Thursday, May 30, 2024

Example of Leftists Are Just Liars

 If leftist protestations were sincere instead of tactical, it would be trivial to jiu-jitsu their ideology against them. Since their """ideology""" is pure sogol, they detect it immediately when you use it against them. They know the results they want; the reasons for these results are whatever makes you do what they want. If you stop doing what they want, they immediately find other reasons. Not even a little bit principled, unless you count [kto kogo], [I get mine]. 

 Example: I propose banning all whites from youtube and facebook, and tiktok and instagram and, especially, tinder. For being white. To protect all nonwhites from inherent white racism. 

 What possible principled argument could a leftist make against this?
 Likewise, can't you already hear the indignant outrage of the right?

 To help forestall whites trying to come back with fake colourwashed accounts, make a white-only white-ghetto tinder/facebook clone. Make it inherently nonpublic, due to the shame of being so white.

 Leftists are ontologically committed to segregation. If whites a) exist as a category and b) are all the things leftists say they are, then it should be trivial to show them that "whites" need to be separated from nonwhites. It's not racist to avoid dating a foreigner - obviously it's racist to inflict your white hatred onto a poor person of alleged colour. Go back to England etc.

 Perhaps even make the white-only tinder account mandatory. Automatically created with your SIN or whatever. Log the IP so the white can't (easily) sneak onto the ethnically cleansed services. Whites forced to shack up and stay with only other hateful whites. Can't do anything about Twitter unfortunately, but that will just show that allowing whites to contact nonwhites merely leads to a racism.

 Of course this is wildly opposed to actual leftist goals. They want to miscegenate everyone (except themselves) into mudbloods. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be subtracted from our own. Giving an excuse for noncoloureds to identify as such? Can't do that. Giving an excuse for noncoloureds to avoid degeneration? Obviously a non-starter.

 You can make the segregation argument, and it will be very embarrassing for them, but ultimately they will invent whatever epicycles they need. Being explicit: this is highly falsifiable. You can go test it right now if you want. However, we both know the only interesting part of the result would be counting the knots in the pretzels they tie themselves in. Interesting only topologically. (Science is very easy if you're not a liar. The experiments are almost all redundant and superfluous.) 


 Nobody can even vaguely compete with the spiteful racism of the anti-racist: they know trying to make a ""white"" ghetto would instead ghettoize youtube, facebook, etc. Leftists are just lying. They're not sincere. They're not well-intentioned. They just say whatever happens to be politically convenient for them. 

 Agree and amplify only works on someone who is genuinely mistaken. Leftists just look at you like you're autistic; "Of course we're just lying, are you stupid?" The idea that someone would think they're sincere is almost incomprehensible to them; they have trouble responding coherently.
 Note this also disproves the piety cycle and prospiracy models. Segregation is clearly more holy at this point. Imagine this: you make a billboard arguing for segregation on the above grounds ("Free speech only for persons of alleged colour!") then endorse Biden. Nothing worse than a stupid ally; be a stupid ally on purpose. What are they going to do, accuse you of racism? On the contrary, if they try to take down your billboard, you can accuse them of racism. They don't hate noncoloureds as much as you do; naughty naughty.
 If it were a prospiracy you could easily bamboozle vast numbers of leftist stormtroopers into supporting this ridiculous political suicide pact. Or any number of other ridiculous suicide pacts; it would frequently happen by accident, never mind on purpose.

 If, instead, it's a theocracy with a Pope, the Pope is going to immediately see what you did there, and shut it down. Likely through pure unprincipled exception. "Block those billboards." "Why?" "It's not your place to know why." "Yessir...."


 Leftists might be vaguely tolerable if they ever thought beyond the next election. They're totally uninterested in long-term effects. They say whatever makes them win now, (children: "But I want it now!") and damn the consequences of victory.

 Leftism is just evil. It's just a crime. Mens rea.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Alrenous, I want to know this: What would you do if a someone was getting robbed next to you? Would you stop it?

Alrenous said...

What do I stand to gain by answering your question?

Alrenous said...

So I stand to gain nothing?
In all likelihood I don't even stand to gain having the answer heard?

As a stranger, it is important to first build trust. The above style of diction signals dishonourability; not only should I not trust them, nobody should trust them.

I guess I should first demand they prove they're asking in good faith. No proof was given. One must assume they're asking in bad faith. Didn't replicate.

Anonymous said...

I saw a video of an African immigrant in a train station in Paris robbing someone, surrounded by a crowd looking away from him, and a girl nervously starting at her phone and slowly walking away like nothing is happening. Then I wondered what you would do.

I will share my identity with you (one sided) and try to build trust if you give me a way of reaching you privately. Discord, signal, protonmail, whatever.

You probably stand to gain nothing but I'll do my best.

Alrenous said...

He wants to get robbed. It would be wrong of me to interfere.

Could have learned martial arts. Could have learned from borderers and moved around in a gang. Could have declared Macron illegitimate and joined the rebellion. Could have avoided train stations suffering from infestations, or perhaps used situational awareness.

Didn't.

Further, the crowd isn't just looking away. The crowd is actively defending the immigrant. What happens if the "victim" pulls out a gun and shoots the criminal? Do they cheer? Do they lie to the police? No, they persecute self-defence.

Demand for crime. Peace and order are "bad," outgroup.

Anonymous said...

Alright

Anonymous said...

ah, found it https://x.com/ClownWorld_/status/1801081079694279001

Alrenous said...

Down's are left alive so that they can suffer. Yes? Working as intended?

They're also left alive so that they can be a burden, and clown world is upset that society, cashing out to specific individuals, isn't burdening itself as much as they would prefer.

"A young elk being predated on by a lion in plain sight on a savannah in africa, while bystanders do nothing." Why isn't society bending itself in knots to provide fake meat to lions so no elk has to suffer, lol?

Alrenous said...

"It's all men are created equal, not all elks." Genesis 1:27 doesn't say anything about other primates, let alone ungulates.

Downs aren't men. Neither is the robber or any of the bystanders. NPCs don't have selves. You can tell they aren't men because they're not using their godly powers to defend themselves. They can't demonstrate they're related to any divine image.

Not to mention the many false premises upstream of caring about this at all.