many years away from puberty. And anyone who has ever known a teenage girl going through puberty knows that you essentially have to FORCE them to wear modest attire, because they want nothing more than to show off their new bodies and get the attention of boys, and men. Men objectify, and women want to be objectified. It starts the summer boys start growing body hair and girls get their periods.

The sexual revolutionaries were completely correct that there was a “double face” regarding sex, that underneath the pleasant and modest public faces humans are a cauldron of sexuality. But there was no hypocrisy here, the public and private spheres were kept separate precisely because of the power of sex.

“Liberals” love to complain that American TV shows a lot of violence but won’t allow a woman’s bare breast on TV. But those differing standards for sex and violence exist for a reason. Little boys will start play fighting as toddlers – and that play fighting can turn to real fighting at the drop of a hat. Boys are taught to control their violent urges from childhood on – we use sports as a way for boys to channel their violent and competitive urges in a safe and socially constructive way.

We put our daughters in ballet, gymnastics, and dance classes to channel their own sexual – and competitive – urges in a safe and socially constructive way. We try to postpone sexual maturity for our children as long as possible so their brains have a chance to catch up to their bodies. There is nothing hypocritical about this – it’s the basis of civilization. It’s what makes us different than animals. The evolutionary reason that human babies are helpless at birth is so mothers can pass a child through their birth canals while the baby’s head is still small – child bearing is painful enough as it is. This allows humans to develop bigger skulls that house bigger brains.

Of course “the elites” engage in “Eyes Wide Shut” style sexual parties. Of course the elites recruit young girls – very young girls, teenage girls – as sexual objects and sexual playthings. It’s not because they are elites – it’s because they are humans. Average regular middle and working class men do the same thing when they have a chance – and average, regular middle and working class women fantasize about being those sexual objects and sexual playthings.

And of course, quite often, these normal sexual dynamics are sometimes perverted into the fetishization of youth and the sexualization of violence. In BDSM it is called “power exchange” because – just like electrical current – the potential difference is what makes the electricity flow, the potential difference is what causes electrical current – just like the power difference between men and women is that spark and the charge of sexuality. The fact that a man is so much stronger than a woman is what women find sexually appealing in men. The fact that a woman is so much more vulnerable – and delicate – than a man is what men find sexually appealing in a woman. S&M is just that dynamic with the addition of costumes and props.

But when one class is much higher on the power scale than another class, the inevitable happens – instead of companionate marriage, the powerful men use the women of the oppressed class as concubines. The moronic “right wingers” who are constantly opposing “egalitarianism” will simply or ignore or excuse this. When a King of England did NOT have mistresses, his subjects assumed he was a sodomite. Where does socially conservative monogamy go when the elite class uses the women of the lower classes as, essentially, sex slaves? That is how you get a degenerate elite. That is how you get – in 2002 Italy, in fact, when Burlesconi was President – poor men pimping their underage daughters off to lecherous old wealthy men. That is how a girl’s youth becomes a product to sell, a way to feed the family.

Is that was the “anti-egalitarians” want? Which NRx “neo-reactionary” “social conservative” father is the first to auction his teenage daughter’s virginity off to the “God Emperor King” because “monarchy is better than democracy?” Which “conservative right wing” man is going to hold his shoes while walking around the castle as the King gets first night privileges with his new bride?

All of a sudden “all men are created equal” has something to recommend it, yes? All of a sudden the idea that the law binds both the rich and the poor, the powerful and the powerless, has a certain logic behind it, does it not? If that is not what right wing religious people mean by “objective morality” than what good are they? If the gods are not just, why worship them?

The origin of sex cults, pedophilia, prostitution, sexual exploitation, and the fetishization of youth is when there is TOO MUCH INEQUALITY. When societies are divided among the powerful and the powerless. In fact, one of the reason we need to have mono-racial societies – even mono-ethnic societies – is precisely because races, ethnicities, and individuals are NOT, by nature, equal. So separating these unequal humans into their own tribes where there is some semblance of a rough equality is the only way to protect your daughters from sex cults, pedophiles, and pimps.

