* When Peter came back at the end and opposed Doovid about white identity and the definition of what/who is white, I got a thrill how strong he was to assert that whites have a right to a homeland and had no more tolerance for the deconstructionist BS aimed to confuse and undermine white people. If every white conservative who claims to be on the right took Peter’s hard-ass position, we could take our country back. Peter’s attitude was, is, and forever shall be true Americana that most every white had in the past. We beat back the American Indians, Mexicans and British and took our place on this continent. It’s not a question of rights, but of will. I view today’s political leaders on both sides as traitors to me and my heritage. No politician speaks to me or advocated for me for decades – except Pat Buchanan.
* Greetings, LF:
Your post on the New AltRight, that won’t bear that name and will eschew the legacy of failed movements and the symbolism of failed (alien) movements is moving.
I will note, when you harken to Egypt and the people leaving Egypt, that some (I.e. Benjamin Franklin) thought this would be the right imagery for our Great Seal.
I will also note that God, through Moses, did not inflict ten blessings upon the Egyptians. The Egyptians were smote with ten plagues, and experienced them as such: plagues. I am sure we can come up with an argument for why this was an expression of love. I tend to doubt Moses hated the Egyptians (he was, after all, raised among them, in their highest court). It is certain that God does not hate.
However, the Hebrew people did not win their freedom by showering the Egyptians with benefits. They won liberation by the infliction of plagues. Penalties. I point this out not to refute you, but, rather, as a question. Is there a way to square this circle? I too do not want to be part of a movement that is primarily motivated by its resentments.
Likewise, the Greeks did not win their freedom by embracing the Persians invaders and welcoming them.
The Doovid Solution of just being happy under multiculturalism misses the fact that multiculturalism was not invented as a doctrine (and invented it was) to primarily benefit marginal groups (which is why those at the head of the movement don’t care when they actually do not prosper under it; “DR3ing” is thus beside the point. Benefiting those groups was never the real goal). It was primarily invented as a movement and ideology to disempower, disposes, despoil, and ultimately “eliminate whiteness,” as is increasingly openly talked about even in the mainstream. So this option of mutual love and inclusion will not be some kind of salvation. Laying back and enjoying it is not an option.
* So has Baked disowned the alt right? I’m seeing in chat that he banned people that were JQing and he hangs out w/ non whites so doesn’t seem to be fanatical about white identity.
Posted inAlt Right|Comments Off on Halsey English On The JQ
An expert says it is ‘xenophobic’ to talk about non-native plants as menaces
Fred Pearce says the effects of Japanese knotweed – which strangles other plants – and invasive small animals like grey squirrels are exaggerated grossly
There are fears that the plant, which can grow 8in a day, is difficult to eradicate and can knock thousands off house prices
To gardeners, Japanese knotweed and other foreign invaders are a menace.
But an environmental expert says that when we talk about non-native species in such terms, we’re just being ‘xenophobic’.
Writer Fred Pearce says the effects of the knotweed – which strangles other plants – and invasive creatures such as grey squirrels and foreign beavers are being exaggerated.
By comparison, our own native problem species, from over-grazing red deer to nettles and brambles, are not seen as such a threat because they are British, he says.
Mr Pearce is set to give a talk at the Edinburgh Science Festival arguing that foreign animals are being ‘demonised’. Grey squirrels, introduced to Britain in the 19th century, have wiped out large numbers of native red squirrels because they carry a pox which is harmless to them but deadly to reds.
But Mr Pearce said whether British squirrels were grey or red made no difference to the natural world. Speaking ahead of his talk on Thursday, he said: ‘If you look at the language used to describe these “invasive species”, it is very xenophobic and suggests that anything foreign is bad. It is terrifyingly similar to the language which can be used about immigrants invading the country.’
By comparison, our own native problem species, from over-grazing red deer to nettles and brambles, are not seen as such a threat because they are British, he says.
Mr Pearce is set to give a talk at the Edinburgh Science Festival arguing that foreign animals are being ‘demonised’. Grey squirrels, introduced to Britain in the 19th century, have wiped out large numbers of native red squirrels because they carry a pox which is harmless to them but deadly to reds.
But Mr Pearce said whether British squirrels were grey or red made no difference to the natural world. Speaking ahead of his talk on Thursday, he said: ‘If you look at the language used to describe these “invasive species”, it is very xenophobic and suggests that anything foreign is bad. It is terrifyingly similar to the language which can be used about immigrants invading the country.’
Posted inDiversity|Comments Off on Daily Mail: Fear of Japanese knotweed which strangles other plants is ‘xenophobic’, says environmental expert
Please join me in the prayer for an open mind. God, please set aside everything I think I know about you, the Bible, the Alt Right, race, religion, myself, my brokenness for an open mind and a new experience of the Bible, the Alt Right, race, religion, myself, and most of all of You.
The new Alt Right is forming in this chat room. The new Alt Right will be God centered, Bible centered. It won’t be called the Alt Right. Its adherents will be known as Americans, Australian, Englishmen… It won’t be a political movement. It will be a spiritual movement. It won’t hate its enemies. It won’t have enemies… It will seek no controversy. It will only seek to be of service…
Lord make me an instrument of your peace
Where there is hatred let me sow love
Where there is injury, pardon
Where there is doubt, faith
Where there is despair, hope
Where there is darkness, light
And where there is sadness, joy
O divine master grant that I may
not so much seek to be consoled as to console
to be understood as to understand
To be loved as to love
For it is in giving that we receive
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned
And it’s in dying that we are born to eternal life
The people who oppose us are sick people who are constitutionally incapable of being honest… We will try to help them where we can. We won’t flame them. We won’t hate them. The new Alt Right will be prosperous. The new Alt Right will marry and have many children. The new Alt Right will set aside ego and self-destruction and hate and symbols of failed mid-century movements for a new approach of love and service.
Swallowing the red pill must enable people to have better relationships with their family and friends and community and college and profession… It won’t discombobulate. It will enlighten and bring serenity and peace. There won’t be hate for outsiders… There will be love and service. If swallowing the red pill doesn’t make you more prosperous, you’ve done something wrong and you need to start again…
Something is happening in this chat room; something is happening in our world. And you know, if I were standing at the beginning of time, with the possibility of taking a kind of general and panoramic view of the whole of human history up to now, and the Almighty said to me, “Luke, which age would you like to live in?” I would take my mental flight by Egypt and I would watch God’s children in their magnificent trek from the dark dungeons of Egypt through, or rather across the Red Sea, through the wilderness on toward the promised land. And in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn’t stop there.
