causticus: trees (Default)
This is semi-copypasta from somewhere else. I cleaned up the formatting a bit and added in some clarifications.

1. Be aware that when someone accuses you of a thought-crime like racism, sexism, ___phobia, ect., they are trying to silence you with fear. They know deep down that without bullying tactics and other underhanded methods, their insane cult-like ideology has no legs to stand on. Thus they must drum up fear and whip people into a frenzy to distract from the obvious (that their ideas are awful and stupid).

2. Team up. When you're accused of thought crimes, the intention is to ruin you, so "share the risk." When someone you know is falsely accused of thought crimes, and really -- all accusations of thought crimes are false -- get their back. Cowardice only enables and emboldens the mob.

3. Do not give in, do not back down. When you know the allegations against you are unfounded, yet they keep coming, stay strong and refuse to capitulate. Make your attacker work much harder than they are willing to. Once the bar for entry in the 'Cancellation Olympics' is raised, the canceling coward slinks away and moved onto an easier target.

The cancel mobs have become increasingly called out as more and more people become hip to what cancel culture is. And those on the receiving end of these endless, bizarre, and unclear accusations, in service to social justice ideology (neo-Marxism), will not stand for it anymore.
causticus: trees (Default)
Note: this list isn't originally my own creation, rather I adapted it from a post on a libertarian blog and modified some of the wording to fit a more general organization description.

1) Leftist ideas are introduced into a growing organization or movement through a few vocal members. Leftists are able to penetrate and gain influence in the organization according to O’Sullivan’s Law, which states that any organization or enterprise that is not expressly right wing will become left wing over time.

2) Through heavy use of emotional manipulation and guilt-tripping, more and more members, and eventually entire affiliate groups, and larger networks of interrelated groups become leftist. The founding organizational, aspirational, and ethical principles are no longer applied. Free speech, open discourse, or differences of opinion will not be tolerated. Non-leftists will be labeled and ostracized.

3) Conservative and moderate leadership acts only after leftists begin taking over leadership positions, and the Marxist claim ownership of the organization and call the conservative, moderate, and otherwise insufficiently-leftist members “entryists” or even claiming they are alien or hostile to the original purpose of the group, when in fact this is a clear case of projection.

4) Initial resistance gives way to retreat, as conservative and moderate members decide to cut their losses and leave the organization for a new and smaller splinter group free of the leftist elements they just fled. The general public begins to associate the original (now-subverted) organization with leftism in general.

5) The new splinter group expands and eventually starts to grow and prosper.

6) Meanwhile, the successfully-subverted original organization hemorrhages membership, as there are not enough leftists interested in the founding purpose of the original organization, nor are there enough leftists interested in the founding purpose of the original organization to keep it alive after the conservative and moderate exodus.

7) As the conservatives and moderates re-organize and grow in strength, the newly burgeoning organization becomes the new target for leftist subversion.

8) The cycle repeats.
causticus: trees (Default)
To anyone who has been paying attention and isn't a member of the intersectional zombie cult, I would say it's rather obvious fact that most of the civil rights issues have been re-branded as "social justice" issues, were already solved many decades ago, as least as far as the legal system is concerned. Yes, once upon a time in certain parts of the US, a black man caught performing the high crime* of walking through the wrong part of town at the wrong time, just might have been beaten to a bloody pulp by an angry, bigoted mob. But thanks to many civil rights struggles, this is most-gladly a thing of the past and any such incidents of that kind occurring today are statistical anomalies, despite what the mendacious corporate media narratives being pushed today might say. Any many other civil rights victories have been achieved in decades past. Gays can pretty much go about their business without being violently harassed or bullied. Women can vote, serve in public live, and are free to pursue whatever career opportunity they so desire. I could go on for miles with regard to other issues too.

Of course many of these movements became infiltrated by leftist political activists and agitators, despite the fact that the people who founded many of these efforts were regular people who had very tangible and legitimate reasons for fighting against the government-mandated injustices of their time (i.e. actual systemic injustice). So what are leftist agitators in this current era do when they have run out of genuine causes to give their lives meaning? Fundamentally, I'm of the opinion that all leftism is fueled by angry grievances against the what is perceived to be "the system." When the legitimate grievances are addressed, the leftist runs out of issues to incessantly whine about. Thus they have to invent new causes (or simply re-animate old causes) to carry on the "struggle" (against reality??)

On the psychological level, I would say that the reanimation of case-closed causes compare is comparable to Necromancy. It's the act of conjuring up a ghost army of past injustices so they can pretend that whatever it is they are whining about has some sort of greater purpose than their own psycho-spiritual deficiencies.

*Yes, this is obvious sarcasm. Because of the current climate we're now in, I have to throw in these silly disclaimers. Because some people are unable to suss out sarcasm in written form, or deliberately choose to take an ultra-literal interpretation of the written material in question.
causticus: trees (Default)
The American Vedic Spiritual Teacher Sri Acharya coined the term, "Radical Universalism"...which is the fallacy-ridden new age sentimentality which blindly asserts (more like, passive-aggressively whines) that all religions and spiritual paths are of equal merit and teach the same thing, everything in general is the same, because...like we're all just one anyway, and thus the act of critically discerning one thing from another is just plain MEAN and INSENSITIVE, yada yada yada. Radical Universalism is in fact an insidious doctrine that has proven quite useful in neutering mass consciousness and thus making it much easier for the sociopathic and amoral elites to further mentally (and physically) enslave the masses. When you're no longer allowed to judge one thing from another (except for differentiating members of the equalitarian cult from heretics/apostates, and other ideological enemies), there is no effective way to even identify your oppressors, much less fight back against them. Abrahamism, Marxism and New Age BS are all just different types of sheep-herding memetic technology.

A Video here elaborating on what exactly Radical Universalism means:

causticus: trees (Default)
Great summary on this colossally stupid idea [Marx's Labor Theory of Value] that just can't seem to die. From Z:
The idea is garbage. It's a waste of time. If I paint something and it takes me eight weeks to paint it and complete it, should it be worth the same as something that Da Vinci painted in an eight week span, when we used the same materials? Well, no. Because my painting would not be nearly as great. He might have used the same amount of labor as I did, but his product is undoubtedly superior. The Labor Theory of Value completely ignores the quality of the product. I won't pay an apprentice plumber at the same rate as I'd pay a master plumber - because the master plumber would do the job in a shorter amount of time and with a greater success rate. He shouldn't earn less because he is more capable. To the contrary, he should earn significantly more because he is competent.

This same criticism of Marxism can be made all over. People are individually different. They have different skill sets, and each of them will produce a different quantity or quality of something in a different amount of time. To ignore this is to ignore the fact that we are working with living beings. Marxism assumes that the individual is equal to any other individual in terms of capability. This is simple not true. Go look at some sports stats and it is clear as day. In 28 minutes Stephen Curry can score 47 points on 15/26 from the field, 8/14 from three, 9/9 from the free throw line, with 7 assists, 4 rebounds, 3 steals and two turnovers. In those same 28 minutes Lu Williams might score 26 points on 10/26 from the field, 3/9 from three, 3/4 from the free throw line, 0 assists, 4 rebounds, 0 steals, and four turnovers. Should these players labor be paid the same? They took the same amount of shots. Perhaps they possessed the ball for the same amount of time.

The fact is people are different. Some people are better at things than others. To ignore that is to be ignorant, and to ignore that on a large scale it to be self destructively ignorant. Supply and Demand is flawed, but it certainly is not this flawed. Because, at least with supply and demand, the people demanding get what they want at a price they are consentualy willing to pay and the people supplying are consenting to a price point that they too feel is far judging by the market. In a LToV "market", people have no idea what they will get, just how much work went into it. And, people have no reason to improve at what they're doing, because if they do they will not benefit from it.


Any ideology that blindly assumes that everyone is the same is plain evil and an affront to Natural Law. Nothing but terrible things happen from very the moment there is any serious effort to implement Socialism/Communism in the real world.
causticus: trees (Default)
An internet comment from SCM:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Unlike traditional Marxism that focuses on economics, Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. Cultural Marxists absurdly deny the biological reality of gender and race and argue that gender and race are “social constructs”.

Nonetheless, Cultural Marxists support the race-based identity politics of non-whites. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms and anti-male feminism, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries.

Cultural Marxists have promoted the idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology. Critics of Cultural Marxism have maintained that Cultural Marxists intend to commit genocide against white people through mass non-white immigration, assimilation, transracial adoption and miscegenation.


This is a pretty typical summary of "Cultural Marxism" we might expect from a person on the Dissident Right who can coherently string a few paragraphs together. Except that, few if any people actually self-identify as either this label or the above list of criteria in any sort of conscious manner. Rather, it's a laundry list of agenda items which Cultural Leftist aligned institutions have been pushing for the past several decades. The majority of people, regardless of their ideological leanings, do not willingly embrace this entire list. As a clear example, just go back 10 years in time and you'll find that the average self-identified "Progressive" would not admit to signing onto all that stuff. Many would even disavow a number of those items. However, many of the things listed above are indeed what the current crop of intersectional cultists are indeed advocating, but (in my view) more as "NPC" ideological automatons rather than fully-willing agents. How many SJWs today would willingly admit to holding at least 90% of those positions?
causticus: trees (Default)
In no particular order:

-(insert Leftist's boogeyman-fixation)__ist/ism
-Decent Human Being
-People/Women of Color
-Garbage Human
-Diversity
-Bigot
-Equality
-Gender Equality
-Multicultural/ism
-Ignorant
-Progress
-___(Insert victim group) Rights
-Misogyny
-Cisgender
-Trigger/ed
-Problematic
-Nazi
-Hate
-Hate Speech
-Silencing/Erasing
-Allies
-Marginalized
-Privilege/d (based on "oppressor" group status)
-Violence
-Consent
-Woke
-I Literally Can't Even
-Science
-Facts
-Inclusive/ness/ivity
-Diversity
-Empowerment
-Evolve(d)
-Toxic Masculinity
-Shitty Opinions
-Wow, Just Wow
-Patriarchy
-Rape Culture
-Rape Apology/ist
-Microaggression
-Social Construct
-Nonbinary
-Genderfluid
-Critical____(insert whatever BS) Theory
-Body Positive(ity)
-Safe Space
-(anything not hetero/white/male)__phobia/ic
-Mansplaining
-Manspreading
-Genocide(al)
-Words Hurt
-Hurtful/Harmful
-Internalized____ (insert "problematic" condition)
-Normalize/d
-Dominant group
-____(Insert group)Voices
-Inappropriate
-We need to have a conversation
-Gender Identity/ies
-Wrong side of history
-Inevitable
-Troglodyte
-Hetero-normative
-White Supremacy
-Slavery
-Institutional___ (Insert __ism of choice)

------

This is by no means complete and I'll probably end up adding in more as they come to mind.
Page generated Jun. 16th, 2025 07:54 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios