This is adjacent to the difference between Reddit and Twitter. Reddit feels infantalizing, the consensus seeking, the moderation and downvote system makes it all so childish, like a platform run by hall monitors. Twitter is rough and can be brutal but it feels like a real place. I'll interact with the same political position on both platforms and come out of Reddit infuriated yet be mildly amused on Twitter.
> Sure, I could give a long winded explanation about the different types of evil — the abstract evil that a straightforward villain presents (Voldemort), versus the more relatable form of evil that’s embedded within the confines of a given bureaucratic system (Umbridge)
Isn't it basically the unchecked patriarchy and unchecked matriarchy - especially in today's failure mode when the male and female social forces aren't balanced, but take opposite poles and fight each other?
The origins of the term Patriarchy is not rule by men but rule by fathers. This necessarily implies a focus on building and promoting the longevity of families. Much of the worst aspects of men come out when men are disconnected from an obligation towards their families or when good fathers are absent
There’s very little actually patriarchal about the frat house
The long house isn't very matriarchical either - since the mothering there becomes an abstract role, untied to the concrete biological reality of motherhood. There are matriarchical societies that still retain family units, the counterpart to the patriarchy you describe.
But frathouse/longhouse are good enough proxy words for the resulting social order when patriarchy and matriarchy turn into abstract and are disconnected from a concrete family and the responsibilities within it (after all, the girl boss, the "cool aunt", the blue haired pronoun girl, are also putting off motherhood, often altogether).
Agree, but at least the patriarchy doesn’t take the moral high ground and elevate scolding to intergalactic scale. Even Progs I’m inclined to agree with cannot resist the urge to “educate” me.
And it's still not very productive. You can change yourself all you want, but unless others do the same it means nothing.
Which is why also Jesus (if not Buddha too) gave sermons, gathered disciples, send them to change people, and established churches and so on.
Jesus even called his first disciples to become "fishers of men," meaning to help bring people to faith.
And that's for things that are based on character and behavior. There are things based on crude reality that no amount of "changing yourself" helps. Like if your country is conquered, changing yourself ain't gonna free it.
What are you going to do if someone is trying to conquer your country?
Pick up a gun? Fight them?
Well how are you going to do that if you've never operated a firearm before? How much of a fight are you going to put up if you're out of shape?
It all hast to start somewhere and it always starts with YOU. Get your shit together, and then you'll be in the position where others will LISTEN to you because they want to follow your example. (like religious leaders)
Because if there's one thing the Internet has plenty of - is sermons. Everybody thinks they can lead - what makes a leader is how much one has mastered themself. (oh yeah, also a common teaching of Jesus - probably Buddah too)
> Well how are you going to do that if you've never operated a firearm before? How much of a fight are you going to put up if you're out of shape?
Millions of laypeople in the civillian led resistance in World War II (and countless other historical ocassions) have answered those questions. You do what you have to do. Doesn't matter if you weren't trained, it's not rocket science to use a gun, and even if it was, you do your best and there are several ways to help.
Same for whetever else: you don't need to reach englightenment to organize, do something good, and convince others to do it too.
> The problem with this is you arent finding confidence in yourself...
No, the problem is not reading what I wrote: "There are things based on crude reality that no amount of "changing yourself" helps. Like if your country is conquered, changing yourself ain't gonna free it."
> your confidence comes from validation of others in yourself.
That's where confidence should come from if it's objectively justified: others validating yourself. Else it's unwarranted solipsistic self-dellusion.
This sounds like a Zoomer from social media who lives for "likes".
No human belongs to any geographic location. Country names and lines are political - not spiritual. No human has a "country". ALL modern countries are financially "conquered" in 2025 its been almost 80 years now. What am I supposed to do? Cry like a bitch? This is like having a nervous breakdown because your plant dies. I guess i should just jump off a roof because some president sold my country? This is illogical and irrational
your confidence should NEVER come from the validation of others. Nobody has to like what you do; many won't because they haven't done it or can't do it. It seems like you haven't gained any real confidence yet... so I'll give you the key.
