What is your favorite meme? Show us!
Neoreactionary Sunset Shimmer, of course.
Liked by:
...........
Ask @antidem
Previous
Do you occasionally enjoy eroge?
No. I'm not *that* much like Tomoko.
Have you ever written a screen play?
No.
Related users
In a recent comment, you said that the Nazis lost "because they made stupid, obvious, avoidable mistakes". What were these mistakes?
I refer you to Dan Carlin's excellent "Ghosts of the Ostfront" series from his Hardcore History podcast. Well worth the price, and then some: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-ghosts-of-the-ostfront-series/
Liked by:
Sir Piragon The 3rd
Headline from 2013: "Yale hosts workshop teaching sensitivity to bestiality". This "sexual diversity" thing is going to get much worse before it gets better, huh?
Oven. Now.
You can contribute more to the declining NRx. 8chan and ask.fm are nice and everything, but you have your blog as a platform for political commentary, and you're not using it. It's not *that* difficult, you know.
Okay, here, happy now? I just finished it:
https://antidem.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/short-takes-june-2015/
(This month's "Short Takes" wasn't so short. Oops.)
https://antidem.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/short-takes-june-2015/
(This month's "Short Takes" wasn't so short. Oops.)
Would you drop any show that promoted homosexuality or similar degeneracy, no matter how good it was otherwise?
I would and I have.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/06/18/ot22-flow-my-tears-the-policeman-thread/#comment-214425 What probability do you assign to war in this scenario?
Hard to say what the federal government's reaction to secession would be at present. One commenter on TRS noted that where we are just now is "Too late to vote, too early to start shooting". That's probably about right. Look, the American Empire is falling apart under its own weight, so time is on the side of its enemies, foreign and domestic. The more time goes by, the weaker it gets. Breakup is probably inevitable, but this time I hope those hot-blooded southerners have learned their lesson about waiting for the right time and the right circumstances.
Why doesn't modernity use slogans a la Brave New World ("the more stitches, the less riches," etc...)?
It doesn't? You've never heard "Love is Love" or "History is on the side of equality" or "Black lives matter" before? If you want slogans, go down to the local Whole Foods and look at the bumper stickers on the cars of the Cat Ladies who are shopping there - you'll see a bunch of them.
NRx is heavily preoccupied with the past and restoring the way things used to be. But are there any areas in which it actually tries to innovate, similar to how the European New Right partly draws on selective readings of left-wing ideas?
NRx is heavily preoccupied with not reinventing the wheel and with not dreaming of perfect worlds that are the enemies of good social arrangements that are time-tested and known to work. It is Modernity that demands novelty in everything, and that sees any idea in every sphere as useless if it was developed and believed in by people who lived and died before they could experience the joys of playing Angry Birds on an iPad.
Think of it as being analogous to the difference between the IFLS crowd and actual engineers (which many prominent NRx'ers are, in some form or another). IFLS types demand constant innovation in everything, whereas actual engineers understand that if there's an existing solution that works well or a proven answer that somebody else has already come up with, then coming up with a new answer or a new solution is stupid, pointless, and wasteful at best, and potentially dangerous at worst. Engineers prefer the proven over the unproven, the tested over the untested, the known over the unknown, and for very good reasons. Where they do end up using something new and unproven because of some advantage it brings to the table, they'll test the bejeezus out of it, over and over again, exploring and documenting every possible failure mode, noting both their likelihood and their potential severity, and coming up with redundancies in case it does fail, before they'll sign off on making it an operational technology.
Anyhow, history tells us that no restoration movement ever succeeds completely. Nor should it - if something needs to be restored, that means it failed, and if it failed, there's some reason for its failure; some flaw that should be fixed to the best of our ability to do so. We don't want to be a reflection of Talleyrand's description of the restored Bourbon kings: "They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing". Even good, proven systems fail sometimes, and even good, proven systems need to be adjusted and refined in order to minimize failure to the greatest extent possible. This is balanced against the sensible desire to modify a functional system as little as possible, because every untested new part added to a tested existing system increases the chances of failures occurring. NRx takes the conservative approach of a good engineer: a good, functional system has already been invented, but was abandoned for bad reasons in favor of a new system that doesn't work well. Let's restore the old, functional system, while finding ways to adjust and refine it to the degree necessary in order to correct its flaws and adapt it to new conditions. Investigating how to do that is what NRx is all about.
