Incels

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's a very interesting take on the Incel bug buzzing around in our culture.

This guy Styx analyzes Incels (without agreeing with them at all) as an oppressed group. His point is where dialogue and talking through problems could be an answer, the persecution of Incels makes them seek out bubble groups and is driving some of them to violence. Whenever you persecute a minority, you create a social pressure that eventually explodes.

Sound familiar?

 

This is an interesting way to flip the leftwing argument on its head. Suddenly, according to this angle, the left and the third-wave feminists are such nasty oppressors of dorks, they are driving the targets of their oppression and bigotry into the arms of violent social response--and they only have themselves to blame. This is pure class warfare.

As Styx said, currently it's grossly anti-PC to make fun of a woman with 400 pounds of love to offer, but the awkward and ugly dork who everyone shits on and can't get laid to save his life is an everyday trope in comedy films and TV shows.

I still hold there are maggots at the top of power-groping groups who take advantage of this stuff and throw gobs of propaganda at it.

In other words, I'm convinced Styx touches on an element of truth in his views (although I'm not on board with his scope) and the covert social engineering is happening, too. This is not either-or. You can--and do--have both.

Michael

[Jon Letendre]

Michael correcly explains how this has been engineered. 

Are there really still some people who think the news cycle is organic and spontaneous?

The dark forces have long been separating us creating divisions, distrust and resentment between (often) made up groups. They need us divided or all their systems of control come apart.

[caroljane]

It must be wonderful to be sure of what is causing  the things that are most distressing and inexplicable to  many of us. I wish I could believe the dark forces had such superhuman powers of cooperation, efficiency and micro-managing of human affairs, and could categorize everything that happens through the lens of their machinations. But I can't , anymore than I can just believe everything is God's will.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

27 minutes ago, caroljane said:

It must be wonderful to be sure of what is causing  the things that are most distressing and inexplicable to  many of us. I wish I could believe the dark forces had such superhuman powers of cooperation, efficiency and micro-managing of human affairs, and could categorize everything that happens through the lens of their machinations. But I can't , anymore than I can just believe everything is God's will.

Carol,

It must be wonderful to believe in Big Brother government so ardently.

Big Brother knows what is best for all, so long as it is socialist Big Brother, right?

Big Brother will protect the downtrodden and keep the oppressor bullies in line.

[Insert wisecrack about Venezuela and it can't happen here.] 

  

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

Are there really still some people who think the news cycle is organic and spontaneous?

Jon,

Yup.

With one caveat. People believe the new cycle is organic and spontaneous if the news items promote their own belief system. Even the most ham-handed propaganda will be seen by such a true believer as objective if it supports their deeply held beliefs.

This goes for right and left.

But the left is generally more screwball--even more screwball than Christian fundamentalists (who are plenty screwball in their own manner).

I know people who wave the American flag for endless war for profit if someone like Obama does it (with drones at that), then look at the institution of slavery with auction blocks happening once again in the Middle East, erase that information from their minds and awareness even when it comes out in the news, yet believe that white male privilege is enslaving minorities in America.

That's takes a lot of faith. (I don't have the capacity to hold that kind of faith in my heart. My mind keeps getting in the way.  )

And when the news media goes along with their beliefs, they think it is outrageous and stupid for anyone to question the news institutions. Even Wikileaks was good when it was against Bush. It was bad when it was against Obama and Clinton. The idea of objective truth does not occur to these people except as a political talking point to use against the enemies of their beliefs.

This true believer attitude even goes for ruling class elite wannabes (who can be the worst kind of true believers), but, oddly enough, it isn't present in actual real-life ruling class elites. Why? Because they are the ones who own the news media and make the propaganda.

They don't want anyone screwing around with their money or power.

Only a true believer blinded by an ideology or religion believes people with gobs of money and power will give it over willingly and will not want to protect it with dirty tricks if they feel threatened.