Confidence stems from two key factors: a history of completing tasks in the past and present, and having an inner belief in yourself (Yeshua is a prime example). Anyone who has come back from loss or has a series of wins will tell you this.
Waiting for a highly volatile human to validate you leads to highly unhealthy behavior—"showing off" for people, begging for attention, doing stupid things to impress unimpressive people. Get it together, kid. Stop tethering your fate to people around you. CREATE your own path
> This sounds like a Zoomer from social media who lives for "likes".
That's to people whose only points of reference is pop culture generational divisions and modern fads.
What it does sound like it the concept of the public individual, that's defined by his presense and recognition in the society and community they live, and not by their own dellusion and fancies. The standard, that is, for societies before social media, and before stupid self-help gurus.
> No human belongs to any geographic location. Country names and lines are political - not spiritual.
On the contrary. It's animals that don't belong to any geographic location - at best, they have places that are ecologically fit for them, but no real feelings and ties towards those places.
Humans are humans precisely because they are not mere animal like in their behaviors, but have developed families, and communities, and countries, and many other culturally defined attributes through their actions and history.
> ALL modern countries are financially "conquered" in 2025 its been almost 80 years now. What am I supposed to do? Cry like a bitch? This is like having a nervous breakdown because your plant dies. I guess i should just jump off a roof because some president sold my country? This is illogical and irrational
You are supposed to actually do something for real ills that happen to your country and community, just like you would do if they happened to your family, not just me self-satisfied in your own.
Crying like a bitch is practically the same as the option you favor, bend over and accept it like a bitch.
"What it does sound like it the concept of the public individual, that's defined by his presense and recognition in the society and community they live, and not by their own dellusion and fancies"
Sir You are not a public individual or a politician.... This doesn't fit for you. You are a regular joe, thinking you are some major figure lol.
Even if you were, ifyour ideology was based on public acceptance, you would be akin to a Trump/Biden - "If they like me - its right, if they dont - im wrong"
Thats poor decision-making 101. People arent going to like the decisions you make. - When - you have a family you'll understand this. This is the quandary of Men
"but have developed families, and communities, and countries, many other culturally defined attributes through their actions and history"
Thank you - you agree with me - from their actions (present) and history(past) - NOT SOME ECOLOGICAL synergy lol.
"You are supposed to actually do something for real ills that happen to your country and community, just like you would do if they happened to your family, not just me self-satisfied in your own."
This is reactive. The media plays on people who do this. This is why you have a creed - a way of life - a CULTURE - this precedes actions that are calculable by reactive responses.
"Crying like a bitch is practically the same as the option you favor, bend over and accept it like a bitch."
I never said - Bend over and accept it ... You are assuming there are only two routes. What people eat doesnt make me shit. I strategized based on my cultural goals and way of life. Not because of some country creed. This is how "American" germans ended up killing native Germans in WW2
"WE GOTTA FIGHT FOR COUNTRY" - no sit the fuck down and think about what you are doing
As someone who worked in a blue state public education system during the height of wokeism, your Umbridge comparison seems apt. It’s hard to deny the sanctimony of the left.
God. What an annoying time that was to be alive.
However, the right’s growing taste for spectacle, conspiracy, and grievance politics is its own form of unseriousness. If one is looking to reason like an adult, one hardly finds a home on the political right in this country anymore. Think you pretty much glossed over the legion of childish stupidity in Trumpistan. Sure, they don’t talk down to us, but it seems a bit of a stretch to imply that they are more the party of the adults.
Perhaps the real divide in this country is people who prefer a serious, pragmatic politics (usually center left, center right) and those on the far left and the far right who live off a straight diet of outrage and have turned politics into entertainment and/or religion.
