A Short Post on Prejudice

“Ewww, that’s gross!”

Every time your child says that, it is a reassurance that he’s gonna be all right — unless you interfere with that aspect of his development. Like the woman at a coffee shop, whom I overheard saying: “I encourage openness to different cultures, ideas, and sexuality when it comes to raising my daughter.”

Something I understand as a father is that non-interference plays as much a role in child-raising as does positive action. Parents who buy into the neoliberal value of uncritical tolerance and push it on their children’s developing judgment — in spite of the child’s natural discomfort — are crippling the child’s moral auto-immune system.

Disgust is the pre-rational seed for a human being’s development of his sense of right and wrong. It is literally visceral; “from the gut” or “gut feeling” are not metaphors. Taboos, for example, come from our pre-rational aversion to things we consider unclean or disturbing: human waste matter, incest and homosexuality, female promiscuity (and male promiscuity to a lesser extent), miscegenation, extreme obesity, snakes and bugs, along with a host of Uncanny Valley aversions such as wariness of foreigners.

As we grow up, that visceral prejudice becomes a foundation for our morality and judgment. And on a higher cognitive level, disgust transforms into an aversion to more abstract evils such as lies and disloyalty.

When a child becomes a teenager, he will not resist siren-songs by reasoning things out to first-causes because a thirteen-year-old is not a philosopher. He also isn’t an automaton, so he won’t turn his back on evil just because his parents told him to. Rather, when he comes to a fork in the road and something feels off, all he’s got is his gut feeling.

He will be more sure to make the right choice in a dilemma if he trusts his instincts. And years later, even if that boy does grow up to be a philosopher, disgust will still serve him as an infallible guide.

Advertisements

48 thoughts on “A Short Post on Prejudice

  1. My gut tells me that allowing fug lesbians to box and shot put has made a mockery of the Olympics. I know harte it and will watch very little of this highly politicized anti White male event.

  2. Pingback: A Short Post on Prejudice | Reaction Times

  3. The Olympics were once equally athletic and esthetic. They helped clarify what top-tier beauty and virtue looked and felt like. This in turn raised the bar for human achievement in the arts and sciences. To the Greeks they served as a thrilling festival of personal and collective encouragement; to us they are a corporate cesspool of watered-down “sport for sport’s sake.”

    A globe of one-dimensional tourists representing countries they generally know very little about in terms of history and deep philosophy. There are now athletes in our world, much too athletic across-the-board for these modern Olympics; too reverent to be blithely appropriated by the commercialized society of the spectacle.

  4. “Like the woman (my emphasis) at a coffee shop, whom I overheard saying: ‘I encourage openness to different cultures, ideas, and sexuality when it comes to raising my daughter.’”

    Why “woman?” Why not at least mother? But better yet, why not (“)mother,(“) instead? Some prejudices are deleterious exactly because they are not from the gut, but are instead learned overtime in the most subtle manner. So above “we” can “see” a deleterious prejudice of yours, PA, subtly learned over time that you now unwittingly impose on your children and those young one who read your work. A woman or better yet a mother who has given herself over to the degenerate thoughts about concerning her daughter IS SUBCONSCIOUSLY FORFEITING her womanhood/motherhood which you will nonetheless CONSCIOUSLY GRANT HER only to inevitably radicalize all sides.

    A real mother does not teach and preach to her daughter radical sexual autonomy. And as it stands, only the daughter ever gets social penalized by the social critics on our side. Every other female IS STILL A “woman.”

  5. Edit:

    So above “we” can “see” a deleterious prejudice of yours, PA, subtly learned over time that you now unwittingly impose on your children and those young [ones] who read your work. A woman or better yet a mother who has given herself over to the degenerate thoughts [above] concerning her daughter IS SUBCONSCIOUSLY FORFEITING her womanhood/motherhood which you will nonetheless CONSCIOUSLY GRANT HER only to inevitably radicalize all sides.

