Alexis de Tocqueville’s Prescient Gaze

DAN IN ATL passes along wise words from a long-gone species of man: The keen observer of reality.

In his classic study “Democracy in America”, Alexis de Tocqueville included this gem:

“There are people in Europe who, confounding together the different characteristics of the sexes, would make man and woman into beings not only equal but alike. They would give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things–their occupations, their pleasures, their business. It may readily be conceived that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to the other, both are degraded, and from so preposterous a medley of the works of nature nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women.”

The twisted roots of American feminism trace back to the motherland: Europe. To find the malevolent pool of black goo that belched the feminism-equalism battleaxes-of-evil, you need to journey to the ancestral lands of your forebears. For most Americans prior the 1965 White Dissolution Immigration Act, that means the lands of Napoleon, Richard III, and Kaiser Wilhelm.

Weak men and disorderly women. de Tocqueville saw clear what many of us living in the grip of his realized dystopia cannot or will not. Time enough has passed; the weakness spreads and the binds of men and women fray. We had warnings. Why didn’t we heed them? Because, perhaps, free will is illusory. We crash in the machinery of these ageless, infinitely looping social cycles, rattling like loose nuts, dimly grasping the exhausted end we’re hurtling toward, but unable to do anything about it save rust within the decay. Our hopes and aspirations, it appears, exist in precarious balance with an ineradicable death wish.

Read Full Post »

The Lapdogs Of Lamaze

When did the pussification of America’s men begin? Speculating on this sort of thing is always fun, but it serves a larger purpose: If we can identify the origin of the Ascended Testes Era, we can theoretically reverse it.

One reader believes he has an answer,

I was just thinking back to my early 20s, when I found myself married to the dumpy chick I knocked up.  [ed: pre-game, natch] I did what was expected of me at the time, which meant marriage, and it meant Lamaze classes, and La Leche League, and all this girlie baby nurturing liberal SWPL crap I’m sure pajama boy would totally embrace in his plaid onesie.

There was only one other father in the Lamaze classes.  All the pretty girls were there with a friend or a neighbor or a mother, and the only two fathers there were with dumpy average looking chicks.  The other guy was such a wuss he kept passing out during the videos, and his wife had to revive him repeatedly.  (They eventually had like six kids, and are still together as far as I know.)

Yeah, beta males may have slightly more kids on average than do alpha males, but would you want to be a beta? (Procreation Pusher: “wouldn’t you like to be a beta too… be a beta, doooon’t be a playa…) No, I think I’ll skip out on the incomparable joy of loading up the belly of a frump.

I’ve been reflecting on the whole Lamaze thing, and how hot girls don’t have babies with guys who would go through that kind of crap in the first place.  Can you see Mystery in Lamaze classes?  I can’t.

Where was Tywin Lannister when his kids were being born?  The same place my father was, and my grandfather, and every man back for thousands of years.  Smoking cigarettes and letting the women handle woman’s work.

I blame Lamaze for the pussification of America.  It all starts with dads going “hee hee hee hooooooo” with their dumpy wives.  It really does.

Besides, blood, shit, and gore belong on the battlefield, not in the vagina you’re fucking.  No man should ever have to see that.  History had this right.

Lamaze was invented by a French fop in the 1940s, and gained cultural traction in the US a decade later. In the annals of herstory, I’m sure a few alpha males were hornswoggled into attending a Lamaze class (which they undoubtedly instantly regretted), but those men who agreed to attend without a fight or, worse, who happily jumped at the opportunity, are truly the most beta of betas.

No man worth his two taters will enjoy any aspect of the Lamaze spectacle. I bet a man’s T level drops 300% as soon as he steps foot in a Lamaze classroom. And given that betas are already short a couple liters of T, they can’t afford to have their precious reserves siphoned off by the sight of distended bellies, pork roll camel toes, and red-faced plumpers method acting the passing of a gargantuan turd.