Equality is what makes your daughter a wife, not a whore. Racially homogeneous – and roughly egalitarian – societies are what gives your daughter the chance at being a respected mother as opposed to a disposable concubine. It’s what allows your son to have an exclusive wife and not another man’s sloppy seconds.

And it’s what allows your grandchildren to be citizens, not slaves; heirs, not bastards, patriarchs, not cannon fodder.

President Donald J Hector Elizando Mountain Dew Camacho Trump

B:

Trump has two handicaps.

1) He is a bozo.
2) He started off with a default 7th grade civics class understanding of how the government works. Meaning, “Mr. Bill goes to Washington,” three branches, the President rules the Executive.

He is not a wild eyed radical, and does not intend to have a coup, abolish the constitution or anything of the sort. He got elected on the premise that the government is an organization which is dysfunctional but basically looks like what it’s supposed to. He got in on the theory that he would be a CEO in charge of revamping a broken corporation, or the captain of a ship which was off course and in bad repair.

Then he got in and all three branches told him to get bent, including the executive which he was supposed to be in charge of. Leaks and betrayal everywhere. It turned out that instead of being the captain of the ship, the president is actually just some dude who prances around on the prow, and if he gets ornery and actually tries to steer the ship and order the sailors around, they chuck him down in the hold. Which is where Trump now finds himself, fighting 1000 tons of pissed off squid.

None of this should have come as a surprise, but see point 1: the guy is a bozo, President Hector Elizando Mountain Dew Camacho.

He might still pull something out, if a group of reactionaries from the alphabet soup agencies and DoD present him with a plan and execute it for him. The odds of this are very small, for the same reason that the Soviet intelligence services and military never did anything against the USSR. This group of people has very little to gain and very much to lose by rocking the boat. They have comfortable and prestigious lives and interesting professions. DC incomes have not suffered at all from progressive policies. Anyone who is anyone in those organizations has been through many rounds of positive selection for conformism and many years of negative selection for nonconformism.

In short, those pics of the “God-emperor Trump” prancing around like a doofus with a submachine gun/sword and hookers at his knees should have been embarrassing to begin with.

But, hey, he might still pull something off-fundamentally, Trump is a decent and smart kind of bozo. Look at all those Jews he surrounds himself with! Just like President Camacho had his Not Sure and empowered him to fix the Brawndo Issue, maybe President Trump will delegate Kushner to figure out all this bad stuff with the french fry and burrito cover shortages. And maybe Kushner will take on Moldbug as an adviser.

One thing is for sure-these guys are not complete idiots. No NRx Nazis, NEETs or other weirdos will be allowed anywhere near power. Might as well leave all those Inquisition fantasies in the trash where they belong.

Jim:

Bozos do not acquire a hot wife, a flying palace with a gold plated bathroom, and the presidency in the face of massive opposition.

Trump knows exactly how the government really works, for he has been buying politicians for a very long time.

Trump is fairly open that he is planning a coup against the judiciary, after the fashion of Andrew Jackson, and has been planning it for many years. Of course what his supporters are hoping for is a coup against the permanent government, but a coup against the judiciary will nonetheless be a pleasant consolation prize.

Whether he can pull off a coup against the permanent government is far from clear, and I am less optimistic than I was a week ago, but he knows full well it is something he needs to do.

He has the military in his pocket, he has the praetorians in his pocket. The spies, however, are giving him a lot of grief, and if he cannot bring them into line, he is going to be a lame duck.

B:

A hot wife and a gold plated bathroom are EXACTLY the sort of things bozos value deeply and show off proudly. [Ed: President Camacho was a porn star with a big gold necklace let’s not forget!]

Would I really be surprised? The trouble with people of some intelligence is that they overestimate their intelligence while underestimating that of others. If I speak with you, it’s a pretty safe bet that I speak with others and have a pretty decent grasp of what’s going on.