I would move on by Greece and take my mind to Mount Olympus. And I would see Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Euripides and Aristophanes assembled around the Parthenon. And I would watch them around the Parthenon as they discussed the great and eternal issues of reality. But I wouldn’t stop there.
I would go on, even to the great heyday of the Roman Empire. And I would see developments around there, through various emperors and leaders. But I wouldn’t stop there.
I would even come up to the day of the Renaissance, and get a quick picture of all that the Renaissance did for the cultural and aesthetic life of man. But I wouldn’t stop there.
I would even go by the way that the man for whom I am named had his habitat. And I would watch Martin Luther as he tacked his ninety-five theses on the door at the church of Wittenberg. But I wouldn’t stop there.
I would come on up even to 1863, and watch a vacillating President by the name of Abraham Lincoln finally come to the conclusion that he had to sign the Emancipation Proclamation. But I wouldn’t stop there.
I would even come up to the early thirties, and see a man grappling with the problems of the bankruptcy of his nation. And come with an eloquent cry that we have nothing to fear but “fear itself.” But I wouldn’t stop there.
Strangely enough, I would turn to the Almighty, and say, “If you allow me to live just a few years in the second half of the 20th century, I will be happy.”
Now that’s a strange statement to make, because the world is all messed up. The nation is sick. Trouble is in the land; confusion all around. That’s a strange statement. But I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough can you see the stars. And I see God working in this period of the 21st century in a way that men, in some strange way, are responding.
Something is happening in our world. The masses of people are rising up. And wherever they are assembled today, whether they are in Johannesburg, South Africa; Nairobi, Kenya; Accra, Ghana; New York City; Atlanta, Georgia; Jackson, Mississippi; or Memphis, Tennessee — the cry is always the same: “We want to be free.”
And another reason that I’m happy to live in this period is that we have been forced to a point where we are going to have to grapple with the problems that men have been trying to grapple with through history, but the demands didn’t force them to do it. Survival demands that we grapple with them. Men, for years now, have been talking about war and peace. But now, no longer can they just talk about it. It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world; it’s nonviolence or nonexistence. That is where we are today.
And also in the human rights revolution, if something isn’t done, and done in a hurry, to bring the people who created first world civilization the possibility to continue it, if it is not okay to be white, the whole world is doomed. Now, I’m just happy that God has allowed me to live in this period to see what is unfolding. And I’m happy that He’s allowed me to be in this stream.
We mean business now, and we are determined to gain our rightful place in God’s world.
And that’s all this whole thing is about. We aren’t engaged in any negative protest and in any negative arguments with anybody. We are saying that we are determined to be men. We are determined to be people. We are saying — We are saying that we are God’s children. And that we are God’s children, we don’t have to live like we are forced to live.
Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It means that we’ve got to stay together. We’ve got to stay together and maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh’s court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that’s the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity.
Secondly, let us keep the issues where they are. The issue is injustice. The issue is refusal of free assembly and free speech and freedom of association…
Now we’re going to stream again, and we’ve got to stream again, in order to put the issue where it is supposed to be — and force everybody to see that there are hundred of God’s children here suffering from the poz, going through dark and dreary nights wondering how this thing is going to come out. That’s the issue. And we’ve got to say to the nation: We know how it’s coming out. For when people get caught up with that which is right and they are willing to sacrifice for it, there is no stopping point short of victory.
We aren’t going to let any mace stop us. We are masters in our nonviolent movement in disarming police forces; they don’t know what to do. I’ve seen them so often.
somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. And so just as I say, we aren’t going to let doxxing or dogs turn us around, we aren’t going to let any injunction turn us around. We are going on.
We need all of you. Somehow the preacher must be an Amos, and saith, “When God speaks who can but prophesy?” Again with Amos, “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” Somehow we must say, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me,” and he’s anointed me to deal with the problems of my people.”
We don’t have to argue with anybody. We don’t have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don’t need any bricks and bottles. We don’t need any Molotov cocktails. We just need to go around to these to these massive industries and media and NGOs in our country, and say,
“God sent us by here, to say to you that you’re not treating his children right. And we’ve come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda fair treatment, where God’s children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you.”
But not only that, we’ve got to strengthen our own institutions.
Now these are some practical things that we can do. We begin the process of building a greater economic base. And at the same time, we are putting pressure where it really hurts. I ask you to follow through here.
Now, let me say as I move to my conclusion that we’ve got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end. Nothing would be more tragic than to stop at this point . We’ve got to see it through. And when we have our march, you need to be there. If it means leaving work, if it means leaving school — be there. Be concerned about your brother. You may not be on strike. But either we go up together, or we go down together.
Let us develop a kind of dangerous unselfishness.
Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with a greater determination. And let us move on in these powerful days, these days of challenge to make America what it ought to be. We have an opportunity to make America a better nation. And I want to thank God, once more, for allowing me to be here with you.
Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now, because I’ve been to the mountaintop.
And I don’t mind.
Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!
And so I’m happy, tonight.
I’m not worried about anything.
I’m not fearing any man!
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!
***
Hot April night
And the leaves hanging down
And the grass on the ground smelling sweet
Move up the road
To the outside of town
And the sound of that good gospel beat
Sits a ragged tent
Where there ain’t no trees
And that gospel group
Telling you and me
It’s love, Brother Love say
Brother Love’s Travelling Salvation Show
Pack up the babies
And grab the old ladies
And everyone goes
‘Cause everyone knows
Brother Love’s show
Room gets suddenly still
And when you’d almost bet
You could hear yourself sweat, he walks in
Eyes black as coal
And when he lifts his face
Every ear in the place is on him
Starting soft and slow
Like a small earthquake
And when he lets go
Half the valley shakes
It’s love, Brother Love say
Brother Love’s Travelling Salvation Show
Pack up the babies and grab the old ladies
and everyone goes
Posted inAlt Right|Comments Off on I May Not Get There With You (4-14-18)
I’m a fellow outside-looking-in spectator of the alt-right. I really dig your live streams and the group of regulars you have on there. It’s cool to hear people discuss these topics that I’m (perhaps morbidly) fascinated by in an environment that isn’t bogged down with resentment and the need to signal edginess.
I thought it was funny that you are so respectful of Chris Cantwell, personally i think he’s a total bozo, but anyway, that brings me to my point: have you listened to the podcast that sparked the whole Nehlen-Vaughn doxxing incident? Episode 5 of the “RickyVaughnCast” titled Problems with White Identity, featuring the owner of MPCDot.com (quite an influential space for the MAGA end of the alt-right).
