Recommended Posts

This seems like the best place to file this topic.  I have just come back from work, where across the street most of the blood has been hosed off the sidewalk and the lovely, futile flowers, mostly donated to crying mourners by local florists, pile up and up.  About half my students were absent today, but as far as I can determine they are all OK.  All classes were cancelled yesterday, the whole area shut down.

Does anyone else remember the awfulness of SOLO before it imploded, and specifically "Doug, " the pick-up artist" who eventually revealed himself to be the prototypical Incell, right down to his utter conviction that if he had only come of age in the 1950s he would now be happily married to a very pretty wife (very pretty emphasized, more than once.)

Those long-ago posts haunt me at this time.  "Doug" proved to be a fictional creation, dashing ski photo and all, but his deepest passions were all too real in their bleak terrifying ugliness. I am sure he is honouring Alek Minassian now as Minassian honoured Rodgers.

As Jon Letendre relishes the thought of the torture and death of anyone connected with whatever happens to outrage him personally.

As Keith Rainiere relished the pain of his sex slaves

Me, I honour Ken Lam, who honoured reason, and I relish the lucky life I live, that such men defend me.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carol,

I feel your pain.

I want to say something more about that, but there is nothing to say. I feel your pain says it all.

1 hour ago, caroljane said:

Those long-ago posts haunt me at this time.

You are an interesting person...

1 hour ago, caroljane said:

... his deepest passions were all too real in their bleak terrifying ugliness. I am sure he is honouring Alek Minassian now as Minassian honoured Rodgers.

As Jon Letendre relishes the thought of the torture and death of anyone connected with whatever happens to outrage him personally.

I say this with the kindest of intentions. You are making the same mistake, engaging in the same fundamental behavior you are accusing others of.

For my part, I don't think any of you are bad people.

I think the guy who mowed down the people in Toronto in a van is a bad person, even if he has mental issues.

I think pedophiles who practice their craft on children are bad people, even if they have innate compulsions.

1 hour ago, caroljane said:

... prototypical Incell...

Incel. One "L."

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

I feel your pain.

I want to say something more about that, but there is nothing to say. I feel your pain says it all.

You are an interesting person...

I say this with the kindest of intentions. You are making the same mistake, engaging in the same fundamental behavior you are accusing others of.

For my part, I don't think any of you are bad people.

I think the guy who mowed down the people in Toronto in a van is a bad person, even if he has mental issues.

I think pedophiles who practice their craft on children are bad people, even if they have innate compulsions.

Incel. One "L."

:)

Michael

Michael, we seem to have got our wires crossed here.

What is the fundamental error  I commit which I accuse others of?  I accuse Doug, and Jon, and Lindsay Perigo (while I am at it) with his "righteous anger", against Barbara Branden and Jim Peron among others, and lately against my city with no evidence, of sadistic schadenfreude against "whoever outrages them personally"- subjectively, in fact.

How long have you known me? When did you conclude that I would relish the torture and death of anyone, be they even pedophiles or only harmless ranters on the web.? I give them the doubtful benefit of the doubt, that they are harmless.

Everyone thought Minassian as an individual was harmless, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, caroljane said:

What is the fundamental error  I commit which I accuse others of?

Carol,

Did you notice that you asked me this question, then gave me a bunch of things that were not the fundamental error as if your list were all the correct answer could be, then attributed me with a conclusion I don't hold?

That's a hell of a way to ask a question.

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I did not notice that. As I said, we seem to have our wires crossed here.  What is the fundamental error that I made?

I don't think you have concluded that I am as angry and spiteful as the two I mentioned , of course (I hope you don't anyway). I just did not like being equated with them in your mind. I value your mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I “relish the thought of the torture and death of anyone connected with whatever happens to outrage me personally”?

No, I don’t. And you know that.

You are a liar.

You make jokes about human trafficking and child rape, (for some reason.)

I cheer justice for vicious abusers of my fellow human beings. You makes jokes about same.

You gas-light, lie, project, turn everything upside down, then play the victim.

From what I can see, you are vicious piece of shit. Go fuck yourself.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish you would stop saying that I know things which I don;t know, and will never credit without evidence.