Think of it as being analogous to the difference between the IFLS crowd and actual engineers (which many prominent NRx'ers are, in some form or another). IFLS types demand constant innovation in everything, whereas actual engineers understand that if there's an existing solution that works well or a proven answer that somebody else has already come up with, then coming up with a new answer or a new solution is stupid, pointless, and wasteful at best, and potentially dangerous at worst. Engineers prefer the proven over the unproven, the tested over the untested, the known over the unknown, and for very good reasons. Where they do end up using something new and unproven because of some advantage it brings to the table, they'll test the bejeezus out of it, over and over again, exploring and documenting every possible failure mode, noting both their likelihood and their potential severity, and coming up with redundancies in case it does fail, before they'll sign off on making it an operational technology.
Anyhow, history tells us that no restoration movement ever succeeds completely. Nor should it - if something needs to be restored, that means it failed, and if it failed, there's some reason for its failure; some flaw that should be fixed to the best of our ability to do so. We don't want to be a reflection of Talleyrand's description of the restored Bourbon kings: "They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing". Even good, proven systems fail sometimes, and even good, proven systems need to be adjusted and refined in order to minimize failure to the greatest extent possible. This is balanced against the sensible desire to modify a functional system as little as possible, because every untested new part added to a tested existing system increases the chances of failures occurring. NRx takes the conservative approach of a good engineer: a good, functional system has already been invented, but was abandoned for bad reasons in favor of a new system that doesn't work well. Let's restore the old, functional system, while finding ways to adjust and refine it to the degree necessary in order to correct its flaws and adapt it to new conditions. Investigating how to do that is what NRx is all about.
Liked by:
Sir Piragon The 3rd
Ian
Thoughts on the Muslim Question. Is Islam an enemy of the West, and if it is, what should be done about it?
Dude I just answered that question like two days ago.
Thoughts on R.W. Emerson?
Never read much of him. My concentrations were in 19th and 20th century British Lit.
Do you look at hentai of your waifus?
Dude, no - any skank can be in porn, but waifus are pure and innocent and lovely.
Interesting aside: I was at (I think) Anime America '95 when someone at a panel asked Izumi Matsumoto, of Kimagure Orange Road fame, if he ever drew hentai pictures of his characters for his own amusement. He angrily refused to answer the question - which pretty much told us what the answer actually was.
Interesting aside: I was at (I think) Anime America '95 when someone at a panel asked Izumi Matsumoto, of Kimagure Orange Road fame, if he ever drew hentai pictures of his characters for his own amusement. He angrily refused to answer the question - which pretty much told us what the answer actually was.
Liked by:
Der Tote Kaiser
Would you ever have a waifu who was taller than you?
I don't see why not.
Are you a masochist?
Why, are you offering me a spanking? If so, will you dress like Sunset Shimmer when you paddle me?
Liked by:
Alt-Right Jewish infiltrator
What is the last, best hope for America?
I suppose a Sulla or a Caesar could help, but with each passing day I lose more confidence in the idea that this will ever happen.
Sunset Shimmer good, Starlight Glimmer evil. What gives?
Starlight Glimmer is a Tumblrista shitlib. Sunset Shimmer is a good right-wing girl, who I'm sure goes to an appropriately traditional church.
There's a lesson in this. Sunset Shimmer came on like a terror, but turned out to be fundamentally good-hearted. Starlight Glimmer was friendly and cheerful and told everybody what they wanted to hear, and turned out to be awful and villainous. It's reminiscent of the Batman Formulation: "Good" is not the same thing as "Nice". Batman isn't very nice, and isn't a lot of fun to be around. For laughs, you'll have to go see the Joker.
It kinda ties in to what I just said about sentimentality...
There's a lesson in this. Sunset Shimmer came on like a terror, but turned out to be fundamentally good-hearted. Starlight Glimmer was friendly and cheerful and told everybody what they wanted to hear, and turned out to be awful and villainous. It's reminiscent of the Batman Formulation: "Good" is not the same thing as "Nice". Batman isn't very nice, and isn't a lot of fun to be around. For laughs, you'll have to go see the Joker.
It kinda ties in to what I just said about sentimentality...
Why protestants churches are so sentimentalists and liberals? What's your opinion on this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88Frcw2z1H8 Sentimentalism has nothing to do with religion.
Derb did a bit on this in a Radio Derb from a few months back (Transcript here: http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/RadioDerb/2014-12-13.html). Relevant quote: "Dostoyevsky describes one of his characters as 'evil and sentimental'. I like that. I wouldn't go so far as to say that sentimentality is always evil. It's always to some degree disgusting, though, and it tends to travel with evil".
