See other Resistance Articles
Title: Out, Damned Spot! Out!
Source:
My archives
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 10, 2010
Author: Bob Wallace
Post Date: 2010-06-10 12:34:47 by Turtle
Keywords: None
Views: 172
Comments: 11
“Truth comes by conflict.” ~ Hillaire Belloc “Without contraries, there is no progression.” ~ William Blake I used to write for a libertarian site (well, sort of libertarian) called LewRockwell.com. But no more. My archives have been erased, and on top of that, they have been erased from the Google cache, which can only happen if the owner of the site where the articles were posted requests it (I�ve already saved all of them, so not to worry). Now who could it be who did this, I wonder? By the way, over 200 articles were destroyed. 217, I think. All dropped down the libertarian version of Orwell’s Memory Hole. I’m not the only one who has been banned. Jimmy Cantrell, who has a Ph.D. in English, was banned, as was Carole Ward. And all for the same reason I was: pointing out what are the real problems. Here�s what happened: I occasionally post outrageous comments at various sites, wondering what kind of response I�ll get. Call it bait. I have found, unfortunately, you have to push the envelope to get a truthful response from people. So I pushed it. This particular time, I made some very crude remarks about race and ethnic groups. What I said was essentially the truth, but I said it in a rather brutal way. The reason? Perception travels through the emotional brain first, to the rational brain last. Then includes you, me, and everyone else, including those who considers themselves the most egghead of intellectuals. Many of whom, in my opinion, believe some of the dumbest ideas on earth. Not only that, they’re gullible and naive. What I did, I did on purpose, to bypass the rational brain. I had made similar comments before, without a peep from anyone � except for those who agreed with me. This time, finally, I got a response, and woo hoo was it one! One person in particular, a leftwing PC narcissistic homosexual named Tom Palmer (who styles himself a libertarian, but is really a pro-war chickenhawk fascist), took my comments and sent them all over the Internet to God knows who. He even made nine comments (all of them the same) on The Sudden Curve blog I write for. This is mental illness. I’m going to repeat that — this is mental illness. Narcissistic, exhibitionistic, megalomanical mental illness. More succinctly, the behavior of a typical homosexual. In some ways I feel sorry for him, because he’s fighting battles he’s already lost. Anyone who thinks the public acceptance of homosexuality, which Palmer advocates, will lead to the acceptance of gay marriage and not buggering young boys, doesn’t understand much about homosexuals, or much of anything, probably. Such are the wages of narcissistic self-deception, even if you do work for the (now degraded) Cato Institute, as Palmer unfortunately does. Another site, the utterly insignificant No Treason (they�re the exact opposite, what with supporting totally open borders), also posted my comments and wrote extensively about them. This is a site run by fools, knaves and cowards who make obscene sexual comments about women, including one I know. Apparently they think they’re funny. They’re the only ones. By the way, they’ve also run cartoons approving of bestiality, in the context of harassing the woman I know. No Treason is an anti-American, left-wing site that reminds me of what Jean Raspail wrote in The Camp of the Saints: they are �righteous in their loathing of anything and everything that smacked of present-day Western society, and boundless in their love of whatever might destroy it.� All of them were so dumb they didn�t realize what I was doing. I�m not surprised at anything self-styled intellectuals do. They proved what I’m been saying for years: there are leftwing libertarians and rightwing ones. The leftwing ones tend toward anarchism and confused thought. Like I said, they’re gullible, and will fall for…well, a lot (anyone who thinks anything of value can be salvaged from leftism know little, if anything, about leftism). Some of the critics claimed they weren’t leftists. Anyone who criticises using words such as “racism” or “homophobia” or “sexism” or “bigot” — words that mean nothing because they can mean anything — and truly believes in these words, is a leftist, whether he knows it or not. The comments at various sites fell into two categories: the more rightwing ones who supported free speech, and the PC leftists, who believe in Thoughtcrime. The leftists, being more narcissistic (as all leftists are) were writing about me as if I was a bad person. Not one of the leftists realized I had tricked them. After thinking about this for years, I’ve decided the leftwing ones (or ancaps, meaning anarcho-capitalists) have a lot of similarities with Marxists. Marx thought all the god-like qualities of humanity would blossom like hot-house flowers once the State “withered away.” That’s exactly what leftist-libertarians think. And if they think that, they have another think coming. What I wrote is what would really happen. These people are left-wing haters who want to destroy. They want chaos. As Dostoevsky said, the man who loves chaos does not simply hate himself — he hates everything. I didn�t bother to defend or explain myself. I was curious as to how the whole thing would play out. And that�s how my archives were