People are stupid. Insofar as there is a large percentage of the population that is right wing/Trumpist, there is likely to be a large amount of overlap between the “MAGA” and “stupid” sections of the venn diagram. The difference between them and the leftist managerial HR ladies is that the latter rule us, or at least exert influence over our lives so we are forced to deal with them, whereas the former do not, so you are free to simply disengage and ignore them. That’s what i do, unless I’m having fun dunking on them.
Except that right-wing America isn't remotely as online as left-wing America, so whereas the online Left is actually representative of Democrats, very few real-world right-wing people relate to the stereotypes of the online Right.
I think the reason prefer a straightforward enemy to the smothering safetyism is the former creates internal unity while the latter creates internal chaos. If your choice is submit or die, then it cleanly separates friend from foe, but if the choice is submit or face a series of escalating reprimands than there will be a lot of degradation of where people draw the line and it makes collective identity more difficult to form.
Not sure I’d want a Dumbledore party either, considering he was something of a lying manipulator while being nice to your face kind of person.
I want a Minerva MacGonagall party: discipline in and strength of character, no bullshit, take ownership of your problem solving, asking for help is fine as long as you’re not just waiting for someone to hand you a solution.
I saw similar things with some of my bosses. I had a couple that were always nice and said positive uplighting things, but you couldn't trust them because you know things weren't always good. Hated those bosses, and they never helped people to actually improve and would stab you in the back without notice.
I also had a couple bosses that would confront, and even yell (the horror!) once in a while. Generally I actually learned something from them because they had a point and expected better from me. Very much prefer the honesty and expectations, and criticism if necessary, than the meaningless platitudes. Treating adults as adults is better for everyone.
Right now on right-wing twitter it's like they flick a spinner every day to figure out which individuals or group are next for deportation threats. Robespierre vibes. I miss when they thought of themselves as slighted aristocrats instead of a xenophobic mob. Twitter is poisoning their brain the same way it did for the Democrats back when they owned it.
I clicked like before I read the article because I prefer an honest dictator to a vapid liberal who sucks up to your emotions to try get you on their side. It actually was a good article. Thanks
It's a curious and rarely-noted fact that a LOT of our elites and institutions WANT us infantilized. Bernard Stiegler speculated that consumer capitalism preferred somewhat unformed customers, and the bureaucracy DEFINITELY wants us to be passive and grasping and weak and dependent.
I don't read most 'bigotry' as earnest, or rather I think a lot of it is a self-conscious reaction to feminized speech codes and suffocating political orthodoxies. Even the norm of politeness has disappeared in the places where we usually communicate now.
If we must reduce politics down to a gay fantasy world analogy I think Warhammer 40K works much better, for whatever the flaws with the Imperium of man it's far preferable to a world run by baby sacrificing chaos cultists
Hard agree. Space Racists are awful, but Mork and Gork aren’t conducive to thriving of any kind. There are the Tau I guess but must we actually die of boredom?
I'm gonna cite this article in one that I'm working on right now. I think I've discovered the underlying principle from which Leftism stems... There's something more fundamental at play than just politics and human psychology.
Great article. We need a better reference than the Harry Potter books, though.
"Potter, you dare use my own slurs against me?"
This is adjacent to the difference between Reddit and Twitter. Reddit feels infantalizing, the consensus seeking, the moderation and downvote system makes it all so childish, like a platform run by hall monitors. Twitter is rough and can be brutal but it feels like a real place. I'll interact with the same political position on both platforms and come out of Reddit infuriated yet be mildly amused on Twitter.
Redditer: “One upvoot for you, my good sir.”
Twitter Enjoyer: “How about you KYS?”
FACTS.
Rubbish. Both reward middle school snark.
I would downvote this comment if I could.
😢
The old tumblr/4chan divide
> Sure, I could give a long winded explanation about the different types of evil — the abstract evil that a straightforward villain presents (Voldemort), versus the more relatable form of evil that’s embedded within the confines of a given bureaucratic system (Umbridge)
Isn't it basically the unchecked patriarchy and unchecked matriarchy - especially in today's failure mode when the male and female social forces aren't balanced, but take opposite poles and fight each other?