I certainly do not presume to read your mind and tell you what you know. From what you write here, I assume that what you know is not much.

What you write here is all that I do know about you, and the evidence of my senses from the content of your posts is  all I can react to. .From what I can see, you are a furious, ignorant, deeply troubled human being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, caroljane said:

I wish you would stop saying that I know things which I don;t know, and will never credit without evidence.

I certainly do not presume to read your mind and tell you what you know. From what you write here, I assume that what you know is not much.

What you write here is all that I do know about you, and the evidence of my senses from the content of your posts is  all I can react to. .From what I can see, you are a furious, ignorant, deeply troubled human being.

You can’t stop gas-lighting or even see it anymore, because you adopted it so long ago, back in childhood. And, from your mentally ill perspective, it works.

A narcissistic parent systemically kept you down and refused any affirmation. You adopted the narcissistic traits to arm yourself, just to survive that ordeal. It’s actually quite sad.

I know your personality well,  I’ve known many like you. None of you ever change, you can’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, caroljane said:

This seems like the best place to file this topic.  I have just come back from work, where across the street most of the blood has been hosed off the sidewalk and the lovely, futile flowers, mostly donated to crying mourners by local florists, pile up and up.  About half my students were absent today, but as far as I can determine they are all OK.  All classes were cancelled yesterday, the whole area shut down.

Does anyone else remember the awfulness of SOLO before it imploded, and specifically "Doug, " the pick-up artist" who eventually revealed himself to be the prototypical Incell, right down to his utter conviction that if he had only come of age in the 1950s he would now be happily married to a very pretty wife (very pretty emphasized, more than once.)

Those long-ago posts haunt me at this time.  "Doug" proved to be a fictional creation, dashing ski photo and all, but his deepest passions were all too real in their bleak terrifying ugliness. I am sure he is honouring Alek Minassian now as Minassian honoured Rodgers.

As Jon Letendre relishes the thought of the torture and death of anyone connected with whatever happens to outrage him personally.

As Keith Rainiere relished the pain of his sex slaves

Me, I honour Ken Lam, who honoured reason, and I relish the lucky life I live, that such men defend me.

You are a hardened gas-lighter, too.

My outrage at child rape, becomes “whatever happens to outrage” me personally.

It’s sickeningly telling, too. In your diseased head, child rape is merely something that happens to outrage Jon personally. To you, it may as well be mismatched socks that I get upset about. Quite telling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, caroljane said:

No, I did not notice that. As I said, we seem to have our wires crossed here.  What is the fundamental error that I made?

I don't think you have concluded that I am as angry and spiteful as the two I mentioned , of course (I hope you don't anyway). I just did not like being equated with them in your mind. I value your mind.

Error, what error, explain the error, I don’t think I’ve made an error, you’ll have to explain I to me because I became stupid just now and I can’t figure it out, explain it to me...so that I can pick at your words and continue gas-lighting you, no, I mean, I value you, I really do, and I hope you don’t think less of me, because I think a lot of you, so please explain it to me so that I can pat you on the back and tell you it’s ok you got confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

From what I can see, you are vicious piece of shit. Go fuck yourself.

Jon,

I know where you are coming from and I come from the same place (and I am even aware of how insulted you feel from recent comments and how valid that is), but this comes off as bullying.

To the reader, it does not shine the light on pedophilia among the power-mongers, but instead on you.

I, like you, am extremely frustrated at the levity people treat pedophilia with when their own powerful icons are touched by it. When it was pedophiles galore in the Catholic Church, they were all over it. Now that it's pedophiles galore among the left and ruling class in general (and in their Hollywood propaganda arm), it's no biggie. In fact, they push back with: Where's your proof? You low information people who believe this pedophile nonsense believe in tin foil hat conspiracy theories, ha ha ha, yada yada yada...

It's frustrating, but another approach is needed to cut through the noise. Name-calling with foul language is merely more noise...

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, caroljane said:

What is the fundamental error that I made?

Carol,

I can give you an example in your own words. You said this:

13 hours ago, caroljane said:

I certainly do not presume to read your mind and tell you what you know.