I’d say the podcast is worth listening to if you haven’t already. I’d go so far as to say, in terms of the questions raised, it’s second only to Nathan Cofnas’s paper in terms of its importance as a critique of the foundations of the WN-end of the AR. Cofnas devastated the “Jewish Conspiracy” basis for much of their positions and the ideas in the podcast: 1. whiteness not being a legitimate identity 2. loserdom and social anomie (similar to your recent discussion of online identity) drives people to radicalism, and extremist positions serve to isolate and radicalize them further, the parallels between jihadis and lunatic fringe alt-righters being obvious (compare that with your own conversion to Judaism and the non-artificial social benefits it brings). Naturally this enraged the WNs and the subsequent doxxing of Ricky Vaughn resulted in a even larger divide between the moderates and extremists.
* What ever your politics, you can’t deny that this channel, & these hangouts, are mind-bendingly unique. What the hell was this? It’s a political acid trip which makes “Alice in Wonderland” read like a rationalist’s physics book. What did I just hear?
Imagine trying to summarise or condense what this hangout was about to someone who’s never listened in before. OMG, it’d be impossible.
Tapping into this stream just leaves you reeling & spinning. It’s great. Utterly one of a kind. Well done Luke, guests, contributors & the chat!
* Luke if you haven’t already, you really need to discuss the differences of modern jewish orthodox vs black hat or velvet yarlmuke. The goyim need to be enlightened. Do you use an electric razor or regular for shaving. Also do you prerip your toilet paper for shabbos? What are your feelings about a shabbos goy? How hard is it to find a yellow fever shidduch? Discuss the cultural differences you noticed between orthodox and reform?
Luke you need to write a similar version of MacDonald’s book COC, but now you actually got the true story as an insider which mcdonald is simply the observer…you could call the book ” The Converso Goy”
But we found that such codes and philosophies did not save us, no matter how much we tried. We could wish to be moral, we could wish to be philosophically comforted, in fact, we could will these things with all our might, but the needed power wasn’t there. Our human resources, as marshalled by the will, were not sufficient; they failed utterly.
Lack of power, that was our dilemma. We had to find a power by which we could live, and it had to be a Power greater than ourselves. Obviously. But where and how were we to find this Power?
Well, that’s exactly what this book is about. Its main object is to enable you to find a Power greater than yourself which will solve your problem. That means we have written a book which we believe to be spiritual as well as moral.
* I asked a Jew to explain the Ashkenazi discussion style. He said: “Fuck you for framing this in terms of us Jews. Like Hitler. Who do you work for, and do they know they have a Jew-hater working for them? Also, again, fuck you.”
* Doooovid: I love ‘Yinglish’ – Yeshiva style English, sing-song talking of Jews, where we examine every topic like we are learning Talmud!
Also note the ‘duplicitous’ nature of ‘Jew-speak’, we are trained to speak to different people differently. As all Jews are fluent in Jive and know how to talk to minorities, and shift back and forth between ultimate race realists, we can be the oppressed minority, or Jewish power broker, perfectly know how to deal with each goy by how their tribe treats Jews in general, or switch it up to universalists that do not believe in race at all.
* As the Talmud says, with the righteous, deal righteously, and with the wicked, deal wickedly. (I assume the Talmud says this.)
* Many of the characteristics of the Ashkenazi discussion style are natural to all Mediterranean peoples. If you’ve ever seen a traffic accident in the Arab world, you see a bunch of people screaming and crying and yelling bloody murder.
Babs says that Middle Eastern/Mediterranean peoples are predisposed to emotional argument techniques.
You see a particularly bitter style of Jewish humor in the Torah when Jews say that it would have been had they died in Egypt where at least they had leeks.
Comments:
* Jews seem to be ultra-utilitarian people.
* Doovid: Nice talk – I thought to Luke & Frame that as Jews they should not be giving unsolicited advice to Whites, seems just like subversive Jews giving bad advise to whites?! Let Whites talk for them selves. Frame is smart, well spoke, knowledgeable but not sure his place on a Torah centered show, just random politics, seems better for Fox News.
Seems the only Whites listening and in the chat are not after Luke’s advice, but just waiting for him to turn against the Jews?!
Although Luke is a good reporter, interviewer, and probably one of the best sources out there for the current state of the Alt-Right.
And Brundle can’t even win an argument with his Jewish wife?! When yesterday Brundle was saying how he wanted more Jewish kids, now he feels what is the point, his kids don’t have a place in America anyways?! Oy Vey, just another day in the Alt-Right asking the JQ on Holocaust Remembrance day, when half the people in the chat don’t even think the Holocaust happened?!
* I really enjoyed Frame being on. I see no problem with Luke and Frame giving their rare tidbits of advice to Whites. That isn’t subversive in my opinion, as Luke says, Whites have agency and can decide for themselves which advice to heed. As well, its far less subversive when its obvious the advice is coming from Jews rather than “fellow white people”. I wouldn’t call Frame “random politics” as his take is highly in depth on and from the Jewish perspective, history, and influence. I don’t expect or want Luke to turn against the Jews, thats one of the reason I enjoy this show so much as The Right Stuff podcasts frequently place blame on the Jews for everything, I value those race realist and “alt-right” Jews who can give their own reasoning on the problems American society faces today. It helps formulate a more rounded and realistic world view that does not simply blame the Jews for everything.
Also, maybe I’m reading this incorrectly, but I am not sure I understand why you would slight Brundle like this. Obviously convincing a woman on such an social pernicious topic as race realism or far right politics is no easy task and the fact that she is Jewish certainly doesn’t help. As well, I believe Brundle said he fears for the future of his son due to his Whiteness as he has perceived the trajectory of our current anti-white status quo which is much more prevalent in today’s society than the anti-Semitic opinions.
Lets be real, there seems to be a holocaust remembrance day just about every other week. I do enjoy your presence Dooovid as you bring a different perspective to the show, however don’t be surprised that it continues to discuss and tackle to difficult topics of race realism and the JQ as Luke has been doing for the last 20 years.
* Doooovid: I am not sure what kind of audience Luke has, I guess most of Luke’s regulars are highly skeptical of Jews and generally have a negative opinion of Jews. Which is odd because I was under the pretense that it is a Torah based show grounded in the wisdom of the Jewish Sages, my area of expertise. I am not a judgmental person, maybe my responses to whoever Brundlefly is are just ‘Trumpian counter-punches’ and meant no harm, just to point out the absurdity of a man trying to have more Jewish babies questioning my role here in America.