erased, including the Google cache. So, you ask, what did I write? I pointed out, in exactly one paragraph, that blacks have an mean average IQ that is genetically much lower than whites, which is why they�re on the bottom in every country of the world, including Africa. These are the facts, folks, and everyone knows it. To ignore these things is to condemn many, many Africans to poverty and death. Of course, this is something leftists will tolerate, as long as it doesn’t intrude on their groovy little fantasy world. What I wrote doesn�t mean I hate blacks, which of course is what leftists will always say. It just means we need the free market so people, no matter what their IQ, can find a high-paying job and support themselves so the government won�t destroy neighborhoods, families and people�s individual lives with welfare. And I know perfectly well there will always be smart ones who will rise to the top. I also wrote that Jews have been expelled from some 80 countries � sometimes more than once, sometimes for hundreds of years � because of their attempts to destroy every culture that admits them. And under a completely free market, without government interference, many Jews will be ostracized. Everyone who is honest about it, knows this is true, too. This is a shame, because the innocent get hurt along with the guilty. But then, that, too, is part of depraved human nature. I also pointed out that the Chinese and Asian Indians have a problem with ancient, ossified cultures that have destroyed much of their creativity. After all, most everything in the world has been created by those of European ancestry, along with the free market. Speaking of Asian culture, one of my best friends is a Filipina, with whom I have discussed these problems extensively. For some odd reason, she’s never banned me from talking about them, even though she says I annoy her all the time. I once pointed out to her that almost all white women don’t find Asian men attractive because they don’t consider them masculine. She told me Asian men already know that, but what really surprised me is that a lot of Asian women prefer effeminate Asian men. Some of the men go so far as to paint their fingernails. The biggest exception to this rule, she told me, are Filipinas, many of whom prefer white men because they like “mixing blood” and creating exotic-looking babies. Now try to discuss that on any “libertarian” site and see how many rational responses you get. There were a few things I didn�t say, such as the fact that homosexuals, who make up less than two percent of the population, are responsible for at least one-third of child sex crimes (like murder, rape and molestation) and two-thirds of all AIDS cases. So, please, don�t tell me there are no differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals. There are. Those Catholic priests molesting kids? They�re not pedophiles. They�re pederasts, which is what many homosexuals are � they like boys in their early teens. And what percentage of those priests are committing these molestations? Two percent. . .just as two percent of the population is homosexual. Interesting tidbit, isn�t it? Let’s put it this way: stereotypes wouldn’t exist unless there was truth to them. Or: all stereotypes are true. What didn�t I write? How about that most lesbians are man-haters? And that Islam is the worst thing that ever happened to the world, and destroyed the ancient and advanced civilizations of Iraq and Iran? And that I consider the Koran or the Talmud no more holy books than I do Mein Kampf? Let�s see�what else? Blacks, Jews, homosexuals, Asians, Mexicans. and Indians. Is there anyone I didn’t offend? How about those crackpot, blasphemous faux-Christian Evangelicals who think they can bring Jesus back by supporting the murder of Palestinians and the theft of their land? Oh — I forgot � I can say that without any problem. In a very rough, general way, this is what you would get under a completely free market: whites and Asians at the top, Mexicans in the middle, blacks at the bottom, except for sports and music. Of course, this does not count for every individual. I’m speaking in generalities. And, to repeat, this doesn’t apply to every individual; exceptional ones, of any race and ethnic group, can make his or her way to the top. And to repeat again: I’m for the free market so all people can make lots of money and support themselves and their families without the government interfering and destroying everything. What did I learn from this little escapade? That even libertarians, who pride themselves on their (non-existent) intellectual and moral superiority, are a primitive tribe, just like everyone else. They have taboos, ones that if you transgress will lead to expulsion. That�s what happened to me. Small “l” libertarianism as a philosophy is sound (it’s the original philosophy of this country, what it was based upon). As for Libertarianism (big L), it is idealistic, leftist Utopian, and utterly foolish. Most of the people who fall for it are homosexuals, leftists who are too deluded to even know they’re leftists, and potheads, and all of them are completely confused about the difference between Right and Left. Big L would no more work in society than Socialism. Facts are stubborn things, and many of your leftist libertarians don’t like them at all. That’s why they ignore them. Reality is malleable, you know, if you just act like the Cowardly Lion, squeeze your eyes shut, and keep