  6. Handle…

    The problem with Freedie’s take is that ultimately he is attempting to disassociate one self-annihilator (the homosexual) from another self-annihilator (the incestual individual) FOR THE PURPOSE of advancing the “right” to self-annihilation in a most subtle of manner.

  7. Freddie believes “uncoerced and informed consent” = harmless to all others. In this manner, a symbiotic regression does not represent something inherently harmful.

  8. “The problem with Freedie’s take is that ultimately he is attempting to disassociate one self-annihilator (the homosexual) from another self-annihilator (the incestual individual) FOR THE PURPOSE of advancing the “right” to self-annihilation in a most subtle of manner.”

    Yeah, first he ‘as a progressive’ can’t conceive of his ‘physical revulsion’ as healthy biological function, the way one gets sick and reacts when one’s immune system is rejecting pathogens; but he also can’t do as much on a macro level, in which rejecting such practice as policy is a negation of civilizational-sized pathogen, in this case in the form of a sexual practice that’s pathological.

  9. Freddie seems unaware that a visceral disgust for a “thing” can be conditioned out of an individual ESPECIALLY IF said conditioning starts very early in one’s form-at-i’ve years. And it is most likely the case that Freddie is evidence of such a conditioning in regards to homosexuality? Furthermore, he seems oblivious to the inevitable conditioning he shall render unto as it concerns his present visceral disgust for incest. And no doubt, the conditioning must be of a different caliber given his post-formative existence. But he will, BECAUSE HE DOES NOT REJECT radical sexual autonomy at the outset, eventually succumb to the toleration of incest to the point of provoking no visceral effect within.

  10. There is, amongst the enemies of sexual Christian morality, a carefully-crafted “hidden from thyself” desire for radical sexual autonomy. A literal objective Aversion to ALL sexual aversions. An ultimately self-annihilating paradox at the bottom of a bottomless Pandora’s box of self-annihilating paradoxes.

  11. As a boy, I had an intense aversion to poor etiquette and lowly behaviour I deemed contrary to The Code. Where I got this, I don’t know. Much of modern American life is an attempt to short-circuit these natural gut instincts in people. Somehow, I avoided it.

    #dissident4lyfe

  12. Blame it on the movies.

    “The cinema is an invention without any future.”
    ― Louis Lumière, first filmmaker in history

  13. After looking at a few of his article links at his site, i see i mislabeled Freddie as a ‘progressive;’ he’s more an academic moderate, i guess.

  14. Academic moderate? What does that even mean? We can cry about Bush’s foreign policy catastrophe all day long, BUT the residual effect go without saying so much so that “we” almost forget that Bush’s greatest “move” was unveiling Jihad to a mass “white” audience and recognizing that they really do hate neocons for their neocon freedoms and are willing to kill ANYONE in return. In other words, the Bush war REALLY SHOWED US what kind of degenerates “we” must deal with in the jihadist. Of course, most nimwits END UP putting ALL THEIR focus on jihadists when they represent merely one faction of anti-wS WHO ALSO HAPPEN to despise radical neocon autonomy. Now sucked into this singular frame, “we” get “wn” doing apologetics for the sexual degenerates of the sand.

  15. — Why “woman?” Why not at least mother? But better yet, why not (“)mother,(“) instead? (Thordaddy)

    That kind of thought leads to pedantry. An adult human female is a woman, period. She doesn’t necessarily have to be a good woman.

    — As a boy, I had an intense aversion to poor etiquette and lowly behaviour I deemed contrary to The Code. (Laguna Beach Fogey)

    Same here. I grew up reading Victorian ethos writers such as Jules Verne, Karl May, and Henryk Sienkiewicz, all of whom wrote from an assumption of male honor and striving for excellence. I also liked Tin Tin comic books (before I learned English; I just followed the story in the pictures). My son likes them now.