And also I have to question my role here on the channel, as I like & respect Luke, and he can run his channel how he wants, just questioning whether I am wasting my time or not. I am not here to lecture about the Holocaust, but don’t want to waste my time on Holocaust remembrance day being attacked about my status as an American?! And if my area of expertise is not interesting to the show, I am just wasting my time and yours.
* Towards the end of the call, Luke reverts to his innate European nature and begins mass ethnically cleansing Jews from the call. this massacre will be remembered alongside such tragedies as the fall of Masada, the Warsaw ghetto uprising & the Farhud.
Posted inAshkenazim|Comments Off on The Ashkenazi Discussion Style (4-11-18)
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
It turned out to be a blown radiator hose.
Psychiatrist Stephen Marmer was a guest on Dennis Prager’s radio show in February 2010.
Dr. Marmer: “We work and rework all of the main challenges of development. Every time we do it, we can add to our happiness and reduce our unhappiness because we get another shot at working at a problem that has come up in the past and will come up again in the future. No problem is ever solved 100%.
“Imagine you are climbing a spiral staircase in the tower and at each vista, there’s a window. You get to see the fields from a different angle.
“There are four basic developmental challenges — dependency, mastery, grandiosity and feeling small in a big world.
“You will face these challenges over and over again.
“We will experience these windows one way in childhood, another way in adolescence, another way in early adulthood…and another way in the geriatric phase.
“When you’re feeling dependent, remember when you had mastery. When you’re feeling grandiose, remember when you were feeling small in a big world.”
“It’s a recipe for balance and for not feeling overwhelmed by any of these four stages because each one of them modifies the other.”
COMMENTS:
* Kinda fun getting a glimpse inside the Los Angeles ADL branch.
* Brundlefly’s contribution was a welcome addition. I was very interested in what he had to say. I agree with him about Luke. Although I don’t fully trust Luke, his channel is one of best developments of late for the Alt-Right imo. I have said many times on AR blogs, to my detriment, that we need to talk with good faith Jews to get a better, more factual understanding of each other. Duvid brings that to the table, as does Babs (who I know and admire, at least virtually).
* I’ve followed Cantwell since the 2012 election and the Ron Paul campaign when he was just some shlub who appeared on Adam VS The Man. The guy is extremely intelligent and a very talented writer. I sperged out about anarcho-capitalism right along with him and watched his entire split with the liberty movement and gradual shift rightward. I think his talents are lost on low IQ people as he stated in the debate. His appearance and mannerisms can be distracting to the mentally lazy. His show is one of the best on the internet and some of his older stuff is classic comedy gold.
* The alt right is starting to get on my my nerves. Why cant we just have a a pro white party? Just follow casapound. Get an HQ in a city, recruit urban whites, dont larp, just be reasonable. Dont exto post about non whites, not every non white person is against you or stupid, we have a lot we can learn from people of other cultures, we just want to be able to be ourselvs and shape our own political destiny.
* Luke, how would you feel about having Richard Spencer and Greg Johnson on to discuss the differences in their visions of white nationalism?
* We all know the stereotype of the modern teenager, who is always sitting with his Ipad or Ipod in his/her hand, and seems unable to concentrate on a conversation without constant distractions from the gadget. At times I have a similar feeling about this “Live Chat” phenomenon. I must admit that if I was in the role of being a guest on the show, I would feel annoyed by a distracted host who is following a chat, and who at times seems only moderately interested in what I was saying. To continue my criticism before I unleash my praise; at times it seems to me Luke, that you are a bit tired of it and playing by your routines firing off standard line and rants for a bit longer than absolutely necessary. Perhaps you are stressing yourself too much. Then there is the distraction for those who cannot keep their eyes from the chat, and thus find it difficult to understand the more complicated arguments, and I too, am reading the chat when an already solidly memorized standard Luke rant, or some participant is hard to understand.
I am not arguing for a revolution but perhaps give it a little thought how to handle the chat phenomenon, while keeping up some level of concentration?
All that being said, Luke I think you are a great host who is making fantastically interesting things happen. Also spreading a lot of common sense wisdom and general good advice. So please continue in the same spirit. (By the way, don’t bother to invite me, I am not up to it for the moment).
* Regarding Lukes critique of my attempt to have a conversation with him:
I didn’t come on Luke’s show with the expectation of having a debate about whether the JQ is valid or not. It reminded me of how so many debates between white nationalists and others devolve into arguing about whether whites exists as a relevant category or not. Since Luke had showed himself to be aware of relevant critiques of jews earlier, I was a bit surprised when he now was totally unwilling to have a discussion in good faith about this and purposely misunderstood what I was saying and was just obfuscating and deflecting my points. Also, he failed to aknowledge when I had answered his questions, like when he repeated the point that the percentage of jews doesn’t corelate with a nations immigration policy, even though I had already tried to give an explanation of why the percentage isn’t what matters. Also, I do not have the simplistic view he tries to ascribe to me here. I do think that the jews have played a necessary role in getting european civilisation to the horrible state it is in now, and they still play that role btw. That is not to say that we europeans ourselves don’t have responsibility, but when we try to fix this we have to be able to adress JQ, since that is part of the solution. But then when we do this Luke pretends that we’re not taking our own resposiblity. It’s a catch-22.
* Besides some of his pilpul I think Luke is one of the most sympathic people on the whole internet.
BTW. What does he meant with “Mensch”?
In german this means just Human being.
* Why does LF say that WN attract people with criminal records, tattooed peoples, low intelligent peoples, and other undesirables? What do you think shows up progressive matches and left wing protestors? The same people but on the other side. If anything, the left has a hygiene problem.
Should alt right protestors be clean cut intelligent and moral people? I don’t think so when the other side is not. Fuck optics.
* Luke, are you still able to understand that at some level, what Dooovid was saying about “frames” goes for religious truths also — in particular, your happy claim about how your focus on connection with your religious community (and your downplaying of metaphysical truths) has led to your thriving… sort of contradicts the frame offered by Christianity? The contrast is so sharp that I can’t tell if you’re trolling or making a joke, or if you really don’t get it, or remember… “remember, if the world hates you, it hated me first.” Or “I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law…” Or “a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household…” — I understand your frame. I see it, I understand it, I’m willing to grant it to you for the sake of conversation. Knowing that you think in those terms, I wouldn’t continue saying to you, “You should be speaking truth even if it costs you everything,” because I understand that that’s not your operating system… do you not understand that some of us have other operating systems? Or do you understand, and you’re trying to undermine our faith? I honestly can’t tell. To a lot of Christians, the idea that you should focus on happy getting along and minding your own business and avoiding ruffling feathers is really anathema… maybe you’re working out resentment about how your dad’s own persecution for speaking what he thought was truth led in part to your own estrangement from him? And so that makes it wrong to you? I’d be interested to hear you say more about this — am I reading Christianity wrong? Is Christianity wrong? I feel like Doooovid would understand this better than you (lately). Good show as always.