Peppermint:

so “winning is for losers”. Are you impressed with GWB clearing brush and Jeb Bush’s wife?

B:

Your definition of winning is for losers. Idiocracy. I’ve been in Saddam Hussein’s palaces, was not impressed by them either.

I’m not impressed with GWB clearing brush.

I am impressed by George Senior, Prescott Bush and the rest of the classic Skull and Bones gang. Though evil, they had class, were formidable and not bozos.

I’m impressed by Andrew Jackson, who was formidable, though he fought a doomed battle. And I can’t picture Andrew Jackson doing bozo things like showing off a gold plated bathroom or trophy wives.

Furthermore, I know many people whom I look up to, who are my personal heroes in one respect or another, and none of them would do bozo things like that.

http://blog.jim.com/uncategorized/apology-to-b/

Jew Literally Buys His Way Into nRX/AltRight (#SocialMatter)

http://www.socialmatter.net/2016/08/29/ascending-tower-episode-xvii-part-1-gaslighting-christians/

Anthony, Nick, and E. Antony are joined by Ryan Landry and welcome special guest The Rebbe to talk about the second half of the Puritan-Judaism theory of Progressivism. In part 1, they cover Jewish perspectives on Christ, the ethnic divisions within modern Jewry, how nationalism saved Israel, and much more.

This episode is brought to you in part by generous donations from our listeners Anonymous in VA, The Bermudan Reactionary, Gladio, Edmund Burkenstock, and a special gift from our guest, The Rebbe.

The neo-reaction motto: Jews are to blame for nothing, Protestants are the blame for everything, White Nationalism is bad, and the solution to our problems is to LARP about restoring a monarchy. Just no racial solidarity or anti-semitism.

happy-merchant

nRX/SocialMatter’s Economic & Puritan Red Herrings

“Online religious arguments tend to be one secular agnostic pretending to be a traditional Catholic arguing with another secular agnostic pretending to be a fundamentalist Calvinist arguing with a third secular agnostic pretending to be a neo-pagan.” — Greg Johnson, paraphrased.

A famous nRX author recently mused, why are we refraining from teaching Catholicism just because we know it’s not true?

No, nRX is not a Jewish conspiracy to co-opt the “alt right” or reactionary thought.

Neoreaction is a Jewish Conspiracy to Thwart the Incipient National Socialist Revolution

NRX is a Catholic attempt to co-opt Jews into fighting the people the Catholics really hate: WASPs.

One would doubt that Moldbug “just happened” to downplay the Jewish role in the modern leftist/egalitarian movement, but it probably wasn’t because he had a Jewish grandfather. It’s simply that it’s not socially acceptable to blame anything on Jews, or to impute to Jews qua Jews anything other than the highest and loftiest motives.

But it’s open season on WASPs – whether religious or not.

So once the Catholics realized here was a chance to guard themselves from accusations of “anti-semitism” and even rope in a few “right wing” Jews, they coalesced around “neo-reaction.” The joke about Moldbug was right, he wants to reestablish the monarchy so he can fulfill his life-long ambition of being a court Jew.

But the Catholic NRXers are involved because they want to finally, once and for all, discredit the Reformation and the Enlightenment and to blame all modern problems on the movements that broke the power of their institution.

It depends on what problem you want to solve. If you’re a White Nationalist, you just have to reverse the consequence of the 1965 immigration act and curb Jewish media influence and anti-whiteness. But that is actually controversial, because it confronts the race issue head on and confronts Jewish power head on.

Catholic NRXers don’t want to do that, because it’s actually controversial and it won’t win them any libertarian Silicon Valley funding. It will turn off their Jewish friends. Since WASPs barely have any power left anyway, and don’t even identify as “WASPs” anymore, they are an easy target. The Democrats haven’t appointed a WASP to the Supreme Court in our lifetimes, and most WASPs these days are in the mold of Warren Buffett and Bill Gates – imperialist, globalist capitalists that are actually quite fine with IQ realism and hierarchy, as long as they can continue to make money and import cheap labor.