And right before you said this:

18 hours ago, caroljane said:

As Jon Letendre relishes the thought of the torture and death of anyone connected with whatever happens to outrage him personally.

And to me, you even said this:

16 hours ago, caroljane said:

When did you conclude that I would relish the torture and death of anyone, be they even pedophiles or only harmless ranters on the web.?

See if you can find something fundamentally wrong here.

:) 

As I said, my intentions are kind, not hostile, in pointing this out.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jordan Sather explores Qanon's references to 'Incel' Minassian ...

On 4/25/2018 at 5:18 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

You are making the same mistake, engaging in the same fundamental behavior you are accusing others of.

 

Edited by william.scherk
Add header for front-page display

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some thoughts by Scott Adams relevant to the subtexts flying around.

The modern narrative of the left is to reply to ideas with hatred of the person. When such a person disagrees with a leftie these days, it's because he is a racist (or bigot or homophobe or misogynist or whatever), or an old white guy wallowing in his privilege, or a fascist, and so on. And they try to prohibit certain ideas and words from even being uttered aloud.

In other words, it's not about the best idea, it's shutting down ideas the left doesn't like through intimidation--not just this overt hatred, but the snark, the presuppositions, the making everything personal, and so on.

Scott's video is long, but he is really on a roll with this one.

btw - Here's a secret trick I use. I bought a small piece of software a couple of years ago and it was one of the best things I ever bought for watching videos online. I should include an affiliate link, but I'm not going to, especially since the price is low. :) 

The program is called Enounce MySpeed and it costs about 30 bucks. This is the version I use. There's a premium version for about a hundred, but I don't own it nor do I recommend it.

This little program allows you to speed up and slow down videos you watch online. YouTube, Vimeo, BitChute, etc. It works with them all. So when there's a lot of useless talk in a video, long stretches without anything happening, etc., you can speed the video up a lot and just blast through it. And if you need to take a transcription of a part, you can slow the video waaaaaaaay down to make it easier.

Enounce MySpeed

Unfortunately, you need something like this if you watch a lot of Scott's videos. He digresses a lot and tends to be slooooooowww... As I have become very used to his speech at an accelerated speed, I listen to the whole thing 3x faster. In other words, I can listen to an hour long video by him in twenty minutes. If I get to a patch where it gets confusing, I slow down a little bit, then speed back up.

Here's a really useful tip I learned about using this thing on other videos where it is uncomfortable to go at, say, 2x faster. You listen to about 30" or so at 3x, then rewind and listen at 2x. It almost sounds normal and becomes quite intelligible. This is because you have acclimated to the faster speed.

The premium version allows you to do this with videos on your computer (as opposed to online). Since most video players like VLC come with this feature, I don't see the advantage of spending the extra money for a redundancy.

Last but not least, this works for audio, too.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, you must forgive me, but I almost never click on videos, basically because I can read much faster than I can listen or watch. So I rely on the poster to give a precis, otherwise I don't comment.  I have read a few of Adams' comment and of course love Dilbert so I am predisposed in his favour.  But absent a transcript I am only commenting on your introduction, not on this video

Firstly,I do not understand why what is not ideological sauce for the leftist goose, is not sauce for the rightist gander.  In a hate contest I think the alt-right are at least a match for  us sick fucks of the left, as I am now characterized on the new OL as it becomes great again.  In my hopelessly biased opinion, Andrew Breitbart died of hatred ; he admitted it was his fuel, and a steady diet of diesel oil may be exhilirating sniffed but is fatal ingested.

He hated  some ideas, the ideas of progressivism, leftism, socialism, and he hated individuals because they held and advanced these ideas, and he made no distinction between the person and the idea, and neither does , say, Jon Letendre in his hatred -- just one example -- you are hardly going to argue that his perpetual state of outrage and gleeful fantasies of the imminent suicide, incarceration or utter degradation. of specific individuals is a deep-cover mission to mess with the hapless brains of his perceived ideological enemies.

Breitbart though might well have abandoned Trump as Bannon, who seems to be a true anarchist with a death-wish, did.  Jon Brady*  is an idolater, and willing to attribute any vile ideas or acts to those who are anti-team Trump.