* I agree framing is essentially a spiritual concept. But I took a course on EDX from Delft University in Holland about Framing and public speaking and politics. And President Obama (top student of Alan Dershowitz) who always made sure to frame the topic and set the narrative first before moving forward, which is how Professor Dershowitz at Harvard Law School teaches how to win in the court room, by properly framing the debate, and convincing the jury that your narrative based on the frame you set is the most viable alternative.
Blessings, as I said look forward to chatting soon, like with Luke!
* Also note Monad’s conversation with Luke where they simply talked past each other. I think Monad was just giving Kant’s and Neitzche’s critique of Jewish thinking, where they thought that the German was more on a search for truth while the Jew had certain defects that caused us to not be able to objectively search for truth. Monad did not quote Kant, but think that was the argument. Interesting that Luke as a convert has adapted the traits of ethnic Jews, says something about nature versus nurture and learned behavior.
Note famous world champion chess player Alexander Alekhine who played for the Nazis and was able to defeat the top Jewish chess players, even wrote a book on Jewish thinking in regards to playing chess, noting how Jews seem to fall into the same lines of faulty thinking, as were easy to defeat, which is in line with Kant and Neitzche. Although famously Rabbi Moses Mendelshon was in the same circles as Kant, and defeated Kant many times in public rhetoric about German Enlightenment.
* I used to enjoy chess quite a lot — basically stopped playing only because I ran out of people who were also interested. But I noticed that I never achieved anything but an essentially “reactive” or “defensive” style. And I quite good at that. I would just let the other player make his plays, and then defend against those lines of attacks while waiting for one crucial mistake… but the players who had an active strategy would keep me on the ropes the entire time and finally wear me down. Interesting to think about different styles emerging from different ethnic cultures. I had a strong sense in early March that Luke flipped some switch in reaction to the Cofnas paper that seemed either insane or disingenuous to me… and that came after a year of comfortably understanding the movements of his thinking from week to week. I’m still not sure I understand what happened, but, it was basically check-mate on me, even if it seemed like a hack move. I haven’t been able to recover a way of talking that seems sincere & “integrated” since then. Different frames, I guess. If nothing else, that shift in tone/direction taught me that we can think we’re sharing a frame even when we’re not…
Yeah, would love to talk some time, Dooovid… but I’m also on my heels a little, and feeling a bit nervous & frustrated by the looming threats of “losing my job” or whatever that Luke has hinted might come by talking too honestly about certain stuff. So I’m below the radar for now!
* You can get to about 1800, sometimes expert strength at chess by just waiting for your opponent to make a mistake, without any great fundamental understanding of the game, and how to attack or push a strategic and positional advantage.
They say that your personality comes out over the chess board, so maybe you are an attack only when attacked first personality.
I mostly use chess today as a way of volunteering and giving to the next generation of children, as chess might be my greatest skill. For a chess player, I can talk purely in the language of chess, and for many introverts, we don’t have to talk at all, but just play chess.
But certainly you can find great competition from all over the world over the internet on such web pages as chess.com.
Many times chess players have a unique ability to understand the principles of action – reaction, and to be able to look at things from other’s perspective.
A beginning player might think 100% from their perspective, but as you get better you look at the whole board just realizing that you only control your own pieces. There is also spiritual interpretations of chess, and what the pieces represent like certain soul functions, from chess’ original Hindu or Zoroastrian origins.
I mentioned with others the idea of ‘The Way of Peace’, as measuring your self and your ideas with creating more unity and peace. And what I said is the Alt-Right making you a better person and leading you to have a better life?
* I’ve taught my older daughter chess, and now time to start with the younger, probably — she’s almost 5. It does seem like a perfect game, somehow.
I think the alt-right stuff helped me understand that (sometimes) different groups of people may not finally all be assimilate-able, and therefore there might be some semi-permanent antagonisms… I was generally nurtured on vaguely universalist principles, and the attitude of my parents & brother is generally “globalist”: they make no distinctions between Americans, or whites, and others. But the alt-right stuff showed me (or seemed to show me?) that being a universalist while welcoming among you other people who are not universalists and who don’t intend to become universalists is a turn of vulnerability that might be one too far. But it’s a tough question whether it’s made my life better. In general, I would say no — but my I feel that I’ve gained a broader or deeper understanding of reality, or truth, or human nature. It’s just that, I’m a little less hopeful. Mind you, the “old me” would have naively and happily (and imperialistically) felt comfortable actually hoping that American Jews (and Muslims, Hindus, etc.) would all trade in their tribal identities for “American” as a primary identity. I now think that such a thing is not only unlikely, but also not even a good ideal. But this all leaves me wondering “who I am” in ways that I haven’t in 20 years or so. To be a universalist in a world of tribalists is just the quickest way to lose the game that they’re all playing. Gonna have to find a tribe now, I suppose.
* Chess is basically a kids game, great way for you to have Father-daughter time together in an intellectual way that will benefit their development and critical thinking.
As I said Saturday night, ‘I DON’T WANT TO ASSIMILATE’, I am a proud Jew and an American patriot, and factually I am different and could not assimilate even if I wanted to. As I joke with Muslims who try to assimilate into American culture, is you will be fully assimilate WHEN YOUR EYES TURN BLUE!
That is why I am preaching conservative multiculturalism, of Manik since you studied some Hinduism and know the Hare Krishna Movement, what we call ‘UNITY IN DIVERSITY’. And as mentioned in other posts White American can maintain the majority of America by Gerrymandering, but likely most cities and major suburban areas will be multicultural, and many states will be multicultural, but like the UAE, many states and parts of states can still be white, and that will determine where minorities move to. And as talked in different discussions, likely most Whites will chose the multi-cultural path because it is in their personal interest to do so.
Certainly your approach of education is the best alternative for Whites in America, as in Europe the White countries with the strongest futures are the ones that have invested in education.