So the Catholic NRXers just want to relive their glory days (of 500 years ago) while avoiding anything actually controversial. That’s where all the “egalitarian” talk comes from. Not even the most hard core “egalitarian” liberal really buys the rhetoric – their neighborhoods are notoriously segregated and the more they “acknowledge their white privilege” the less they actually have to do anything about it.

But NRX wants us to believe that the progressive establishment – Bill Gates and Warren Buffet – really “believe” in equality and really believe that evolution only worked from the neck down. As opposed to the obvious facts: the establishment pays lip service to liberal ideas because it’s useful. Just like no one in nRX actually believes in Catholic dogma about miracles or transubstantiation, they just like the institution.

In order to keep Silicon Valley funding open, nRX is willing to give us howlers like these:

Do we dare imagine a nation where an open-heart surgeon takes home the same pay as a janitor? One job requires nearly a decade of dedicated study, an unwavering hand, a stout set of nerves, and the ability to think quickly lest a patient die; the other job requires a broom. What may be termed equality of outcome would certainly not be equality to the surgeon who spent his youth learning the scalpel when he could have just taken up a broom and gotten paid the same wage. Now multiply the scale of this nightmare by several orders of magnitude: a pharmaceutical chemist taking home the wages of a street sweeper; an electrical engineer receiving the same pay as a prostitute. Nothing could be more unequal. Nothing could be more unfair.

Of course, that is just a big fat red herring. No one who talks about “income equality” is suggesting that a janitor should be paid as much as a doctor. When people talk about “income equality” what they are clearly talking about is the fact that the top 1,000 billionaires on earth own more wealth than the rest of humanity combined. They are talking about the fact that the financial system – a financial system that is increasingly independent of the physical economy of goods and services – can create money out of thin air, and that creates virtually fictional derivatives that can’t and won’t be enforced when the time comes (see China defaulting on oil derivatives back in 2010.)

Why is everyone stuck on either the status quo, or Ron Paul-style goldbuggery? The Federal Reserve – and their counterparts in Europe and Asia – are just political constructs. No one cares that a brilliant doctor is going to make multiples of what a janitor makes. No one cares that an internet entrepreneur can become a billionaire.

What people care about is that “the masses” are taxed (in money and blood) so that oil pipelines overseas profit the right people. That whenever Wall Street can’t keep the fiction up, billions and trillions are simply transferred from the population at large so bankers can still get their bonuses.

It was always the conceit that putting fiat money under the control of democracy would lead to the population just printing themselves money, thus leading to inflation. So fiat money creation was put in the hands of technocratic financiers – and they did something virtually indistinguishable from a tin pot socialist dictator like Hugo Chavez – they just kept printing up money, non-stop, but instead of putting it into the economy they just diverted it into their bank accounts. So they could have their fifth mansion.

After all, you can have an economy of full employment when everyone is a servant of a king. One laborer to file each of the king’s toes – that’s ten jobs right there. Two or three servants to feed each of his dogs. Many biologists have suggested that humans are eusocial, after all.

But nRX is going to scare us that any talk of “equality” automatically leads to uppity janitors thinking they are Bill Gates while smart, hard working computer programmers are working for minimum wage, can’t get wives or have children, and we all turn into Bolivia.

But the nRX types want to avoid race and want to team up with their Jewish friends to blame everything on Puritans from two hundred years ago – because it’s 100% compatible with the ruling class to do that. You get no push back on that. You can still be invited to respectable cocktail parties – in fact, your “scandalous” “right wing” ideas can be tolerated, if not celebrated, because of course they are no threat to the actually powerful.