So, yeah, there is obviously some selection bias going on with regard to the types of men who can be found empathy birthing in a Lamaze class. More telling is what this reader noticed about the hotness of the pregnant women who weren’t with their men. What he observed was a female selection bias that complemented and reinforced the male selection bias: Hot babes have more choice in men, and they invariably choose high value alpha males who are the least likely to sit through an insufferable Lavaje class. These alphas could be captains of industry with no time for Lamaze silliness, or they could be dominant personalities who won the test of wills contest. Either way, it shows that hot women — women who have, after all, an incredible array of sexual market options — will choose insensitive sociopaths before new age sensitive empaths.

Lamaze was probably not a cause of the emasculation of American men, but it was a harbinger. All those betas lining up to hee hee ho with their women were castrates in a coal mine. A mere fifty years later, we have Youtube videos of bronies coming out with their stuffed animal lovers.

Read Full Post »

Freelance Comment Of The Week: Diversity Is Our Separation

Replying to a Steve Sailer review of the movie Her as a mischievous chain-yank of the exquisite sensibilities of white people who majored in humanities, commenter stari_momak pithily spits,

You notice how [as] America has gotten darker, white people have gotten fairer (or paler)?

One consequence of the CH axiom Diversity + Proximity = War is, ironically, a racial self-segregation that belies the media message drumbeat propagandizing the opposite. Her is very much a SWPL (Stuff White People Like) utopia: clean urban spaces, softening pastels, car-less mass transit, bicycle lanes, love affairs with an advanced Siri AI who sounds like the whitest white girl who ever whited, a noticeable lack of bling or vibrancy.

It’s almost as if the crushing weight of diversity (especially in LA) has freed upper middle class whites to wall themselves off in cultural compounds of their own making. Sure, they have to guss up their motives with doublespeak, but their actions — their revealed preference in economese — is strictly for a society of the whites, by the whites, for the whites.

It’s no longer affordable for liberal whites to walk their talk. The days of mingling with a token or two, or adopting some affect of the underclass, and patting oneself on the back are rapidly coming to a close. Diversity has expanded its reach to dangerous levels, threatening a core reactor meltdown. Its ominous, suffocating presence reminds leftoids on a daily basis the reality of a world that is being reshaped into what they have claimed is progress. In their personal lives, where chucks hit the ground, they recoil at this progress, and retreat to insulated social bubbles that align more closely with predilections formed by their genetic heritage.

Like the vast expanse of outer space, as America on the whole becomes less white, the pinpoints of whiteness glow more brightly.

Read Full Post »

The Leftoid Media Lie Machine

As most CH readers are likely aware, mass media suppression of hatefacts has accelerated and intensified in recent years, with signs that 2014 will usher the Year of Crimethink Suppression. As a minor but telling example of the effort the liberal-owned-and-operated media industrial complex (aka the propaganda arm of the Cathedral) will go to maintain their Narrative and excise uncongenial facts from their copy, Mangan tweeted (can someone please create a social media platform with a manlier sounding name, ferkrissakes?) the following,

Dishonest, groupthink journalism: 98% of Stories Ignore That Ice-bound Ship Was On Global Warming Mission. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ciandella/2014/01/02/frozen-out-98-stories-ignore-ice-bound-ship-was-global-warming-missi

In the scheme of things, it’s a small “oversight” by the journalistic zero integrity clown show, (and ironic considering that global warming is the one liberal pet cause that is buttressed by at least some respectable science), but when you multiply this trivial slight against the truth by the millions of other big and little anti-white lies the Cathedral tells every hour and every day of the year, it becomes clearer that the American public is being deliberately lied to on a scale so massive it may dwarf in sweep and penetration the propaganda outlets of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th Century East.

Why do they lie? And why do they lie on such insignificant details, when telling the truth would seem to do them no harm? For answers, you need to get inside the heads of your Columbia Journalism School SWPL foes.

The Leftoid Media Lie Machine operates under the direction of two fundamental psychological processes that exist in every human being, but are especially pronounced in your typical leftoid: Ego preservation and status whoring.