You will probably not believe this, but I don't think Trump is the ruination of America and like everything his presidency will have longterm unintended consequences, some of which will inevitably be good ones.  It dismays me that so many people think he is as wonderful as he thinks himself, but my own American relatives, even the ones who voted for him, voted for him for reasons I respect, which were totally  unconnected with his  alternately cringingl and gloating character, his mean spirit and uninhabited mind.

*Have you heard from Mary Lee Harsha since the election? I liked her.  I can  just hear Jon saying, "Harsha, Harsha, Harsha!!"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, caroljane said:

So I rely on the poster to give a precis, otherwise I don't comment.

Carol,

I have a task for you.

Watch an hour-long video of a lecture on something you agree with, then give a precis to someone resistant to that message.

How long do you think that would take you?

:)

If you are truly interested in Scott Adams's ideas, and since you prefer the written word, here are his latest two books.

Win Bigly: Persuasion in a World Where Facts Don't Matter (2017 - This deals with President Trump's persuasion skills as a major theme among other things.)

How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big: Kind of the Story of My Life (2014 - This is probably his first foundational work on persuasion. In this book, he deals with self-persuasion whereas with Win Bigly, he deals with persuasion of others.)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, caroljane said:

In my hopelessly biased opinion, Andrew Breitbart died of hatred...

Carol,

I honestly don't know how to respond to so much hatred of Breitbart.

You can't even identify him correctly, although it's clear you do hate him, so how on earth to talk about your evaluation of him?

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Young Jordan Sather with a message for OLers ... Plus: Generalizations and Rubrics ate my Homework.

On 4/27/2018 at 7:00 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The modern narrative of the left is to reply to ideas with hatred of the person.

Spoiler

lxKw3XA.png

 

Edited by william.scherk
Sweeping generalizatons, rubrics, tags and groups ... ate my homework" means never having to illustrate your argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, caroljane said:

You will probably not believe this, but I don't think Trump is the ruination of America and like everything his presidency will have longterm unintended consequences, some of which will inevitably be good ones.  It dismays me that so many people think he is as wonderful as he thinks himself, but my own American relatives, even the ones who voted for him, voted for him for reasons I respect, which were totally  unconnected with his  alternately cringingl and gloating character, his mean spirit and uninhabited mind.

Carol,

This is an indication that something is seeping through.

You are starting to look at the reality of results, but when you look directly at President Trump. all you can still see is an "alternately cringing and gloating character" and a "mean spirit and uninhabited mind."

Here is what you are missing. Here is a tweet from a man I believe falls within your approval, Ben Rhodes:

This was written on September 22, 2017. I honestly believe you could have written something quite similar--and, what's more, fully believed it. In fact, I believe you believe something similar to this day.

But here is the reality.

04.28.2018-12.34.png

The Korean war has never been officially declared over for 68 years. Now it is being so declared and the two Koreas are in a summit where the outcome will probably be the denuclearization of North Korea. What's more, take a look at this quote (from here). 

Quote

"Clearly, credit goes to President Trump," Kang told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in Seoul. "He's been determined to come to grips with this from day one."

Kang Kyung-wha is the South Korean Foreign Minister. I can just see Amanpour dying a new death inside as she heard this, wanting to grab the microphone and make like a sword swallower with it. :) 

So how does a "mean spirit and uninhabited mind" pull off peace on that level? Among a long, long list of other real-world accomplishments at that? How does an "alternately cringing and gloating character" give credit for the current Korean situation to someone else (someone who matters, that is) without hogging the credit himself? See here:

As President Trump grumbled the other day, all US Presidents going back to Eisenhower have not managed to get this worked out, but he's getting it done. Despite that, everybody is now telling him how he should do it.

It's worth asking, on what basis? Their own failure against his success?

I know you have no answer for any of this. And what's worse, all the media talking points against it sound way too lame for an honest and intelligent person to defend.

But I know the reasons why all this is happening.

Shall I give them? It's a temptation, but no. I can't write and write and write the same things over and over when I know you won't even see them. But I'll mention one and see where it goes.

