Category Archives: Society

A Lesson For The Modern World, by Hardscrabble Farmer

Sometimes the high and mighty aren’t as high and mighty as they think they are, and sometimes the betting favorite doesn’t win. From Hardscrabble Farmer at theburningplatform.com:

In the autumn of 1415 the English army under command of Henry V were making their way north towards the English held port of Calais. He had arrived only two months earlier and after a single minor victory the French King ordered his forces to assemble in order to expel Henry and his forces from French soil. Although the actual count of his forces are still in dispute his army numbered less than 9,000 men, over 80% of them serfs, armed only with longbows and a heavy mallets for weapons.

They were not only disadvantaged by their numbers but by a full week of poor weather, dysentery, and steady rain slowed their advance. Just south of the village of Agincourt they found themselves within a mile of the French forces that had blocked their path and forced them to prepare for battle. Most people do not realize that this particular engagement would alter not only the course of the Hundred Years War but the future landscape of armed conflict. The French King had been experiencing a form of mental illness that led him to believe he was made of glass (an occupational hazard of potentates it would seem) and so he was absent from the engagement, hidden in his castle while his army marched on the English invasion force.

To his credit he had arrayed one of the most technologically advanced military forces ever assembled. They outnumbered the English cohorts by as much as 6:1 with nearly 10,000 knights clad in the latest steel armor which the iron tipped arrows of the English could not penetrate. By modern standards this was roughly equivalent to having Taliban go up against the top of the line fighting dogs produced by Boston Robotics. The English forces were clad in their farm wear, only a small number with any kind of armor, on foreign soil with no supply lines, after several days of hard travel in bad weather.

Continue reading→

Advertisements

Technology: distracting, Disturbing, Deceiving and Deluding Ourselves to Death, by Jim Quinn

One way to tyrannize people is to distract them from what you’re doing. From Jim Quinn at theburningplatform.com:

“What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate. In the Huxleyan prophecy, Big Brother does not watch us, by his choice. We watch him, by ours. There is no need for wardens or gates or Ministries of Truth.

When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; a culture-death is a clear possibility.”Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business

Image result for huxley amusing ourselves to death

Something as mundane as using the restroom at work sometimes ends up triggering deeper thoughts about technology – its benefits, deficiencies and danger to our culture. I’ve been using the same restroom at work for the last twelve years. They remodeled the restroom a few years ago with the latest technology – automatic flushers, automatic soap dispensers, automatic spigots, and automatic towel dispenser. This technology is supposed to make things better, but from my perspective the technology just added complexity, glitches and unnecessary complications.

First off, these technological “improvements” did not eliminate any humans from the equation. The housekeepers responsible for the restrooms continued to be employed. Prior to the remodel they would fill a metal bin with individual paper towels and fill the soap dispenser with liquid soap. Now they have to insert a roll of paper towels in the electronic dispenser and a cartridge of soap in the electronic soap dispenser.

Continue reading→

Feminism Is A Disease – And Masculinity Is The Cure, by Brandon Smith

The title says it all. From Brandon Smith at alt-market.com:

It seems these days like everyone and their genderfluid grandma has some “profound” insight into the minds and world of men. Men and masculinity are spoken of in the media with sharp tones of fear mixed with disdain, as if we are a dangerous aberrant genetic anomaly that needs to be studied under a special microscope that will protect the observer from being influenced by our vitriolic pheromones. The problem is, most of these “experts” on manhood are not men at all, or, their observations of male behavior are tainted with deep-seated resentments.  That is to say, they are hardly objective.

I recently came across an article by The Atlantic titled ‘Psychology Has A Healthier Approach To Building Healthier Men’. Written around the same time as the embarrassing failure of Gillette’s “Toxic Masculinity” ad campaign, I assume The Atlantic like many other mainstream media outlets was privy to this coming propaganda push and is attempting to rally the leftist troops to defend an ideological partner in crime. YouTube itself has even been aiding Gillette by removing dislikes from the video’s vote count, which just goes to show that YouTube (owned by Google) is not a business but a propaganda machine, pure and simple.

As I’ve noted in past articles on the psychology not only of globalists, but the useful idiots on the political left they like to exploit, these kinds of people often exhibit many of the traits of narcissistic sociopaths. It has been my observation that narcissistic sociopaths tend to come to the aid of other narcissistic sociopaths when they are facing discovery or prosecution.  They are not as isolated from each other as many assume.  They do in fact “organize”, and act to help each other as long as there is mutual benefit.  If one vampire is hunted down by the villagers with their pitchforks, they know that ALL vampires might eventually be hunted down.

There is nothing particularly special about The Atlantic’s analysis of men; it merely regurgitates all the typical feminist misconceptions and fallacies, but more subtly and in a way that might appear “rational” to the unschooled.

I do ask readers to study the article, because it is a perfect all around example of the kind of advanced propaganda men are facing: The dangerous mixture of pseudoscience and cultism.  It presents itself as scientific while lacking any scientific foundation.  It presents itself as fair while being ideologically biased in the extreme.  It acts as if it wants to “help” men while treating men as if we are suffering from a mental illness called “traditional masculinity”.

Continue reading

Doug Casey on Toxic Masculinity and White Privilege

When men are ashamed to be men, social collapse can’t be too far behind. From Doug Casey at caseyresearch.com:

Justin’s note: Gillette thinks men can do better.

The razor company made this clear in a controversial ad that came out on January 13. If you haven’t seen it yet, I suggest you take a couple minutes to watch it. As you’ll see, it’s a clear response to the #MeToo movement and the ongoing war on “toxic masculinity.”

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that there were a lot of strong opinions regarding it. Some people love it. Others despise it. But I wanted to hear what Doug Casey thought… So I called him up last week.