Excessive sentimentality is the domain of those who, of the classical rhetorical triad of ethos-pathos-logos, hammer incessantly on pathos. This is the primary tool of slick sophists, who know that the easiest way to bring people under their influence is to tug at their heartstrings. Logos is the most difficult, by far. Most people can't follow a complex logic train, and many can't even follow a relatively simple one. Those who can follow one, however, are prickly and demanding when it comes to things like credible evidence, the correct burden of proof, and the avoidance of logical fallacies. So if you do it wrong, you'll get hammered by intellectuals, but even if you do it right, most people (and in a mass democracy, it's convincing "most people" that counts) won't care. Long story short, employing logos to make arguments in the arena of politics in a mass democracy is a tremendous amount of effort for very minimal return.
Going hand in hand with this is capitalism. Look at an advertisement from the 19th century, before Eddie Bernays got his hands on the advertising business. Mostly, it's informational, and ads from that time tended towards a lot of descriptive text telling you what the product actually did. Now look at a modern commercial - pure emotion; pure sentimentality. Even where cold information and technical specifications seem most necessary in an advertisement, we get sentimentality instead (I'm looking at you, Apple). Why? Because sentimentality gets the proles to do what you want. Do you think they know the difference between a Snapdragon 800 and a A8? That they'd really understand it even if you explained it to them? No - but they know how an Apple commercial makes them feel.
So, along with democracy and capitalism, what is the third branch of Whig Modernity? Protestantism. Protestants are sentimental because Protestantism is Modernist, and Modernity, for all its claims of cold, scientific rationalism, is built on pure sentimentality. This is why it is utopian, for utopianism is the ultimate in sentimentality - the belief that we can create a place where nobody ever has to suffer, for any reason.
Not even if they deserve it.
Excessive sentimentality is the domain of those who, of the classical rhetorical triad of ethos-pathos-logos, hammer incessantly on pathos. This is the primary tool of slick sophists, who know that the easiest way to bring people under their influence is to tug at their heartstrings. Logos is the most difficult, by far. Most people can't follow a complex logic train, and many can't even follow a relatively simple one. Those who can follow one, however, are prickly and demanding when it comes to things like credible evidence, the correct burden of proof, and the avoidance of logical fallacies. So if you do it wrong, you'll get hammered by intellectuals, but even if you do it right, most people (and in a mass democracy, it's convincing "most people" that counts) won't care. Long story short, employing logos to make arguments in the arena of politics in a mass democracy is a tremendous amount of effort for very minimal return.
Going hand in hand with this is capitalism. Look at an advertisement from the 19th century, before Eddie Bernays got his hands on the advertising business. Mostly, it's informational, and ads from that time tended towards a lot of descriptive text telling you what the product actually did. Now look at a modern commercial - pure emotion; pure sentimentality. Even where cold information and technical specifications seem most necessary in an advertisement, we get sentimentality instead (I'm looking at you, Apple). Why? Because sentimentality gets the proles to do what you want. Do you think they know the difference between a Snapdragon 800 and a A8? That they'd really understand it even if you explained it to them? No - but they know how an Apple commercial makes them feel.
So, along with democracy and capitalism, what is the third branch of Whig Modernity? Protestantism. Protestants are sentimental because Protestantism is Modernist, and Modernity, for all its claims of cold, scientific rationalism, is built on pure sentimentality. This is why it is utopian, for utopianism is the ultimate in sentimentality - the belief that we can create a place where nobody ever has to suffer, for any reason.
Not even if they deserve it.
Liked by:
Ian
Do you believe there are cases where online piracy is morally justifiable? Say, when a game/film/whatever isn't sold in your country or no longer available.
Sure. Pirate away. Fuck Hollywood.
Do you play video games at all or are they the jewish devil ?
Shame on you for not reading my question history, anon. I own a New 3DS XL, and am currently working my way through Fantasy Life, Kingdom Hearts: Dream Drop Distance, and Senran Kagura.
Do you play dating sims?
Well, no, basically none of them have ever come to North America - not even Love Plus. I guess nobody thinks they'd sell here.
Dude, Sunset Shimmer is literally in high school. You are old enough to be her father! Should you really be thinking of her this way?
Daddy can love her like no high school boy can.
If you could talk with only one person for the rest of your life, who would it be?
You really don't quite understand how introversion and social phobia work, do you?
What has Sunset Shimmer ever actually done to fight Communism?
Apparently she's been helping to smuggle political prisoners out of North Korea.
Do you believe in dating before marriage?
As opposed to the other way around?
Liked by:
NO NAME
Next