Michael

[KorbenDallas]

I'm a bit confused with the working conspiracy theory in this thread surrounding the Toronto Van Attacker.  Is the theory that the Incel forum was set up prior to the attack, and that the attack was also engineered?  Or was it that the forum was set up prior to the attack, the attack itself wasn't engineered, but the groundwork had been lain months in advance in anticipation for some attack and ready for news propaganda regarding Incel terrorism and fear?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, KorbenDallas said:

I'm a bit confused with the working conspiracy theory in this thread surrounding the Toronto Van Attacker.  Is the theory that the Incel forum was set up prior to the attack, and that the attack was also engineered?  Or was it that the forum was set up prior to the attack, the attack itself wasn't engineered, but the groundwork had been lain months in advance in anticipation for some attack and ready for news propaganda regarding Incel terrorism and fear?

Korben,

The reason people do covert things is because they don't want people to see them doing it.

But there are some things that are easy to detect, like the propaganda stuff. The rest is speculation.

In the specific case of the Toronto attacker, I mentioned I don't know enough of his personal history to say anything for sure. But I contend he was not the only neurotic being primed to go on a killing spree. Was he actually primed or did he simply go along while others were being primed? Who knows?

Like I said, I would bet good money an amazing friend came into his life out of nowhere and now this friend can't be found. In order to know for sure, I would have to dig for real, including probably a trip, and this topic doesn't warrant that much of my time or effort.

Here's an analogy. We all know kids lie, but incredibly some people deny this.

One day a kid appears with chocolate all over his face. A guy from a nearby store salls and says someone made a holy mess in the chocolate isle, stole some chocolate, and if you know anything about it. You ask the kid and he says he hasn't eaten any chocolate that day. What do you conclude?

Duh...

Now, did you actually see the kid eat the chocolate? What brand of chocolate are we talking about? Couldn't the chocolate on the kid's face have been put there by someone else since we all know That Particular Kid would never lie? Etc. etc. etc...

Blech to that kind of thinking...

Kids lie and the kid got caught. It's common sense.

The technique of exploiting insecure young males online is well-known and taught. It's a favorite with cults, radical Islamist groups, etc. also, I study propaganda techniques and I have studied enough Internet marketing to have a small notion about bots, sockpuppet accounts and so on. And I see all this surrounding the Incel craze that has been engineered to grip the modern imagination.

If people want to pretend that being horny, inept and frustrated turns a person into a stone cold mass murderer, so lets make all kinds of new laws against males (and then females for good measure) and put third wave feminists in charge of them, well... OK...

That's an opinion, I guess. That's what the propagandists are ultimately selling. At least they are paving the way...

I see things a bit differently.

Michael

[caroljane]

3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

It must be wonderful to believe in Big Brother government so ardently.

Big Brother knows what is best for all, so long as it is socialist Big Brother, right?

Big Brother will protect the downtrodden and keep the oppressor bullies in line.

[Insert wisecrack about Venezuela and it can't happen here.] 

  

Michael

Maybe it might be wonderful too, but I can't believe in a superhuman omniscient Big Brother controlling my life, anymore than the dark forces doing it as you describe.  Unless they really are superhuman, I cannot believe any coalition of mere human beings, however rich and powerful, could produce such teamwork with such success.  Even the most reasonable movements - forces of brightness, like the Objectivist movement, break apart on the very ground of their individual humanity.

[anthony]

59 minutes ago, caroljane said:

  Even the most reasonable movements - forces of brightness, like the Objectivist movement, break apart on the very ground of their individual humanity.

 

Superbly put, Carol. And for this, the individual will find he/she has to move on from the movement to realise their own "brightness".

 

[caroljane]

1 hour ago, anthony said:

Superbly put, Carol. And for this, the individual will find he/she has to move on from the movement to realise their own "brightness".

 

Back at you,  Tony.   

[Jon Letendre]

JFK knew of secret societies. And he warned us about their outsized influence.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

4 hours ago, caroljane said:

Unless they really are superhuman, I cannot believe any coalition of mere human beings, however rich and powerful, could produce such teamwork with such success.

Carol,

May I direct your attention toward war?

There are a lot of mere human beings in wars--including the rich and powerful--who are not superhumans, but do a lot of extremely complex teamwork, including the covert stuff and propaganda. And man, can they be successful in their objectives, which generally involves breaking things and killing people on a massive scale.

So, in your opinion, humans can do that in war, but not elsewhere?

That's against your beliefs?

btw - I am fully on board with your comments about basic humanity. But I did not understand your added comment to it. Do you mean that Objectivism only works as a collective, that on the individual level, the humanity of Objectivists breaks down?