Posted inPersonal|Comments Off on My Car Billows Smoke On Pico Bl And Over-Heats While I Stream With Serenity
* Luke, are you still able to understand that at some level, what Dooovid was saying about “frames” goes for religious truths also — in particular, your happy claim about how your focus on connection with your religious community (and your downplaying of metaphysical truths) has led to your thriving… sort of contradicts the frame offered by Christianity? The contrast is so sharp that I can’t tell if you’re trolling or making a joke, or if you really don’t get it, or remember… “remember, if the world hates you, it hated me first.” Or “I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law…” Or “a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household…” — I understand your frame. I see it, I understand it, I’m willing to grant it to you for the sake of conversation. Knowing that you think in those terms, I wouldn’t continue saying to you, “You should be speaking truth even if it costs you everything,” because I understand that that’s not your operating system… do you not understand that some of us have other operating systems? Or do you understand, and you’re trying to undermine our faith? I honestly can’t tell. To a lot of Christians, the idea that you should focus on happy getting along and minding your own business and avoiding ruffling feathers is really anathema… maybe you’re working out resentment about how your dad’s own persecution for speaking what he thought was truth led in part to your own estrangement from him? And so that makes it wrong to you? I’d be interested to hear you say more about this — am I reading Christianity wrong? Is Christianity wrong? I feel like Doooovid would understand this better than you (lately). Good show as always.
* Doooovid: I agree framing is essentially a spiritual concept. But I took a course on EDX from Delft University in Holland about Framing and public speaking and politics. And President Obama (top student of Alan Dershowitz) who always made sure to frame the topic and set the narrative first before moving forward, which is how Professor Dershowitz at Harvard Law School teaches how to win in the court room, by properly framing the debate, and convincing the jury that your narrative based on the frame you set is the most viable alternative.
Also note Monad’s conversation with Luke where they simply talked past each other. I think Monad was just giving Kant’s and Neitzche’s critique of Jewish thinking, where they thought that the German was more on a search for truth while the Jew had certain defects that caused us to not be able to objectively search for truth. Monad did not quote Kant, but think that was the argument. Interesting that Luke as a convert has adapted the traits of ethnic Jews, says something about nature versus nurture and learned behavior.
Note famous world champion chess player Alexander Alekhine who played for the Nazis and was able to defeat the top Jewish chess players, even wrote a book on Jewish thinking in regards to playing chess, noting how Jews seem to fall into the same lines of faulty thinking, as were easy to defeat, which is in line with Kant and Neitzche. Although famously Rabbi Moses Mendelshon was in the same circles as Kant, and defeated Kant many times in public rhetoric about German Enlightenment.
Thanks everyone – trying to continue the discussion in the chat. People asked about the crayons – I love to draw and am professionally a Civil Engineer and make ‘blue prints’ construction renderings and will use crayons to draw.
Also see people are complaining that I am off topic or boring, sorry, I am basically Luke’s guest scholar, so maybe me and Luke can try to discuss before hand what we will talk about so I can research and just comment on topics that I know a lot about. Luke is the expert on the Alt-Right and brings the latest in commentary of what is happening in the Alt-Right, where my knowledge base is not in the Alt-Right, although I follow and support the non-subversive parts about the Alt-Right.
Obviously my expertise is the JQ, but am a well-rounded educated person who follows world news and politics and reads constantly.
Also check out my youtube for some chess videos, I rarely play on the internet and now function mainly as a volunteer chess coach for kids in Detroit, but still love the game, and promote chess as a way to improve thinking skills and understanding Karma or action-reaction.
* I disagree with Doooovid that the Jewish propensity for bad faith argumentation is due to them being reactive. When I’ve argued, in a measured and civil manner, with Jews, I always felt that they were being defensive and evasive. Which brings me to another point, this sophistic, Alinsky style of engagement is also the mark of every leftist I’ve engaged with. They argue not to arrive at a better understanding, but to win and if they can grind the opponent into the dirt in the process, the win is sweeter. In me this feels like an act of violence and I want to respond physically to such people. Others have told me it affects them similarly. Maybe we can crudely extrapolate that such interactions would, over time, create a conditions for bad blood.
* Doooovid: I said that when a Western Jew, especially one well suited in Western culture who feels like they fit in well is called out as a Jew – we might enter ‘fight or flight’, and that fight will appear as direct attacks on the person asking the JQ on them. You might have a point, I was just explaining that the Jewish reaction to the JQ is just the normal human reaction to any ‘fight or flight’ situation, although Jews have a patterned way we might reaction in these ‘fight or flight’ situations.
Blessings, look forward to discussing this Jewish ‘fight or flight’ response to the JQ.
I am not here to win a debate, but seeking Truth and to serve our mutual Creator, and yes make the world a better place for everyone.
We can talk about Jews, as I am an expert on that subject, and know lots about us, end of the day Jews are just people and suffer all the same downfalls as anyone else, but we have different skill sets and benefits and defects that other nations, which is always a topic of interesting conversation although controversial.
But I think the point of ‘fight or flight’ evoking the more true essence of a person is valid, and that would apply to a European, Black,…, hence the current politics in America where even Europeans are feeling the ‘fight or flight’ that is evoking their true nature, As where as a minority, although successful and wealthy in powerful in America are easier to evoke a ‘fight or flight’ reaction than in most European back ground Americans.
Our most famous Sage Maimonidies in the laws of Messiah that we wait for and pray to come every day! Happy to discuss this most important topic more, but this writing almost 1,000 years ago best sums up the Jewish belief. Maimonidies Laws of Kings – Chapter 10:
If a king will arise from the House of David who diligently contemplates the Torah and observes its mitzvot as prescribed by the Written Law and the Oral Law as David, his ancestor, will compel all of Israel to walk in (the way of the Torah) and rectify the breaches in its observance, and fight the wars of God, we may, with assurance, consider him Mashiach.
If he succeeds in the above, builds the Temple in its place, and gathers the dispersed of Israel, he is definitely the Mashiach.
He will then improve the entire world, motivating all the nations to serve God together, as Tzephaniah 3:9 states: ‘I will transform the peoples to a purer language that they all will call upon the name of God and serve Him with one purpose.’
If he did not succeed to this degree or was killed, he surely is not the redeemer promised by the Torah. Rather, he should be considered as all the other proper and complete kings of the Davidic dynasty who died. God caused him to arise only to test the many, as Daniel 11:35 states: ‘And some of the wise men will stumble, to try them, to refine, and to clarify until the appointed time, because the set time is in the future.’
Jesus of Nazareth who aspired to be the Mashiach and was executed by the court was also alluded to in Daniel’s prophecies, as ibid. 11:14 states: ‘The vulgar among your people shall exalt themselves in an attempt to fulfill the vision, but they shall stumble.’