Yep it’s the frat house versus the long house, baby
The origins of the term Patriarchy is not rule by men but rule by fathers. This necessarily implies a focus on building and promoting the longevity of families. Much of the worst aspects of men come out when men are disconnected from an obligation towards their families or when good fathers are absent
There’s very little actually patriarchal about the frat house
The long house isn't very matriarchical either - since the mothering there becomes an abstract role, untied to the concrete biological reality of motherhood. There are matriarchical societies that still retain family units, the counterpart to the patriarchy you describe.
But frathouse/longhouse are good enough proxy words for the resulting social order when patriarchy and matriarchy turn into abstract and are disconnected from a concrete family and the responsibilities within it (after all, the girl boss, the "cool aunt", the blue haired pronoun girl, are also putting off motherhood, often altogether).
Agree, but at least the patriarchy doesn’t take the moral high ground and elevate scolding to intergalactic scale. Even Progs I’m inclined to agree with cannot resist the urge to “educate” me.
~~Jason Pargin puts it best in his most recent article:~~
As Jesus, and Buddah and about every other religion has always said:
There is one person, one factor in this entire world which you have absolute control over.
Yourself.
So you can sit there and try to spend endless energy and effort to sway, cajole, beat, torment, whatever other people to do what you want.
Or you can get started on "being the change you want to see in the world."
Yeah it's a cliche. But it's still true.
And it's still not very productive. You can change yourself all you want, but unless others do the same it means nothing.
Which is why also Jesus (if not Buddha too) gave sermons, gathered disciples, send them to change people, and established churches and so on.
Jesus even called his first disciples to become "fishers of men," meaning to help bring people to faith.
And that's for things that are based on character and behavior. There are things based on crude reality that no amount of "changing yourself" helps. Like if your country is conquered, changing yourself ain't gonna free it.
What are you going to do if someone is trying to conquer your country?
Pick up a gun? Fight them?
Well how are you going to do that if you've never operated a firearm before? How much of a fight are you going to put up if you're out of shape?
It all hast to start somewhere and it always starts with YOU. Get your shit together, and then you'll be in the position where others will LISTEN to you because they want to follow your example. (like religious leaders)
Because if there's one thing the Internet has plenty of - is sermons. Everybody thinks they can lead - what makes a leader is how much one has mastered themself. (oh yeah, also a common teaching of Jesus - probably Buddah too)
Spot on my guy.
The stories of yeshua(jesus) have been corrupted and do not align with the religion of his time even in spirit
> Well how are you going to do that if you've never operated a firearm before? How much of a fight are you going to put up if you're out of shape?
Millions of laypeople in the civillian led resistance in World War II (and countless other historical ocassions) have answered those questions. You do what you have to do. Doesn't matter if you weren't trained, it's not rocket science to use a gun, and even if it was, you do your best and there are several ways to help.
Same for whetever else: you don't need to reach englightenment to organize, do something good, and convince others to do it too.
This is weak. The problem with this is you arent finding confidence in yourself... your confidence comes from validation of others in yourself.
Why do you care what others do, go elsewhere and build your own tribe
> The problem with this is you arent finding confidence in yourself...
No, the problem is not reading what I wrote: "There are things based on crude reality that no amount of "changing yourself" helps. Like if your country is conquered, changing yourself ain't gonna free it."
> your confidence comes from validation of others in yourself.
That's where confidence should come from if it's objectively justified: others validating yourself. Else it's unwarranted solipsistic self-dellusion.
This sounds like a Zoomer from social media who lives for "likes".