I don't think that's what you were saying, but I want to make sure.

For the record, I don't think Objectivism works anywhere except on an individual basis. But there are no guarantees. This is because Objectivism itself does not form character. Character-wise, people of good character can use it as a tool for maintenance and inspiration, but that's about all. In order to develop good character, they need to make some pre-philosophy and/or pre-religion choices. Some of the more lucky folks are born with a good disposition and raised with excellent role models, so their choice is easier, but choosing to embrace good character is available to all. (That's what redemption is all about.)

Jungians have a good way of looking at this. They say to develop good character, we must learn how to accept and deal with our shadow, because we all have one.

(There are great neuroscience reasons for the existence of a shadow, too. Verifiable reasons, so I have no doubts about this.)

I like this approach of dealing with the shadow so much, I include it in my core spiritual operating system along with many ideas from Objectivism (and some other ideas from elsewhere).

Michael

[caroljane]

14 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

May I direct your attention toward war?

There are a lot of mere human beings in wars--including the rich and powerful--who are not superhumans, but do a lot of extremely complex teamwork, including the covert stuff and propaganda. And man, can they be successful in their objectives, which generally involves breaking things and killing people on a massive scale.

So, in your opinion, humans can do that in war, but not elsewhere?

Michael

In which war did they effect such consistent successes, -- the Hundred Years' War? Vietnam?  WWI, that unnecessary but inevitable nightmare of butchery and stupidity ? I read the Proud Tower too - wonderful book. Do you remember the part about how after the war, they were redecorating the wartime  headquarters of one of the  French generals, or an allied command centre (I forget the exact venue). They rolled up the carpet and found dozens of telegrams stuck under there, all marked Urgent and demanding immediate reply, ranging in date throughout the four years.  

iDid you read the Guns of August too, also by Tuchman?  And William Manchester'sthe Arms of Krupp, that chilling and terrifying classic of the utter defeat of reason and humanity by the  armament industry?  Krupp and co. were the real victors, not the Allies. Their losses were negligible, and their gains were great.

[caroljane]

14 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

btw - I am fully on board with your comments about basic humanity. But I did not understand your added comment to it. Do you mean that Objectivism only works as a collective, that on the individual level, the humanity of Objectivists breaks down?

I don't think that's what you were saying, but I want to make sure.

Michael

You are right, I meant the opposite  Objectivism had powerful effects on individuals,  many beneficial and long-lasting,  and still continues to. But as a "movement", with joint projects such as the newsletter, events, educational agenda and so on, it blowed up real good after the Branden-Rand split and the existing Ayn Rand Institute now , a not-for-profit propped up by Koch money and rigidly ideologically controlled,  can hardly resemble anything AR might have envisioned. 

[Jon Letendre]

NXIVM is a good example of the sort of tactics that dark systems utilize. It is hard to imagine keeping many individualists in a line, but that’s not the personality type these groups harness.

The news reporting about this group and what is happening is not honest. For one thing, the news keeps saying “sex cult,” like it’s just some orgy club. Yet Allison Mack is charged with trafficking young children.

And now this latest news about one of the cult’s doctors. Keep in mind, my fellow innocent-minded, non-naive, rational Objectivists, he was NOT doing research, this wasn’t a “study” or “experiment.” Rather, this is simply how members (by the many hundreds, probably many, many thousands before the investigation is over) were kept in line - with mind-numbing psychological terror. Members were shown what had happened to other, past members. These were group cohesion exercises. (There are goodies, too, obviously, for good behavior.)

We normal healthy people simply do not have the perspective with which to imagine how mafias, cults and secret societies are kept in unison. We don’t want to imagine it either, generally.

 

“NXIVM 'sex cult' doctor is charged with conducting 'fright study' experiments and showing members videos of rape, dismemberment and a man being forced to eat his own brain

“actual video of the horrific and brutal murders and dismemberment of four women by machete”

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5695523/NXIVM-cult-doctor-charged-conducting-fright-study-experiments.html#ixzz5ElgwMg2B 

 

[Jon Letendre]

Here is President John F. Kennedy on April 27, 1961:

* “The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings”

* “Today no war has been declared — and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack”

* “We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence — on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day”

* “It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations”

[caroljane]

47 minutes ago, Jon Letendre said:

NXIVM is a good example of the sort of tactics that dark systems utilize. It is hard to imagine keeping many individualists in a line, but that’s not the personality type these groups harness.