  16. “Same here. I grew up reading Victorian ethos writers such as Jules Verne, Karl May, and Henryk Sienkiewicz”

    Y’know, it’s interesting that some of the us across the racial lines are from similar class levels (or close enough for my forthcoming point, barring the avatar bio of LBF and a few others). But if I may, let me stress a big difference across academic-class racial lines; we’ve mentioned in earlier posts, but I can attest to you that it is very true that, when in the early-to-mid-60s when black Americans began attending four-year universities in s significantly bigger mass, it was the social sciences, education and other practical, here-and-now ‘black uptick’ fields that were pushed and where populated by this emerging collegiate group.

    As we’ve subsequently discussed that was understandable but unfortunate in many ways —— especially, given that that era was much more amenable to a colonial sense of humanities and scholarship, and that new breed of college-bound blacks were much more open to the European tradition-stacked canon and perspective. I think there’d be a lot more progress and a lot less defensiveness toward ‘third-world’ adaptation of the western Renaissance tradition if that had been sought from the get-go of this new class of collegiates.

    This, though it’s totally understandable if however regrettable that the opposite happened —– what PA basically accurately if a bit awkwardly described as fealty to the theories of W.E.B DuBois and hypothetical racial history prevailed instead of a more practical devotion to DuBois black-trades=black-uplift had prevailed.

    A lot of current black studies and other cutting-edge progressive academic folly of this day maintains because of that initial misdirection, IMO.

  17. I think there’d be a lot more progress and a lot less defensiveness toward ‘third-world’ adaptation of the western Renaissance tradition if that had been sought from the get-go of this new class of collegiates.

    Progress toward what?

    Are you suggesting that those black Americans (studying then) would have been diligent and contributing scholars in the traditional and Eurocentric liberal arts?

    If that is not your point, then the misunderstanding is mine; but why-ever would they be interested in anyt of that stuff?

    *************

    A lot of current black studies and other cutting-edge progressive academic folly of this day maintains because of that initial misdirection, IMO.

    In any case, the misdirection of academic talent into the liberal arts was applied across the board and continues to this day.

  18. “A lot of current black studies and other cutting-edge progressive academic folly of this day maintains because of that initial misdirection, IMO.”

    Agreed. I’m saying I think it was misguided to consider that absence of the western tradition a lack that was shameful or in whatever way something to be defensive about, which from there led to all the defensive posture and politics along race lines that continue to this day. I believe black and hispanic qualities are desired for what their vital if relatively unrefined elements are to this day, with evidence abounding to this day. It’a a huge, generational ideological dodge that is, ultimately, unnecessary…… That is a fairly radical contention; it can be ridiculed galore but i really don’t think it can be refuted evidenced by our day-to-day ‘here and now.’

    Ones human essence isn’t really a badge that can be used for essential bragging rights, though the alt-right and many interest groups persist in trying to do as much. The social frisson it produces serves as proof to as much.

  19. “Are you suggesting that those black Americans (studying then) would have been diligent and contributing scholars in the traditional and Eurocentric liberal arts?”

    Yeah, I’m saying the above should’ve been considered a lack and something to aspire to without regret. Why? because no one’s possession or not of that predisposition and/or genetic bestowment was of their personal divine achievement anyhow, but rather a random bestwoment……. And if you accept that, then that perhaps explains much of the ideological discord to this day.

    So, I think I agree with your premise if not your assessment.

  20. Ok, the Kenyan is starting his final descent into madness now that he doesn’t have to pull punches or run a campaign again:

    “I always tell people who are anti-government who are here in the United States, try going to a country where the government doesn’t work,” Obama said.

    LOL – because the only thing you have to do to have a nice country is start lots of enthusiastically- and well-funded government programs !! The more the better. !!

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/obama-conservatives-should-visit-country-where-government-doesnt-work/article/2003653

  21. because no one’s possession or not of that predisposition and/or genetic bestowment was of their personal divine achievement anyhow, but rather a random bestwoment……. And if you accept that, then that perhaps explains much of the ideological discord to this day.