No human belongs to any geographic location. Country names and lines are political - not spiritual. No human has a "country". ALL modern countries are financially "conquered" in 2025 its been almost 80 years now. What am I supposed to do? Cry like a bitch? This is like having a nervous breakdown because your plant dies. I guess i should just jump off a roof because some president sold my country? This is illogical and irrational
your confidence should NEVER come from the validation of others. Nobody has to like what you do; many won't because they haven't done it or can't do it. It seems like you haven't gained any real confidence yet... so I'll give you the key.
Confidence stems from two key factors: a history of completing tasks in the past and present, and having an inner belief in yourself (Yeshua is a prime example). Anyone who has come back from loss or has a series of wins will tell you this.
Waiting for a highly volatile human to validate you leads to highly unhealthy behavior—"showing off" for people, begging for attention, doing stupid things to impress unimpressive people. Get it together, kid. Stop tethering your fate to people around you. CREATE your own path
> This sounds like a Zoomer from social media who lives for "likes".
That's to people whose only points of reference is pop culture generational divisions and modern fads.
What it does sound like it the concept of the public individual, that's defined by his presense and recognition in the society and community they live, and not by their own dellusion and fancies. The standard, that is, for societies before social media, and before stupid self-help gurus.
> No human belongs to any geographic location. Country names and lines are political - not spiritual.
On the contrary. It's animals that don't belong to any geographic location - at best, they have places that are ecologically fit for them, but no real feelings and ties towards those places.
Humans are humans precisely because they are not mere animal like in their behaviors, but have developed families, and communities, and countries, and many other culturally defined attributes through their actions and history.
> ALL modern countries are financially "conquered" in 2025 its been almost 80 years now. What am I supposed to do? Cry like a bitch? This is like having a nervous breakdown because your plant dies. I guess i should just jump off a roof because some president sold my country? This is illogical and irrational
You are supposed to actually do something for real ills that happen to your country and community, just like you would do if they happened to your family, not just me self-satisfied in your own.
Crying like a bitch is practically the same as the option you favor, bend over and accept it like a bitch.
If public validation is the source of confidence, who validates the first person in a community before there is a community
"What it does sound like it the concept of the public individual, that's defined by his presense and recognition in the society and community they live, and not by their own dellusion and fancies"
Sir You are not a public individual or a politician.... This doesn't fit for you. You are a regular joe, thinking you are some major figure lol.
Even if you were, ifyour ideology was based on public acceptance, you would be akin to a Trump/Biden - "If they like me - its right, if they dont - im wrong"
Thats poor decision-making 101. People arent going to like the decisions you make. - When - you have a family you'll understand this. This is the quandary of Men
"but have developed families, and communities, and countries, many other culturally defined attributes through their actions and history"
Thank you - you agree with me - from their actions (present) and history(past) - NOT SOME ECOLOGICAL synergy lol.
"You are supposed to actually do something for real ills that happen to your country and community, just like you would do if they happened to your family, not just me self-satisfied in your own."
This is reactive. The media plays on people who do this. This is why you have a creed - a way of life - a CULTURE - this precedes actions that are calculable by reactive responses.
"Crying like a bitch is practically the same as the option you favor, bend over and accept it like a bitch."
I never said - Bend over and accept it ... You are assuming there are only two routes. What people eat doesnt make me shit. I strategized based on my cultural goals and way of life. Not because of some country creed. This is how "American" germans ended up killing native Germans in WW2
"WE GOTTA FIGHT FOR COUNTRY" - no sit the fuck down and think about what you are doing
exactly
As someone who worked in a blue state public education system during the height of wokeism, your Umbridge comparison seems apt. It’s hard to deny the sanctimony of the left.
God. What an annoying time that was to be alive.
However, the right’s growing taste for spectacle, conspiracy, and grievance politics is its own form of unseriousness. If one is looking to reason like an adult, one hardly finds a home on the political right in this country anymore. Think you pretty much glossed over the legion of childish stupidity in Trumpistan. Sure, they don’t talk down to us, but it seems a bit of a stretch to imply that they are more the party of the adults.