Media mavens and liberal lickspittles alike fancy themselves the cognitive elite; they take pride in their smarts and their education. They are world class humblebraggarts and suck-up credentialists. Their insufferable ideology — a caustic mix of snarkism, childism and feelsism — is their coin of the realm, the barter they use to signal their smarts and to draw up cultural battle lines that give them tactical advantage. When their beliefs are challenged, as is becoming more their reality every day thanks to shiv masters like yours truly, they go into rabid attack mode, because a threat to their egos is like a threat to their bodies. The leftoid is nothing if he is not his glowing, pulsing ego. If the leftoid loses his Narrative prerogative, he may as well lose his reason for living.

And so the temptation to lie lie lie is strong in the leftoid when the truth begins to come out and undercut his manicured mental world and cherished self-conception as an enlightened and kind-hearted wunderkind. He responds to the crisis by working tirelessly to keep that Overton Window securely in his playing field. Three consequences of the threat against the leftoid’s haughty but paper-thin smugness then emerge:

1. The Cathedral suppression of truth will intensify as realization spreads among the true believers in the ranks that everything they’ve believed is a lie.

True believers hide contradicting facts from themselves as much as they do from others. This is an ego protection countermeasure. It isn’t logical, but it is human.

2. The ruling elite who are cynically aware of the truth but can’t escape their emotional attachment to their ideology or to status whoring on the backs of the wrong kinds of white people will encourage the lying as a tool of psychological and political warfare.

Cathedral leftoids loathe the idea that they might give aid and comfort to their non-leftoid enemies. In this scenario, they know the truth on some level, but refuse to acknowledge it (despite any journalistic ethical strictures commanding them to do so) because they believe acknowledging it will embolden and gird the spirits of those they consider horrible, no good people. To these leftoids, the prospect of Heartland Joe (Votech, Class of 1975) beaming with satisfaction that his intuition about the way the world works was right all along drives them insane with rage. Even worse, the thought that a sadistic demon like me would take an eviscerating scalpel to their egos armed with their de facto surrender papers keeps them awake at night in terror.

3. Slander, spying and sanitization will become the default actions of the liberal gatekeepers of discourse gaping ineffectually into the teeth of intractable social problems caused primarily by their own ideas and preferred policies.

Expect shitlib hysteria to reach epic contortions in the coming years, because it will be the only reaction they have left to assuage their fraying egos as the world they constructed falls to pieces around them. The more unsolvable the mass scale social problems become, the more readily leftoids retreat to shrieking bansheeism as a policy prescription and psychological balm.

In the end, the truth wins out. The question is whether it wins in the arena of genteel exchange of ideas, or it rises as the last man standing in a blood-soaked thunderdome.

Read Full Post »

Sociopathy Is Increasing In America

Is sociopathy prevalence on the rise in America? According to the author of the book The Sociopath Next Door, it is. American culture has become a breeding ground for sociopaths.

And disturbingly, the prevalence of sociopathy in the United States seems to be increasing. The 1991 Epidemiologic Catchment Area study, sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health, reported that in the fifteen years preceding the study, the prevalence of antisocial personality disorder had nearly doubled among the young in America, It would be difficult, closing in on impossible, to explain such a dramatically rapid shift in terms of genetics or neurobiology.

Male sociopaths do better with women. This is indisputable. If sociopathy is increasing in America, then we must look to the foundational market of human interpersonal relations — the sexual market — to discover the source of this increasing sociopathy. Quite simply, if more women are more often rewarding sociopaths with their sex, then the supply of sociopathy will increase.

Under what conditions would women swoon for sociopaths? Very harsh conditions, for one. An emotionless Machiavellian is a useful mate to have when survival is constantly tested. Another social condition that probably redounds to the benefit of sociopaths is one in which women are incentivized, by a coddling state and by women’s own economic self-sufficiency, to favor the love of maximum tingle generating cads over comfy cozy betas.

Tellingly for the currently cratering US, diversity may play a crucial role in assisting the rise of the sociopaths.

In this opinion he is joined by theorists who propose that North American culture, which holds individualism as a central value, tends to foster the development of antisocial behavior, and also to disguise it. In other words, in America, the guiltless manipulation of other people “blends” with social expectations to a much greater degree than it would in China or other more group-centered societies.