    Everyone knows that already thanks to the aggressively promoted narrative of white privilege, systemic racism, ect.

    And it’s not really a “random bestowment” because my father choose to marry a white woman and inculcate me with white western derived values that my ancestors chose to pass on to him. I, in turn, choose to promote and defend those values.

    Besides, every other racial/ethnic group promotes their unique contributions. Only whites are expected to demure.

  22. PA…

    Not only is this not pendantry, it is, in fact, an explanation of a pathological prejudice suffered by a mass of “white” males towards “woman.”

    “We” are at the bottom of the deconstructionist barrel.

    An adult human female is a woman, period. — PA

    And because this is evidence of a most noxious and subversive “application” of “universal equality…”

    YOU MUST CONCEDE…

    Dyke = woman…

    Faggot = man….

    As long as we are talking female and male adult humans, of course.

    Yet, in a world of “universal equality,” adult equals child. Literally. No, for real. What argument can you possible muster against this liberated “truth?”

    The PATTERNED USE of “woman” amongst alt-(w)riters when “creatively” narrating what should be ALL MANNER OF (white) FEMALE from dyke and de facto dyke, to female abortionist and liberationist, to teenage girls and adult females, etc. IS A PURPOSEFUL COLLAPSING of our reality SUCH THAT such PATTERNED AND LEARNED USE of this diabolically liberated language IS AN ACTUAL ACT of subtle psychological war ESPECIALLY on those just starting to learn the language.

  23. If you are born of radically autonomous origins then an enveloping randomness will make sense. And so Nikcrit, like so many others born in this rapidly “progressing” era, cannot come to grips with the “certainty” of his beginning.

  24. What is the emergent use of “man-child” other than the reinforcing subliminal conditioning to the “truth” of the adult equaling a child? And this is a real truth of our degenerate times. The adults are like children NOW. And NOW “we” embrace this “truth” wholeheartedly AS THOUGH it were a FORMER desire made reality.

  25. As MGE says, one’s bestowment is not random; not from the point of view of one’s mother and father.

    From their point of view it is anything but random — to keep it from being random is the reason they mingled their juices with each other, and not with someone else

    ******************

    “I always tell people who are anti-government who are here in the United States, try going to a country where the government doesn’t work,” Obama said.

    This is an elementary error in logic by President Mulatto.

    The “anti-government” people in this country, those among them who are adults and not lost in libertarian lala land, are not opposed to necessary government in human affairs — they are opposed to THIS government.

    Obama may or may not realize the error in his logic, which i would call an error of category. He is mistaking people’s opposition to a particular, and calling it an opposition to a principle, and then using that mischaracterization to make his opponents sound like simpletons.

    Anybody who opposes government is obviously a fool — and therefore me and my government are inevitable and justified!

    Which is similar to an argument that i have seen on the local, used to justify “progress” with “change”. They say that “You can’t stop change” and so therefore this proposal (for a new road, or for a new population) is going through — because it is “change” and you can’t stop that!

    But those opposed to the new road, or the new population, are not suggesting that change be stopped — they are suggesting that this PARTICULAR change is not the change that they want.

    And it is ironic that their resistance is characterized as retrograde — because “the change” is more often than not, simply more of the same. MORE roads, and MORE population replacement.

    We are not lost in lala land and saying that we will stop change. Rather we want to change how things are going.

  26. On another subject, there is a good podcast at 2Kevins with a Bumbling American. They do a fun job of skewering Obama and his “wife”.

    They point out how the fact that we don’t even make the obvious jokes about them, and how that shows what a bunch of wasted lost pansy ass faggots Americans are. (They don’t call them those things, … )

    Bumbling American thought that back in 2008 America would come to its senses and reject someone like Obama, who clearly has no ties to the real people of this country, We the Bitter Clingers. But instead we elected him and his “wife”. That was some sort of Rubicon, on our way to hell.