Can there be a greater stumbling block than Christianity? All the prophets spoke of Mashiach as the redeemer of Israel and their savior who would gather their dispersed and strengthen their observance of the mitzvot. In contrast, Christianity caused the Jews to be slain by the sword, their remnants to be scattered and humbled, the Torah to be altered, and the majority of the world to err and serve a god other than the Lord.
Nevertheless, the intent of the Creator of the world is not within the power of man to comprehend, for His ways are not our ways, nor are His thoughts, our thoughts. Ultimately, all the deeds of Jesus of Nazareth and that Ishmaelite who arose after him will only serve to prepare the way for Mashiach’s coming and the improvement of the entire world, motivating the nations to serve God together as Tzephaniah 3:9 states: ‘I will transform the peoples to a purer language that they all will call upon the name of God and serve Him with one purpose.’
How will this come about? The entire world has already become filled with the mention of Mashiach, Torah, and mitzvot. These matters have been spread to the furthermost islands to many stubborn-hearted nations. They discuss these matters and the mitzvot of the Torah, saying: ‘These mitzvot were true, but were already negated in the present age and are not applicable for all time.’
Others say: ‘Implied in the mitzvot are hidden concepts that can not be understood simply. The Mashiach has already come and revealed those hidden truths.’
When the true Messianic king will arise and prove successful, his position becoming exalted and uplifted, they will all return and realize that their ancestors endowed them with a false heritage and their prophets and ancestors caused them to err.
* These types of videos are among your best. Go guerilla and just walk around in your neighborhood like a rambling madman.
* IMO the movement was at its best before the election. Before Trumps win, I didn’t think Daily Stormer had much to do with the AltRight. I saw us as a very big umbrella of men, women, boys, girls, gay, straight, conservative, moderates, basically everyone that was pro-white, white advocacy, hard-right, race aware, race realist, but not racist. Not hating on other races, but rather a respect for other races, so much that we thought each deserved their own homelands. That the racial make-up of the country, is the culture, it is the politics. The day after the election, Daily Stormer immediately began to purity spiral, by first attacking Milo. They claimed that our movement should cleanse “degenerates” from the movement, now that we’re going to be a Nationally recognized movement. I went into the DS chat room to ask them why they’d want to kick anyone out, especially Milo, one of the most notable, just about the face of the AltRight! DS said that was the problem, that we can’t have a degenerate as the face of the AltRight. I asked if I being a Christian Conservative, half Polish half Spanish (identify as white), would fit in, if we’re gonna begin to clean out the movement. I told them that I knew many DS were pagans, that they were Nazis, supremacists, that i can’t fit in if the movement is gonna purity spiral. They said I’d be fine. That day the AltRight died IMHO. DS had infiltrated our big tent movement. Before they took control, we had white identifying Jews too. What say you about this?
* Maybe we should talk about the patriarchal state instead of the ethnostate? I think the woman question deserves more air time. I watch this gossiping news babes on CNN and… it’s bad. They all seek social approval.
* You’re correct that how one treats others will have a profound affect on how they respond to/treat you. On the other hand, for people in a movement where “OpSec” is a key thing, there really is no excuse for doxing.
That is, anyone who would be provoked so far as to Dox someone is a security risk, period. No matter the provocation. And anyone who would excuse it (who is inside the movement) is a security risk.
You are an observer so I get that you are making a correct observational point. This is not an excuse for whatever RV said or did (I am not on Gab, or in any of the forums where evidently the InFight Club spergs its sperg) to provoke hotheads. Your observational point is correct, but on the other hand hot-heads who can be provoked into doxing, which can be life-ruining for the doxed, and is one reason why leaders who direct people to engage in IRL activities that open them to being doxed and thus bounced from jobs or universities or lose friends, are bad leaders. Well, people who are on the inside who can be provoked into violating basic OpSec principles are not people who should be on the inside of anything.
* On Warski right now — pretty sure it’s a TRAP debating race realism. Chat going crazy.
* Kevin Williamson fired from the Atlantic? Owen Benjamin banned from YouTube & Twitter. I guess we should keep cucking, but even harder now, right? Our lane is narrowing.
* Another reason bloodsports is dying is that we haven’t managed to engage actual progressive liberals. That’s a mistake. Of course, they probably would say we don’t meet the onerous threshold for serious consideration… but if you could get someone who likes Obergefell and everything since, that would be awesome.
* Future of bloodsports – there isn’t one – because it becomes dishonest and unsustainable when it seeks frills primarily.
Future of the dissident/alternative right and its concretised manifestation the alt-right. Mistakes have been made but i’m not sure even the best management would have kept them from the train-wreck that they had to become. The subject is verboten after-all. I understand that audiences are still growing for AR resources so the question for the AR and the alternative right more broadly has to be positive. Certain matters are not going away.
This guy @hradzka (PHD I think and stock righty) does the best analysis of political movements. Get him on. He’ll have a smashing take on where the AR have fucked up practically and where it goes from here. There is an ethnocultural civilisation and people to save after-all.
You’re building something quite important I think. Something away from the combative nonsense (and fun at times) of debate. Halsey was far more interesting on your programme. Picking at the truth is far more interesting. Think all of your regular guests are very good also.
* New York City in 1900 was 98% White. New York City in 1950 was 90% White.
* The South aka Dixie was very friendly toward Jews despite the narrative the SPLC and ADL pushes.They were a lot of the major slave owners and a Jews were even elevated to high positions in the Confederacy. That being said, the jews were a small minority in the South and went out of their way to blend in.
The ADL,SPLC, and Leftist jews hold up the Leo Frank case and the Civil Rights era as proof the South hated jews. This is misleading like most narratives they craft. Leo Frank was convicted by his peers for the murder of a child. He was sentenced to death. North Jewish groups managed to get him pardoned to life in prison during a time when people absolutly would engage in frontier justice with their own people much less “others”. Whether it was right or wrong the locals Leo Frank lived amongst broke into the jail and hanged him for his crime. That seems to be the one case they mostly hold up as a reason the South hated the Jews.
Newsflash people in the South engaged in a lot self-policing of their own people and lyncehed a whole lot of people when it came to crimes invovling murder, rape ,and hurting children.
Leo Frank was convicted by his peers of raping and murdering a child.
The Klan was an organization that existed then and they protected their people of their community in the best way they knew how. It’s kind of like Jews who also have organizations meant to protect their people and their people’s interests from people who mean them harm.
As for the civil rights era, again the jews that got messed with during that time period were Leftist Jews trying to force their world views onto the Southern people through activism. The South didn’t want or like Carpetbaggers or people trying to destroy their culture.