Let's try civility since that is a biggie for you.

Civility is not a Kantian categorical imperative from the neumonal world that we can only deduce reality from. But the left mentality sees it that way. It structures its core stories that way and builds an entire belief system from it. Civility for them is a hard and fast rule that must be obeyed always under all contexts. Period. Whoever does not follow it is evil. No further thought required.

But what is civility really? It's a form of behavior between humans and nothing more. Now add this to how to handle bullies. Do you be civil to them under all contexts? You better not in certain contexts or they will see your civility as weakness. Then they will hurt you. Bad. And enjoy it.

Actually, as President Trump just showed, the best thing is to stand up to bullies in public, taunt them and, if necessary, pop them in the nose real hard. That makes them stop. And that's where his taunting of Kim Jong Un came from. It worked, too.

In other words, the left (and ruling class elitists in general) don't know what to do with bullies in reality other than form a mob, snipe at them and backstab when they can get away with it. Now note the following because this is the most important point in my epistemological description of this mentality. The same people who mouth off to a perceived bully from within a mob ignore the mob bullies on their side and the constant incivility from such bullies. They just don't see their own bullies, much less condemn them. And no amount of facts make them see.

That's not the way of President Trump and his supporters. Hardly anyone among his supporters is surprised about the positive Korean situation. Most have dealt successfully with bullies--personally dealt with them one-on-one--over their lives. So they know what dealing with a bully requires. And they know it's not a rule in someone's head. The bully has a specific nature irrespective of any rule. 

Dealing with nature and the natures of everything in it is Trump's epistemology. That's his foundation. Not some rule.

So there it is.

Even after explaining this, I'm still pretty sure you are only going to see a stupid and uncouth man when you look at President Trump. All while trying to not see the massive amount of his positive achievements. (The good news for me is that some is seeping through.)

There are plenty of reasons for all this and there is plenty of other stuff I could write, but like I implied at the beginning, how do you present a large issue that is causing cognitive dissonance in the head of the person you are talking to, and even so, that person is resistant to looking at the issue except through a biased lens that filters out all the stuff that matters, allows in only the stuff that doesn't matter--and amplifies it at that?

But before I write more on this to you, I want to see if you understand what I did write or if, after a momentary lapse of understanding, things go back into the self-correcting cybernetic machine of the cultural zeitgeist you have adopted.

btw - I don't seek to convince you. I only seek to get you to see what your words show you not to see. Then you can make your own judgments.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Incels ... are a symptom ... that something is very wrong in society"

19 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I only seek to get you to see what your words show you not to see.

 

Db4FyN0VQAECA1N.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Young Jordan Sather with a message for OLers ...

William,

I see what he's saying: people who are not liberals are bad people who hate, unlike the good liberals.

:) 

This dude probably doesn't even realize that's what he's saying. I am pretty sure you don't see it, either.

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What is the 'Incel Rebellion'?"

19 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I am pretty sure you don't see it, either.

incelNews.png

incelEconomistTweet.png

Edited by william.scherk
Steering some images to illustrate the opening topic ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William,

(sigh)

Incels are not the scourge of the earth.

One idiot does not make an army.

Hey! I have an idea! Why don't we make a new law restricting individuals, corporations and the communication industry in general to prohibit Incels from oppressing the undertrodden?

Let's save the world!

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The left is intellectually bankrupt. Most of its big ideas were tried in the twentieth century and those ideas put into practice yielded total failures, massive human disasters, bloodbaths,” as Ayn Rand put it.

Today the left is reduced to projection, historical revision, lies, distraction, stoking of race, class, and  identity-based hate.

The left wants a fascist deep state that reverses their lost elections.

The Democrat Party is fascist. Not the explicit platform, but in actual behavior, in spirit and in everything they do, from cheating Bernie to the attempted coup against a duly-elected President. Rotten, authoritarian and plain evil to the core.

The projection and hysteria have reached a fever pitch of late because they know they are near the end. Their games are being exposed, their endless wars are being ended, their captive voters are waking up to the evil, they are being rooted out of every western institution and their beloved leaders are being taken down one after another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...