repeating, “I wish, I wish.” I have never called myself a pure “libertarian.” I’ve always qualified with with “right-wing” or “conservative.” One friend calls himself a “constitutional libertarian.” No one I know, other than the crackpots, calls himself simply “a libertarian.” The term unfortunately carries too much baggage, because of the people who have degraded the term. By the way (and this is a sad, sad thing), Lew backed down from two sites run by depraved sexual perverts. It’s a shame one of his nicknames on the Internet is “Lewpus.” I think you can figure out what it means. The more I thought about it the funnier it got: I was banned after attacks by a pathologically lying homosexual and a couple of guys who sexually harass women while hiding behind their website. I am reminded of a comment by John Milton: �None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license.� There’s nothing like a little controversy to get people to expose their true selves. I even caught one of the pedophiles at Anti.State.com using my name to make slanderous posts. Such admirable people, eh? What am I supposed to think about a “movement” with so many marginal, indeed disputable, people in it? One of my friends took the link to LewRockwell.com off of his site, telling me some of the writers were “fucking loons.” Another no longer calls himself a libertarian, after finding out “they weren’t what I thought they were.” He wasn’t talking about the philosophy; he was talking about the people. I have unfortunately decided that libertarianism as it stands now is completely hopeless, mostly because of the anarchism, which I will repeat, is leftist and therefore terribly destructive. Sad to say, but the only truly stupid, truly ignorant comments I got were exclusively from libertarians. All of them either didn’t understand or distorted everything I had written. I’m not saying your shouldn’t read the site, or not support it. It’s a needed corrective to the leftist- libertarian/anarchist/pederast brigade. But don’t delude yourself that Lew Rockwell is something he is not — a man unafraid of the truth. You want to know something? If I had to do it all over again, I�d do it exactly the same way. It was much too enlightening to want to give up what I discovered. I finally got the truth about libertarians. It wasn’t very pretty, either. A lot of them are losers living in their little fantasy world, a never-to-exist world in which a nation of one-third Wahabi Muslims, one-third Orthodox Jews, and one-third fundamentalist Christians would live in peace-and-universal-brotherhood because the free market would unite them in their material lust for SUVs and DVD players. They remind me, more than anything else, of unpleasant and very immature children. All the emails I got supported me, although as I said, some of the posts I read at various forums didn’t, and clearly exposed the leftist PC in way too many libertarians. Everyone of those who supported me described themselves as “right” in varying degrees. Everyone of those who opposed me described themselves as “left” or “beyond right or left.” The latter viewpoint is nonsense: no one is beyond Right or Light, no more than anyone can be beyond male or female. But, again, the hate and viciousness was exclusively from those on the Left. Look at it this way, folks: the human race has advanced technology, but otherwise is still stuck in One Million Years B.C. Only there�s no Raquel Welch in a two-piece fur bikini in sight. “All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.” ~ Enoch Powell “Live not by lies.” ~ Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Poster Comment: There is probably five years old.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Turtle (#0)
Oh, the fallacies - let me count the ways. One, that I.Q. tests measure anything other than literacy and support the cultural biases of the test writer. This has been shown over, and, over, and over, and over again. I.Q. tests are invariably written from the cultural and linguistic viewpoint of the test writer. This is not to say that their are not differences between people, some smarter, some dumber, and some very dumb e.g., those who believe in I.Q. tests as an absolute measure. The classic example is the tests used to measure military recruits during WWII which had a linguistic and cultural bias toward those reared in urban enclaves. Almost invariably country kids showed up on these tests as imbeciles. Two, would be the inheritability and genetic transmission of intelligence - a thesis for which there is no support other than prejudice. The measured differences between different human subspecies is explained by "1" above. As well there is a tendency of like to promote like i.e., whites will promote whites over any other group just as those groups will promote members of their own self identified group above others. It is not a "white" thing or a "black" thing, or a "Mexican" (which is actually a very diverse gene pool) thing it is a group thing. I do agree on the analysis of the homoleft and homolibertarians as basically leftists in libertarian fleece. This has more to do with the aberrations of these individuals and is simply another expression of the irrationality which drove them from a normal sexuality. Generally I prefer to call myself a Paleolibertarian or Paleocon.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Good piece.
Pack up your troubles in your old kit bag and smile, smile, smile.