The news reporting about this group and what is happening is not honest. For one thing, the news keeps saying “sex cult,” like it’s just some orgy club. Yet Allison Mack is charged with trafficking young children.

And now this latest news about one of the cult’s doctors. Keep in mind, my fellow innocent-minded, non-naive, rational Objectivists, he was NOT doing research, this wasn’t a “study” or “experiment.” Rather, this is simply how members (by the many hundreds, probably many, many thousands before the investigation is over) were kept in line - with mind-numbing psychological terror. Members were shown what had happened to other, past members. These were group cohesion exercises. (There are goodies, too, obviously, for good behavior.)

We normal healthy people simply do not have the perspective with which to imagine how mafias, cults and secret societies are kept in unison. We don’t want to imagine it either, generally.

 

“NXIVM 'sex cult' doctor is charged with conducting 'fright study' experiments and showing members videos of rape, dismemberment and a man being forced to eat his own brain

“actual video of the horrific and brutal murders and dismemberment of four women by machete”

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5695523/NXIVM-cult-doctor-charged-conducting-fright-study-experiments.html#ixzz5ElgwMg2B 

 

Small fact-check correction, Jon.

Mack is charged with trafficking women, not children. Two women brought complaints against her on which the charges are based. There are no allegaions about children , except one rumour emanating from a well-known fake-news site.  You have been wrongly informed. The facts of the indictment are publicly available.

We should all be glad that this revolting mindwashing sadistic pyramid scheme has not proved, yet anyway, to have victimized the youngest and most innocent.

[caroljane]

Further to the Epstein coverup, which there surely was/.

There is no doubt in my mind that Prince Andrew and  Clinton might well have availed  themselves of  the services offered (Rothschild I know nothing about so can't comment). But if either of them had become a pedophile at their late stages of life, I would doubt it.  You Americans have trawled through every woman Clinton ever hit on, and I don't recall any minors he assaulted or even groped. Not that there were none, but surely if there were any fire there Ken Starr et al  would have fanned the smoke up to high heaven.

About the house of Windsor I do know,  Andrew is a corrupt, venal, pompous waste of space. But like all Windsor men, starting spectacularly with the ex-king and Duke of Windsor, as sons deprived of their mother  at early ages,* their only known attractions have been to women older or equal age to themselves, efficiently managerial and comforting. Andrew had a famous affair with Koo Stark, a soft porn star - and, well, Camilla.  Meghan, 3 years older and hugely more worldly. Etc.

As far as child prostitutes here, my judgment says and I hope I am right, in these two particular cases, nothing to see here, folks.

[Jon Letendre]

We shall see about NXIVM and children. It’s just getting started.

[Jon Letendre]

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

22 hours ago, caroljane said:

In which war did they effect such consistent successes...

Carol,

In just about all of them over the entire human history in all cultures without exception.

Kinda obvious, no?

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Eric Schneiderman, NY AG and longtime bitter enemy of President Trump, just resigned due to some nasty shenanigans he did on women.

Why would a man championing women so much, making such macho talk about taking down Harvey Weinstein and on and on, not to mention the lessons he wanted to ram down Trump's throat in public about respecting women, abuse his power to intimidate women into sexual situations against their will?

Is he an Incel at heart?

   

Michael

[KorbenDallas]

On 5/6/2018 at 7:54 PM, Jon Letendre said:

Here is President John F. Kennedy on April 27, 1961:

* “The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings”

* “Today no war has been declared — and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack”

* “We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence — on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day”

* “It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations”

JFK's degree of rationality isn't in the same category as an Alex Jones or a David Seaman.

[william.scherk]

'Who is an incel at heart?'

12 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Is he an Incel at heart?

On 11/11/2017 at 1:52 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I am bothered by the intensity of the current mob mentality in taking out high-profile lefties for sexual deviation. All you need is an accusation and the mainstream press goes apeshit trying to destroy celebrity careers. [...]

But underneath, this is sheer cultural poison. Our times are going to enter an oppressive prudish phase after the dust settles and that does not please me.

 

[Peter]

I am always heartened when Hollywood depicts a strong, horny woman.