Perhaps the real divide in this country is people who prefer a serious, pragmatic politics (usually center left, center right) and those on the far left and the far right who live off a straight diet of outrage and have turned politics into entertainment and/or religion.
People are stupid. Insofar as there is a large percentage of the population that is right wing/Trumpist, there is likely to be a large amount of overlap between the “MAGA” and “stupid” sections of the venn diagram. The difference between them and the leftist managerial HR ladies is that the latter rule us, or at least exert influence over our lives so we are forced to deal with them, whereas the former do not, so you are free to simply disengage and ignore them. That’s what i do, unless I’m having fun dunking on them.
That’s fair.
Except that right-wing America isn't remotely as online as left-wing America, so whereas the online Left is actually representative of Democrats, very few real-world right-wing people relate to the stereotypes of the online Right.
"Perhaps the real divide in this country is people who prefer a serious, pragmatic politics (usually center left, center right)"
Your "serious, pragmatic politics" have lead us to ruin.
Your apology isn't worth much in the face of the ruin we're facing
I think the reason prefer a straightforward enemy to the smothering safetyism is the former creates internal unity while the latter creates internal chaos. If your choice is submit or die, then it cleanly separates friend from foe, but if the choice is submit or face a series of escalating reprimands than there will be a lot of degradation of where people draw the line and it makes collective identity more difficult to form.
Not sure I’d want a Dumbledore party either, considering he was something of a lying manipulator while being nice to your face kind of person.
I want a Minerva MacGonagall party: discipline in and strength of character, no bullshit, take ownership of your problem solving, asking for help is fine as long as you’re not just waiting for someone to hand you a solution.
I saw similar things with some of my bosses. I had a couple that were always nice and said positive uplighting things, but you couldn't trust them because you know things weren't always good. Hated those bosses, and they never helped people to actually improve and would stab you in the back without notice.
I also had a couple bosses that would confront, and even yell (the horror!) once in a while. Generally I actually learned something from them because they had a point and expected better from me. Very much prefer the honesty and expectations, and criticism if necessary, than the meaningless platitudes. Treating adults as adults is better for everyone.
Right now on right-wing twitter it's like they flick a spinner every day to figure out which individuals or group are next for deportation threats. Robespierre vibes. I miss when they thought of themselves as slighted aristocrats instead of a xenophobic mob. Twitter is poisoning their brain the same way it did for the Democrats back when they owned it.
"Will things ever change? Will there ever be a Dumbledore party?"
Dumbledore was actually pretty shady. I think he might be the equivalent of the unelected Deep State.
I will never forgive the Umbridges for ruining rainbows and glitter.
Sensible people would rather be punched in the face than stabbed in the back.
I clicked like before I read the article because I prefer an honest dictator to a vapid liberal who sucks up to your emotions to try get you on their side. It actually was a good article. Thanks
It's a curious and rarely-noted fact that a LOT of our elites and institutions WANT us infantilized. Bernard Stiegler speculated that consumer capitalism preferred somewhat unformed customers, and the bureaucracy DEFINITELY wants us to be passive and grasping and weak and dependent.
I don't read most 'bigotry' as earnest, or rather I think a lot of it is a self-conscious reaction to feminized speech codes and suffocating political orthodoxies. Even the norm of politeness has disappeared in the places where we usually communicate now.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/the-war-on-norms
If we must reduce politics down to a gay fantasy world analogy I think Warhammer 40K works much better, for whatever the flaws with the Imperium of man it's far preferable to a world run by baby sacrificing chaos cultists
Hard agree. Space Racists are awful, but Mork and Gork aren’t conducive to thriving of any kind. There are the Tau I guess but must we actually die of boredom?
I'm gonna cite this article in one that I'm working on right now. I think I've discovered the underlying principle from which Leftism stems... There's something more fundamental at play than just politics and human psychology.
Great article. We need a better reference than the Harry Potter books, though.
It's a universal referent which is why it works