    Another point that was raised is in response to the Establishment Faggots who criticize the alt-righters for being anonymous on-line. He turned that criticism around and suggested that it is Establishment voices who cannot stand on the merit of their ideas (and words) alone, and have to rely on their brand to have any weight at all, in the discussion, and that alt-righters can prosper on-line with their stupid goofy handles, says it all.

  27. Obama may or may not realize the error in his logic, which i would call an error of category. He is mistaking people’s opposition to a particular, and calling it an opposition to a principle, and then using that mischaracterization to make his opponents sound like simpletons.

    Well said.

    And he’s just a typical liberal in that the idea of limited government is simply beyond his comprehension.

  28. In honor of the Olympics, I’d like to give warm applause to the Dutch Womens’ Field Hockey Team:

  29. It is not prejudice to reject radical sexual autonomy. It is regenerate to reject such “thing.” But it is a pathological prejudice to degrade traditional ideals in the service of radical female liberationists.

    “Universal equality” MANDATES:

    Woman = anti-woman = homodyke = any adult female = female toddler…

    AS falsification of The Perfect Order.

    So if you are unable or too ignorant to write into our liberated language the above truth with a very articulated counter-language THEN you might as well just be complicit in the zeitgeist.

  30. If you call Lena Dunham a “woman” because she is any adult human female then you degrade “woman” and elevate a de facto dyke.

    If you call Kim Kardashian a “woman” because she is any adult human female, period then you degrade real women and pedestalize a radical female liberationist.

    And if you call Hillary Clinton and Angela Merkel baaaad “women” because they are any adult female, exclamation point then you savage real ladies and exalt two diabolical dykes.

  31. Vox Day says “we” only need twelve.

    I envision…

    PA
    Ryu
    Charlton
    Day
    Kristor
    Firepower
    Citadel
    LBF
    thordaddy
    Roebuck
    Stevens
    Auster, posthumously…

  32. thor: “Academic moderate? What does that even mean? “

    Lol!! Yeah, I gotta admit, that was pretty lame; i sorta asked myself after the fact, ‘boy wtf were you thinking.”

    I think the term does, however, roughly describe ‘neo-cons,’ whose take-downs by you have been amusing.

    (Liberals with subscriptions to jane.com is a good start in defining ‘neo-cons.)

  33. Nikcrit…

    When I state that the truthiest thing the neocons stated was, “They hate {{{us}}} for {{{our}}} freedoms,” I am NOT necessarily dissing the neocons, but rather, exposing the charlatans who make mockery of this simple truth. The global cabal of anti-(white) Supremacists HATE other individual’s “freedoms,” BY DEFINITION. And it DOES NOT MATTER whether that “other” is an anti-(white) Supremacist himself such as the “jewhite” neocon who can no more “pimp” wS than he can sell a perfect foreign policy.

    All the neocon is left to do is state TRUTHFULLY, “They hate {{{us}}} for {{{our}}} freedoms.”

  34. So there is an element of “foreign policy” that just is foreign. There is an aspect of “foreign policy” that grants the unknowable and alien such that simple truths MUST BE axiomatically accepted beforehand. “We” also hate the jihadist’s “freedom” which “we” willfully label “oppressive” for the purpose of doing nothing about their much hated “freedoms.”

    “We” are DEAD wrong to hate Islam for its “oppression” because such is not really what “we” are hating. “We” hate their “freedom” to execute a self-annihilating mass murder only to be rewarded with seventy-two virgins for eternal smashings. AND WE HATE a Western “default elite” imposing on “us” a mass-mediated linguistic perversion which leaves “us” either speechless or spittling in the face of such radically homicidal autonomy.

  35. Doesn’t women’s boxing violate the Violence Against Women Act? Are these women going to be arrested when they return of the U.S.? I thought it was “never OK” to hit a woman.

  36. Good question, Days of Broken Arrows….. but i gotta ask: are you the ol’ avatar “Mason Arrow,’ from the days of OneSTDV lore? If so, welcome!

  37. Pingback: The Liberal Personality – PA

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s