Gini And The Economic Altar

autistic-ai-overlord-jew-asian-aristocracy-homosexual-tranny-armed-forces-social

Mark Yuray: Doing Social Conservatism Right #nRX #SocialMatter

http://www.socialmatter.net/author/markyuray/

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.

Thank God For The Reformation And the Enlightenment

I’ve been reading and reading these neo-reactionary Dark Enlightenment people the last few weeks. Now, I realize that they are all super-duper smart – a self-described intellectual elite – and use big fancy words that some peon like me has a hard time understanding, but I promise I’m doing my best.

So, the Catholics are always bitching about the Reformation. Well, I’m Presbyterian. Frankly, Catholics are weird and gross and low class. Most of their institutions are bizarre. They worship a goddess – let’s be honest, that’s what Mariology is – their priests are crypto-homos, and the entire structure of the Catholic church is imperial.

The Protestant Reformation was in the North-Western part of Europe – you know, that part of Europe where the people are smarter, Whiter, and better looking. They were sick of being ruled by a bunch of dark skinned queers in Italy. So, they revolted and set up National Churches instead of a Imperial Church in Rome.

You know, nationalism.

And thank God they did. Catholicism is weird and gross, it’s an ignorant religion for dark skinned half-whites.

Presbyterianism is for White people.

I’ll write about the Enlightenment later.

Remember, these are people whose icons are those Magic the Gathering cards. The Dark Enlightenment is Dungeons and Dragons for adults.

So these Dork Enlightenners (they call White nationalists “racist” and don’t have the courage to actually promote White interests) – these people say they want to go back to before the Enlightenment.

Here’s how to start – get off the damn internet, which is a product of our post-Enlightenment world.

If NRx Wants To Revoke The Enlightenment, Do Jews Go Back To The Shtetl?

Of all NRx complaints about the Enlightenment, has the emancipation of the Jews ever been mentioned as a downside?

https://nickbsteves.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/this-week-in-reaction-20150424/

Watson, in Jews, Puritans and Whites OH MY!, catches Kevin McDonald pretty much agreeing with the neoreactionary dictum: “It’s not just the Jews.”

Is it really “it’s not just the Jews?” Or is it “it’s never the Jews?”

https://oneirradiatedwatson.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/jews-puritans-and-whites-oh-my/https://oneirradiatedwatson.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/jews-puritans-and-whites-oh-my/

Notice the tone, MacDonald is “caught,” “oh my!” As if MacDonald has never mentioned anything other than Jews. One of MacDonald’s most important pieces was “The Indigenous Culture of Critique.”

This sort of tone might be appropriate in a situation in which Jews are blamed for everything. But in modern America, and the West in general, Jews are blamed for nothing. In fact, it’s a signal of low social status to even notice that Jews have any power at all.

Jews run Hollywood? That’s a “conspiracy theory.” Jews overrepresented in politics? “So what, they work hard and are smarter than you, you’re just blaming your personal failure on Jews!” When Whites were overrepresented in the Ivy League, that was an example of structural racism. Now that Jews dominate the Ivy League, they got in all on merit?

NRx seems quite unwilling to critique Jews for anything at all, don’t they? If Jews caused problems in the 20th Century, we must go back further until we can blame it on some European group. “Sure Jews did this bad thing, but this other person did something bad too, so why blame Jews?”

Here nickbsteves engages in some extremely common philo-semitism:

Not only is it “Not just the Jews,” but, if it were they would truly be the master race psychologically speaking and would pretty much deserve, from an evolutionary perspective, all of the spoils they have obtained.

If we were talking about *any other group* – anyone at all *but* Jews, do you think nickbsteves would say the same thing?

One suspects that everything about the Enlightenment can be criticized *except* that it liberated the Jews.

It’s all very kosher isn’t it?

It would be a mistake to start “counting Jewish noses” in NRx, or pointing to Moldbug’s purported Jewish grandfather. There’s another dynamic at work here. I suspect it is similar to the allergy to ethno-nationalism and explicit advocacy for White interests and instead the focus on IQ. The idea is to create a coalition that includes just enough “diversity” – you know, Jews, White guys with half-Asian children, a smattering of Japanese and Sub-continentals – something that looks like Amren.