I believe there is a shinier side of this coin, too, one that begs the question of why certain cultures seem to encourage prosocial behavior. So much against the odds, how is it that some societies have a positive impact on incipient sociopaths, who are born with an inability to process interpersonal emotions in the usual way? I would like to suggest that the overriding belief systems of certain cultures encourage born sociopaths to compensate cognitively for what they are missing emotionally. In contrast with our extreme emphasis on individualism and personal control, certain cultures, many in East Asia, dwell theologically on the interrelatedness of all living things.

Interestingly, this value is also the basis of conscience, which is an intervening sense of obligation rooted in a sense of connectedness. If an individual does not, or if neurologically he cannot, experience his connection to others in an emotional way, perhaps a culture that insists on connectedness as a matter of belief can instill a strictly cognitive understanding of interpersonal obligation.

An intellectual grasp of one’s duties to others is not the same attribute as the powerfully directive emotion we call conscience, but perhaps it is enough to extract prosocial behavior from at least some individuals who would have behaved only in antisocial ways had they been living in a society that emphasized individualism rather than interrelatedness. Though they lack an internal mechanism that tells them they are connected to others, the larger culture insists to them that they are so connected — as opposed to our culture, which informs them resoundingly that their ability to act guiltlessly on their own behalf is the ultimate advantage. This would explain why a Western family by itself cannot redeem a born sociopath. There are too many other voices in the larger society implying that his approach to the world is correct.

As Robert Putnam has discovered, ethnic and racial diversity reduces trust and social cohesion. Radically heterogeneous societies lose their aura of connectedness. Within this atomized, unraveled milieu, sociopaths thrive. They thrive not only because any communitarian brakes on their behavior are removed, but also because the culture begins to value and exalt the very special talents of the sociopath. This is an unavoidable transition when people feel unmoored from a larger social family, and adopt a pathologically individualist “look out for #1” attitude to life in response to the vague but palpably ominous threat of rainbow fauxalitions.

To be a high level player, you have to be blessed with a touch of sociopathy. Without that trait for timely detachment, you will empathize too much with the particular needs and reproductive goals of women. That distracting emotional resonance will hinder your ability to hurt a woman’s feelings and, sadly you’ll discover, rare is the woman who joyfully surrenders her body to a man who is careful to spare her feelings.

So sociopathy has its privileges. But no nation of sociopaths ever put a man on the moon.

Read Full Post »

Pajamaboy Caption Contest

Now it’s your turn. Leave your ideas for captions in the comments. Winners will be announced in a future post. Good luck and happy shivving!

Bonus!

Read Full Post »

Speaking Power To Truth

A malignant white leftoid decided to try and get himself arrested for a nuisance crime to prove (in his own mind) that police “stop and frisk” profiling of blacks and hispanics is wrong because it presumably lets a lot of white Manhattanite would-be criminals off the hook.

Wearing a suit and tie and carrying a couple of cans of spray paint, he had a hard time getting arrested. Even after tagging a public building in full view of security cameras, he still couldn’t get arrested (a cop at the scene was bewildered by the leftoid’s brazenness, and who can blame him), so he turned himself in, where he discovered that white cellmates had fewer bruises on them than non-white cellmates from what they claimed (always trust a con) were altercations with cops.

Naturally, the leftoid is humblebragging about his revealing exposé of the criminal justice system and, I’m sure, he’s now a hit at Upper West Side parties where he has cashed in his anti-white status whoring points for beaucoup feels. But all this moron did with his campy street stunt — aka criminal tourism — was prove that criminal profiling works. There are so few suited-up white men in NYC spraying graffiti (the number doubtless hovers around zero) that one of them carrying a can of spray paint isn’t cause for suspicion. The one white guy who does get punished for it is a performance artists who intended to write about the experience in The Atlantic. His race commits so few petty crimes in New York that he had to force the issue to get any notice from the law. So, the cops were right to ignore this buffoon.

Leftoids are fond of reciting their religious belief that blacks committing nuisance crimes — like trespassing — are handled more roughly by cops than are whites doing the same. What leftoids always fail to consider is that cops have good reason for the putative double standard; a black kid running across a suburban lawn is more likely to be heading on his way to a home invasion than is a white kid criss-crossing backyards. Those crime stats… they just don’t lie.

Read Full Post »