How strange that you're able to group ideologies/ideas with specific sexual preferences. I generally refer to myself only as a libertarian (of the little "L" variety), and still see "left/right" as little more than continuing to buy into an artificial pre-fabricated paradigm to keep people at opposition. Is it then true that I'm a "leftist libertarian" aka homosexual that likes DVD players? My wife, my children and my own self would be surprised by that, as well as all of the girls I lusted after throughout my life. :) It is true that some, even many, anacaps are utopian and even, yes, can be seen as fitting more closely with Marx than with, say, Mises. Some, however small a minority, take a more considered stand, recognizing no societal framework is going to persevere over time, and opt simply to be left alone by government authority and to live in peace and be a good neighbor, while accepting that they have to live within the framework of others by the very nature of reality. Kind of a Christian Anarchist/Dostoevsky/Tolstoy view rather than a Marxist societal utopian framework view. The ones of the later description never struck me as particularly utopian, nor leftist, nor homosexual. Perhaps I'm missing something in my observation of fellow libertarians since the 1980's though. The facts you present don't particularly bother me, one shouldn't be offended by truth expressed without malice.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
I use the term classic liberal.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." My anarchist friends have referred to me as a "Minarchist" as I tend toward a Jeffersonian point of view that government is a necessary evil but that it should be sharply, strongly, limited in its freedom of action. This is opposed to the Throreauian viewpoint espoused under anarchism which is "the government which governs best governs not at all". My view can be summed up thusly: "Courts, Coinage, and Defense" and nothing else. Period. As well a persons sexual proclivities are a reflection of their personality, viewpoint, and emotional health. Invariably true libertarians are higher toned, more trustworthy, and avidly heterosexual. In other words they are emotionally higher toned and that is reflected across a spectrum of behaviors. Conversely people of lower emotional tone are increasingly dysfunctional the lower you go. Ever notice that homosexuals, whether male or female, evidence a covert hostility toward everyone? The same can be noted and observed in other types of perverts - such as the obsessively promiscuous, sadists, masochists, pedophiles, etc., ... Snotty queen is not just a description of a behavior but of emotional tone and sanity. Fascists on the other hand are chronically angry at everyone and their solution to every problem is destructive force. And so on up the line to the higher toned libertarian viewpoint who feels no compulsion to control other people or direct their lives. They lead by example and grant freedom of choice to all - even the homos and fascists.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
That works for me. The problem with it though is that in our debased political environment, and what exists as dialogue, it is too open to intentional misinterpretation.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
I'm not anacap as its defined by the OP, but I'm more or less philosophically aligned with the latter "anarchist" camp I mentioned. But as I pointed out, I recognize and understand that my view is not how human reality works, and I simply accept that governments will exist, always. My goal is to minimize or eliminate where I can government influence in the society I live in, but only in regards to my family and my own life. That is not always possible, but its a goal. I have no social constructs to offer others, I know that pretend "anarchist" societies are bound to failure or worse, and consider my path one only as a "revolution of one", based on a sound moral framework that includes a respect for the rights of others and a benign view of my fellow man and neighbor. Help where you can, and try where you can't, but accept no government authority demanding you do something against your interests *if you can help it*. In essence it's a minarchist practical position with an end goal to not even have to worry about government in any instance. I'll work with minarchists as staunch allies, and figure that once the dust settles we can bicker over who can reduce government more to the point that most are satisfied without harming anybody. If the view is we need a small government, then I'll accept that and be the town crank, happily. :) Strange position, I'm certain.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
This is true. Mostly I add a definition when I use it.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." I wrote the article. I found the most vicious attacks on me came from "libertarian" homosexuals. In fact, they started the whole attack, and it was without an exception the leftist "libertarians" who kept the attacks going for weeks. The easiest way to tell a right-libertarian from a left one is whether or not they support the whore-mongering, wife-beating, plagerizing fraud Martin Luther King (real name = Michael King). The left ones support him.
For it is not the wolf or any of the other beasts that would join the contest in any noble danger, but rather a good man. — Aristotle, Politics, Book IIX
I wrote the article. Yes, I know, that's why I say "how strange that *you're*...". That's not a function of politics, it's a function of their...ahem...life choices I think. Pretty stereotypical behavior actually.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
Could you please post the article in question that got you bounced off of Lew Rockwell?? I'd really like to read it.
_________________________________________________________________________
#2. To: Turtle (#0)
#3. To: Turtle (#0)
#4. To: Original_Intent, turtle (#1)
Generally I prefer to call myself a Paleolibertarian or Paleocon.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#5. To: SonOfLiberty (#3)
#6. To: farmfriend (#4)
I use the term classic liberal.
#7. To: Original_Intent (#5)
#8. To: Original_Intent (#6)
The problem with it though is that in our debased political environment, and what exists as dialogue, it is too open to intentional misinterpretation.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#9. To: SonOfLiberty (#3)
How strange that you're able to group ideologies/ideas with specific sexual preferences.
#10. To: Turtle (#9)
How strange that you're able to group ideologies/ideas with specific sexual preferences.
I found the most vicious attacks on me came from "libertarian" homosexuals. In fact, they started the whole attack, and it was without an exception the leftist "libertarians" who kept the attacks going for weeks.
#11. To: Turtle (#0)
Obama is the miscegenated bastard of a white communist whore. True story.
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest