Luke Ford

From the Chateau:

Americans are fat of waist and fat on feels. Commenter Tark Marg at Sailer’s coins a perfect term for the psychopathology afflicting a sizable number of WEIRDO (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic, and outbred) Whites.

Unless the causative factors behind this PC lunacy are clearly explained, it’ll be impossible to effectively counter it. Here is my attempt to do so.

As I see it, the West is suffering from a condition I’ll call empathobesity.

For a long time, an egalitarian, empathetic impulse was an asset in the West as it created an ever expanding educated and productive class of citizens by expanding political franchise from monarchs to lords to wealthy commoners to middle class men to all men to all adults, followed by welfare and universal healthcare etc.
To illustrate using the example of England, starting with the Magna Carta in 1215, we have the English civil war in 1642, the glorious revolution in 1688, Habeas Corpus, the reform acts of the 19th century, the representation of the people acts of the early 20th, feminism, Welfare, the sexual revolution, mass migration, gay rights, animal rights, transgender rights and so on.

Initially these steps have had a positive payoff as they expanded the class of educated people able to undertake scientific and industrial progress. This is why the scientific and industrial revolutions occurred in England where also we see the first diffusion of political power with the Magna Carta in 1215.

Over time, this empathetic, egalitarianist impulse has calcified into a dogma. Probably in the early to mid 20th century, this dogma has run into diminishing and even negative returns.

Thus, the extension of empathy to adherents of a hostile religion is likely to be a major drag, not gain, a point well proven by this incident. The mass importation of low skilled illegal immigrants will not enhance the economic welfare of the recipient nation.

The feminist movement initially increased the pool of educated workers, but by eschewing reproduction, have condemned the West to declining human and financial resources just as the mass of poorly educated and integrated aliens, especially in Europe, starts to spike.

Yet, like an obese person compelled by instinct to eat in excess, the West cannot shake off its pathological empathy (hence empathobesity).

I’ve made this argument in more detail at tarkmarg.blogspot.com. Please have a look and see if you find it convincing.

As portmanteaus go, empathobesity is a term of art. The concept isn’t all that new; the idea of NW European White altruism being hijacked (“hacked”) by less empathic races rendering the condition pathological to Whites has been discussed all over the alt-right, as well as at your ‘umbly appointed Chateau. Empathobesity could help explain why the Equalist Elite are sounding more extremist about their pet causes, like Open Borders.

The intellectual diagnosis is necessary, but revolutions need slogans, banners, and rhetorical shivs. The next time a shitlib acts up in the usual shitlibby manner, tell it that it suffers from empathobesity. Advise therapy or medical intervention to fix their problem.

How ironic that the fortuitous evolution of mind which propelled NW European Whites to the heights of art, science, and civilization is the same unique endowment that may be the White race’s undoing.

From the blog EverythingsAProblem:

Some people think it’s cute when people lay in bed with their loved ones, holding each other in their arms. This act is commonly referred to as “spooning.”

Other people—enlightened people—realize that spooning is a deeply problematic way that power structures propagate themselves. Fortunately, such enlightened people are dominant in the media and can explain to us how we should be Good:

The more I reflect on spooning during my sojourn, the more I have come to see it as a terrible idea, one that’s fraught both physically and ideologically.

Yes, thank you! I’m glad someone is finally addressing this. 

Big spoons are manly and will take care of you (provided you let them use you to take care of themselves); little spoons are fragile, passive creatures that need to be held and kept safe. This, of course, is fundamentally a sexist arrangement, one that casts the big spoon as “the man” and the little spoon as “the woman.”

wow really makes you think

To say that this power imbalance is built into all acts of spooning—whichever the sexes engaged—is not, I think, an overstatement.

Not only is it not an overstatement, it’s the truest thing I’ve ever read. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that the government should probably step in and begin educating our children about the ideologically unsound nature of spooning. Is it really too much to ask for a chapter in sex ed books on this topic?

I give the transgression of sleeping next to your loved one in an ideologically fraught way three problematics.

Comment to Steve Sailer:

Steve, have you ever investigated/considered that one utilitarian element of Obamacare was to hurry the exit of old white guys who vote republican?

My father is 85, Catholic, former Marine, and general grumpy conservative old guy. He had a stroke two weeks ago, and the family is amazed at how many insurance firewalls we’ve bumped up against that were not there ten years ago when my 92 year old grandmother required similar care.

It being the election year that is is, it occurred to me that yes, the left would certainly like my dad to be gone by election day.

* Sarah Palin, whatever else you think about her, was right about the Death Panels.

Rationing care, especially for the about to die old folks, is the only way to control health care costs.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Steve, the NYT notices Racial Identity, and Its Hostilities, Are on the Rise in American Politics.

I’m not sure if I’m imagining a tone to the article but I get a sense of disapproval inherent in the reporting regarding the failure of white Americans to transform into the New Soviet Man, as seen by the NYT elite. This likely arises from the unexamined positions incorporated into the writing. Here’s an example.

Such voters are nostalgic for the country they lived in 50 years ago, when non-Hispanic whites made up more than 83 percent of the population. Today, their share has shrunk to 62 percent as demographic change has transformed the United States into a nation where others have a shot at political power.

Well, how did that happen? Was it like a hurrican hitting the coast or did this demographic transformation come about because of policy choices?

Their fear is understandable. In general, the concerns of Hispanic and black American voters are often different from those of white voters. But the reaction of whites who are struggling economically raises the specter of an outright political war along racial and ethnic lines over the distribution of resources and opportunities.

Why do blacks and Hispanics like Big Government? Because Big Government is the enforcer in the racial spoils game, where wealth and opportunity are taken from whites and trasnferred to NAMS. That’s not a problem for the NYT so long as whites are willing to be tax farmed but once they resist, then we’re heading into a racial war. I suppose that when the Nazis rolled into Norway and didn’t face Norwegians in a house to house war that there was actually no war taking place, never mind the Nazi war on Norway, so long as Norway wasn’t taking the fight to Germany there was no war. Or something.

The article does a good job of documenting how diversity destroys communities but the writer leaves a lot of points out of the article such that the current regime cannot be scrutinized, why is “Diversity our strength” when the points he cites demonstrate otherwise? One thing is clear though, whites are the culprits for supporting Trump.

* When the UK law criminalising homosexual acts between consenting adults was repealed in 1967, the speeches in favour of the bill were basically “These are sad people who can’t help their inclinations, it’s cruel to lock them up if no one’s harmed“. Opponents warned in apocalyptic terms that homosexuals wouldn’t be content with legality but would in time demand full cultural equality – and those in favour said “don’t be ridiculous – that’ll never happen“.

But not even the most fervent speaker on either side could have imagined that less than 50 years later a Tory MP (and chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee) would make a speech in the house about how he regularly liked to inhale a chemical (which relaxes the anal sphincter), and how banning said chemical was “fantastically stupid“.