Instead of a biological continuum, it’s an artificial group – whoever gets X on the IQ tests.

You know, something that looks like Silicon Valley.

Because anything ELSE would actually draw the wrath of the Synagogue Cathedral.

They are just run of the mill conservatives giving themselves a fancy name and posing as great intellectuals.

NRx: Political Correctness for Right Wingers

You can see it especially in the reactionary Catholics.

Reactionary Catholics prove how “right wing” they are by using terms like “sodomite” and having the “courage” to say that homosexuality isn’t normal. In fact, they even like to point out that anal sex is not just gross, but spreads disease.

Everyone else keeps quiet and looks away uncomfortably because it’s pretty obvious what’s going on.

Yes, liberals do pretend that homosexuality is normal – obviously, no one believes it. Homosexuality is obviously gross and hey – the Pope is right – homosexuality is “intrinsically disordered.” It’s clearly some sort of developmental disorder, perhaps a hormonal issue. In fact, gay marriage is a modern attempt to contain homosexuality.

Before the modern era, gays would join the Catholic priesthood. After all – THAT IS YOUR TRADITION. What do you think “celibacy” is? It’s all the men that don’t want to marry women – you know, homos – so they join the celibate priesthood, put on a dress, run the fancy rituals in the Church, and otherwise keep their homosexuality in the crypto-closet.

The rest of us, we figured this out a long, long time ago.

But you know, those fags don’t always really keep chaste and they have a long, long tradition of buggering the altar boys.

So those altar boys grow up humiliated and ashamed about what their priests did to them, so they lash out about “sodomites” and build entire political movements around basic, obvious things that liberals – liberals being the smarter faction of society – already know and already figured out.

I’m sorry your priests anally raped you. It’s a crime. But you “NRx traditional Catholics” are just embarrassing yourselves at this point.

Hey Catholics, that IS YOUR TRADITION. That’s what you are fighting for. THAT IS YOUR CHURCH. That is your community. That is what “celibacy” means. Your priests are celibate, your nuns are celibate, your cardinals are celibate, the Pope is celibate.

The Priesthood IS gay marriage, and that is your tradition.

I’m reading a traditional Catholic “neo-reactionary” about how “Islam was the first Protestant reformation” and I’m thinking, yep, that’s right, Islam doesn’t have a fag priest class either, that’s pretty much just a Catholic thing.

That is what the Protestants were rebelling against. Luther and Calvin and every other proto-Protestant complained that “celibacy” led to “sodomy” because the celibate priesthood is just the “traditional” version of gay marriage.

I’m sorry, Father O’Malley shouldn’t have touched your there. Talk to your therapist.

OK, are we done? Good. Now please shut up and stop embarrassing yourself and everyone else.

Does Henry Dampier Read Hipster Racist?

He must, becaue I’ve been saying much of this for nearly two years now:

http://www.henrydampier.com/2015/04/explaining-pop-kink

Conservatives funnel their children into egalitarian institutions, demand inhuman powers of chastity from their children, and then become shocked — just shocked — when the impossible rules result in their cheerleader daughter getting a big belly without knowing who the father is. The absurdity of expecting inhuman levels of restraint from people is also mirrored by the leftist reign of regulations in sexual harassment. Men and women must be forced to be the same, and any outburst of natural attraction is to be punished by the full force of the legal system.

But the article is really about “pop kink” and as usual, he gets it wrong. I almost feel like I might accidentally come across as one of those obnoxious, politically correct Professional Kinksters talking about informed consent and safewords, but like most people, Dampier is reading a bit too much into “kink” and thus, in many ways, missing the significance.

Yes, kink is a place (the only place?) where it’s ok for a feminist or a leftist to act out traditional gender roles. At least among my set, BDSM was, essentially, a long running dirty joke. Take any sort of scenario, and turn it into some “scene.” BDSM was nothing but regular sexy times with the ladies wearing more fashionable clothes. There were a few people we knew that were into it a bit more “hardcore” than others but only the “community” feels as if it is some sort of “identity.”

De Sade’s Justine really has no connection to BDSM. It’s been a while since I’ve read it, but I seem to remember Justine was a philosophical piece about atheism with a torture-murder scene. The utterly awful 2003 film “Quills” was an attempt to turn De Sade into a Kinkster Philosopher Ahead of his Time but it was nothing but pure historical revisionism, as well as a total snoozefest.

No one has ever explained to me what is so terrible about bondage – have people really never tied up their ladyfriend or blindfolded her? They like the suspense. What do you think those fuzzy handcuffs at the novelty store are for? Spanking? Spanking is half sexy and half funny. Are we really going to suggest that is somehow “perverted?” Dominance and submission? Goodness, folks, that is in the Bible. It’s actually a commandment and the Christian ideal of marriage.

From what I can tell, the main hangups people have are pain and humiliation. All I can say is that people often have a complex relationship to pain. Pain is an inevitable part of life, applying pain in a controlled way can be comforting. Pain is sort of the opposite of pleasure, and each thing evokes its opposite. Have you ever had a really good deep tissue massage? You know how it hurts, yet feels really good at the same time?

Humiliation? OK, have you ever had a fight with your ladyfriend then had really great makeup sex afterward? You know, she pushes and pushes and you yell at her. It’s kind of humiliating to her when you put her in her place, but she kind of enjoys it when you take charge. The hilarious “Break Feminazis” scenarios on reddit are all the same basic gimmick, “uppity feminist Wonder Woman gets put in her place by a Real Man.” It’s like competitive comedy writing; it just so happens that many, many feminists actually get really aroused by it.

All the rest of BDSM is just costumes and role-play.

The other thing people don’t get is that, generally speaking, BDSM is a woman’s thing. BDSM scenarios are pretty much the number two fantasy of women, after the sort of standard “Prince Charming rips my bodice.” There are more women into it than men. In fact, it’s all rather understandable from a pop evolutionary pscyhology perspective as well.

I can assure you folks, 50 Shades of Grey is not a harbinger of the Decline and Fall of Western Civilization. It’s a throw away piece of girl porn with some spanking in it. Good grief.

The real issues that the West has is not that lots of girls think it’s sexy to be tied up and spanked, it is economic and social changes that have made marriage and family formation all but out of reach of the working class. Fix that problem and you’ll fix the fertility problem.

As for the divorce issues, it’s really simple and it is, in fact, kind of related to BDSM, at least, power in relationships. The court system gives wives a financial incentive to blow up their marriages. The court essentially hands a woman a grenade and says, “now don’t use this unless you really, really need to.” She now has the power in the relationship.

Imagine a hypothetical future in which wife-spanking was completely legal and accepted. I’m not kidding. A hypothetical future society where a husband was unequivocally in charge of his family, the Head of Household, and if he had to, he could take his wife over his knee and spank her as punishment.

If that scenario immediately makes you think, “that’s just awful. Husbands would just be abusing their wives for no good reason,” well, congrats, you are either a feminist or a conservative, as if all men, most men, or even a really significant minority of men actually like to abuse the women they love. These are the women they have pledged their entire lives to, the future mother of their children, and feminists – and conservatives – think men are just so evil and so awful that it is inevitable they would abuse their power, thus, men cannot be entrusted with any power at all. In fact, it would be better if the wife were in charge. (Hmm, perhaps traditional conservatism is actually full of submissive men. Apparently C. S. Lewis liked his wife to dominate him in bed.)

On the other hand, if that scenario makes you think, “goodness that’s hot, I would be so turned on if my man turned me over his knee when I was acting up,” email hipsterracist@yahoo.com for a good time.