Below, Doug shares his thoughts on the ad… toxic masculinity… as well as white privilege.

Just a forewarning, this is one of the most controversial Conversations With Casey we’ve ever published. You might want to skip reading this one if you’re easily offended.


Justin: Doug, what did you think of that Gillette ad?

Doug: The first thing that came to mind was that, when I was a kid in the ’50s, Schick razors used to sponsor boxing on television. Boxing, ritualized unarmed combat, is about the height of masculinity. It was, logically, sponsored by a razor company.

Now, we have a razor company that’s saying that almost any kind of masculinity is toxic. It’s a complete turnaround, an inversion. And, just as an FYI, Schick has run ads making the same point. As have Dollar Shave Club and Harry’s – both of which are owned by major corporations. I never previously cared what kind of razor I used – never even noticed the brand. But I’m simply not going to buy their stuff from now on, simply because I refuse to support these despicable people even on the tiniest level. I suppose I’ll give Porter Stansberry’s OneBlade razor a second shot. It’s a great shave, just rather retro.

Anyway, the Gillette ad basically says you should be ashamed to be a man, particularly if you’re a white man. The ad – which happens to have been directed by a woman I’ll describe as borderline psychotic – portrays men as horrible human beings. I haven’t done a count, but the only men even trying to do the right thing and moderate so-called toxic masculinity, are black men. So it’s not just that being a man is bad, but being a white man is particularly bad. No wonder 60,000 American white men commit suicide with opioids every year.

This is just one of many signs of the accelerating collapse of Western civilization and everything it stands for.

Continue reading

The American Psychological Association just made it harder to maintain strong marriages, by Suzanne Venker

What if men and women really are different? From Suzanne Venker at washingtonexaminer.com:

Couple
We’ve known about the war on men for years, but to have the the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the country formally reject the inherent nature of men is both profound and appalling.
(iStock)

I‘m finishing up a manuscript for a new book that helps women find Mr. Right and keep him by embracing sexual inequality, aka the innate differences between women and men. So-called gender equality presumes the sexes are interchangeable, and they are not. Masculinity and femininity represent the yin and yang of any romantic relationship and are crucial for lasting love. When they cease to exist, children suffer and families disintegrate.

So you can imagine my shock and disdain for the American Psychological Association’s new guidelines that claim traditional masculinity is “harmful.” We’ve known about the war on men for years, but to have the the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the country formally reject the inherent nature of men is both profound and appalling.

The APA guidelines understandably triggered a huge backlash. They emphasize such absurd ideas as “gender role strain,” defined as “a psychological situation in which gender role demands have negative consequences on the individual or others,” and “gender role conflict,” defined as “problems resulting from adherence to rigid, sexist, or restrictive gender roles, learned during socialization, that result in personal restriction, devaluation, or violation of others or self.”

Continue reading

Placing the USA on a collapse continuum with Dmitry Orlov, by the Saker

Collapse, like Ernest Hemingway once said about bankruptcy, happens slowly at first, then quickly. From the Saker and Dmitry Orlov at thesaker.is:

The word ‘catastrophe‘ has several meanings, but in its original meaning in Greek the word means a “sudden downturn” (in Greek katastrophē ‘overturning, sudden turn,’ from kata- ‘down’ + strophē ‘turning’).  As for the word “superpower” it also has several possible definitions, but my preferred one is this oneSuperpower is a term used to describe a state with a dominant position, which is characterized by its extensive ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of economic, military, technological and cultural strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers” this one, “an extremely powerful nation, especially one capable of influencing international events and the acts and policies of less powerful nations” or this onean international governing body able to enforce its will upon the most powerful states“.

I have mentioned the very visible decline of the USA and its associated Empire in many of my articles already, so I won’t repeat it here other than to say that the “ability to exert influence and impose its will” is probably the best criteria to measure the magnitude of the fall of the USA since Trump came to power (the process was already started by Dubya and Obama, but it sure accelerated with The Donald).  But I do want to use a metaphor to revisit the concept of catastrophe.

If you place an object in the middle of a table and then push it right to the edge, you will exert some amount of energy we can call “E1”.  Then, if the edge of the table is smooth and you just push the object over the edge, you exercise a much smaller amount of energy we can call “E2”.  And, in most cases (if the table is big enough), you will also find that E1 is much bigger than E2 yet E2, coming after E1 took place, triggered a much more dramatic event: instead of smoothly gliding over the table top, the object suddenly falls down and shatters.  That sudden fall can also be called a “catastrophe”.  This is also something which happens in history, take the example of the Soviet Union.

Continue reading→

 

Milgram Morality in the 21st Century, by Jeff Thomas

Most people will do as they’re told, no matter how distasteful or immoral. From Jeff Thomas at internationalman.com:

In 1961, Nazi executioner Adolf Eichmann was brought to trial for war crimes in Israel. At that time, there was worldwide discussion as to whether such a man could possibly be found not guilty, under the claim that he was “just following orders.”

Was it possible that mankind, generally, is so devoid of conscience that people in positions of control would simply follow orders, if someone in greater authority “took responsibility” for the outcome of the instruction?

This question led Yale Psychologist Stanley Milgram to create a number of psychological experiments on people’s willingness to follow the instruction of authority figures that conflicted with their own conscience.

The experiments were simple. Average people, from a variety of walks in life, were asked to participate. The participant – the “teacher” – was requested to ask multiple choice questions of a “learner”, who had ostensibly been hooked up to an electric generator. If the learner provided the wrong answer, the teacher was to press a button, giving the learner an electric shock. (Although the learner was actually an actor and, in fact, received no shock, the teacher didn’t know that.) With each additional wrong answer, the “shock level” was increased until a “fatal” shock was induced by the teacher.

Continue reading