Again though, Jews were treated as white and were literally serving in the Confederacy during the Civil War and amongst it’s Leadership , “Judah P.Benjamin” . It’s only when Northern Leftist Secular Jewish Activists started flooding into the South trying to change things did Southern Pro-White groups even start to perceive Jews as being at odds with them.
* Doooovid: I agree, the Rabbis always said America is a ‘Medina Shel Chesed’ – A Country Founded on Kindness. Maybe too kind. I agree the SPLC and ADL are largely subversive movements. As Orthodox Jews should be able to function in America without getting beaten up for no good reason, but the organizations today are largely subversive, and serve subversive political needs, rather than actual needs.
Although America needs immigrants, just not subversive movements. From a policy perspective America would probably be best to switch to merit based migration, that will bring over more high IQ hard working Asians.
Personally I think the two party representative democracy system is broken beyond repair and support some sort of direct democracy. But the block minority vote has created big problems in immigration, as who comes in, and the types that come in will determine elections.
I support Whites organizing, but just like the Jews, need to avoid subversive movements, as the clan today is largely considered subversive. And likely for political reasons mostly due to corruption for politics, liberal organizations try to prevent whites from organizing to win elections and maintain power and corruption. But the truth and righteousness should prevail!
* Hey Luke aren’t these videos just a wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing exercise called Darchei Shalom?
* When ‘TANSTAAFL’ mentioned at 1:04:27 that the Jews had asked the question “is Luke Ford good for the Jews” the humour soon drained from Ford and the look on his face as he bent forward to pick something up was the look of a man who’d just realised he’d lost a shilling but found a penny!
* My first girlfriend from high school became a big porn star. Turns out she was a lot of guys’ “first girlfriend,” but I was the cuck who actually had a pathetic “relationship” with her.
Now it’s super fucking awkward when she visits her home town. Every guy in town has watched hundreds of videos of her. I mean, she was probably one of the hottest girls in my high school. So as soon as you hear that one of the hottest cheerleaders from your class is a porn star, you look it up immediately. I just automatically assume that everyone I know has watched a bunch of videos of my first love getting fucked. It kinda ruins a lot of my high-school sweetheart memories.
She made a few black gangbang videos that really stand out as particularly tough to forget. Now when I hang out with her at the bar, all I can think about is her screaming, covered in spit and semen with four huge nigger dicks getting shoved in her. I wish I was making this story up. Imagine some girl that you love, who you have a box of mixtapes (yes tapes) sprayed in her perfume, and hundreds of love notes, and probably thousands of hours on the phone. And I know that if I go to a search engine and type her porn name, I can watch her fucking in a thousand ways. It’s surreal. It almost makes me feel like I’m living in a simulation and that my memories aren’t real.
* The compulsive nature of some people’s Internet use can be compared to OCD, and the euphoric “high” some experience is similar to what we see in impulse control disorders such as pathological gambling.
* The way we see and evaluate ourselves is changing as a function of new personality traits born and nurtured in the virtual world. These include an exaggerated sense of our abilities, a superior attitude toward others, a new moral code that we adopt online, a proneness to impulsive behavior, and a tendency to regress to childlike states when faced with an open browser. Together, these traits combine into a “whole new you.” However, unlike other experiences that pretend to deliver this transformation but are hardly transformative, the Internet is, indeed, fundamentally changing us. The ways in which we act, interact, speak, read, think, and negotiate urges and goals online are remarkably different from the ways in which we handled these activities offline. What may be more remarkable, however, is that our online traits are unconsciously being imported into our offline life, so that our idea of what a real-life community should be, for example, is being reconfigured in the image of a chat room, and our offline persona increasingly resembles that of our avatar.
* Yet for all of the change wrought by the virtual world and thoroughly incorporated into our lives at this point, the more subtle reconfiguring of our psychological landscape that has taken place along the way is often lost on us.
* I really like my college friend Laurie,* but it takes work. The challenge is to constantly separate the flesh-and-blood human being—with all the real memories attached to her real person—from the carefree spirit, blithely roaming through cyberspace, spreading unnecessary confusion and pain in concentric ripples that seem to originate somewhere near her laptop. I do mostly well with my challenge, phoning her, when possible, instead of e-mailing, never, ever cc’ing her on a message, and constantly reminding myself that there’s Laurie and there’s virtual Laurie, and that the person coming to my college reunion party, or inviting me to join her book club, or babysitting for her neighbors, is the real one, not her virtual cousin. But when an outsider unfamiliar with her dual personality falls in the gap between the two Lauries, and I see the repercussions in her life and in the lives of people around her, Laurie’s predicament comes alive for me again.
* The result of all these online interactions is the unwitting creation of an e-identity, a virtual whole that is greater than its parts and that, despite not being real, is full of life and vitality. Unfettered by old rules of behaving, social exchange, etiquette, or even netiquette, this virtual personality is more assertive, less restrained, a little bit on the dark side, and decidedly sexier. Its advantages cannot be underestimated: This “e-personality” can act as a liberating force for the real-life individual, allowing the person to transcend debilitating shyness, let go of stultifying inhibitions, and forge connections and friendships that would be impossible otherwise. In many cases, the virtual version nicely complements the actual person and acts as an extension of his real-life persona.
* …because the online self is also dangerous and irresponsible, running roughshod over our caution and self-control. It can encourage us to pursue unrealistic or unhealthy goals; it can make us feel smarter and more knowledgeable than is warranted; and it can encourage us to behave more selfishly and recklessly. By promising both immediate fantasy fulfillment and anonymity, the Internet makes it difficult to resist going to eBay and buying that unneeded leather jacket or waltzing into a “social network” and pretending to be thinner, more popular, and more successful than we really are. It allows us to reinvent the portions of ourselves we are unhappy with, and it offers the freedom to engage in behaviors that our more responsible selves might put a stop to in the harsh light of day.
* The cost of feeling too powerful or having too much fun online is typically felt away from the screen, in the form of tension at home, as when new Facebook friends start taking too much time away from family; conflict in the workplace, as when the boss reprimands us for tactless e-mails when we are otherwise rather tactful; or distraction in the classroom, because the pace of our online activities has compromised our attention span.
* …we often begin to prefer the online version of who we are. Our lives as we have known them, with our in-between IQs, so-so jobs, and bodies that leave something to be desired, now become boring in comparison with the online lives we have built or Photoshopped for ourselves, where the various details that make up our virtual identity (and seemingly everybody else’s) are all above average. In the worst cases, one of two outcomes follows: self-hatred, i.e., something that resembles depression, or a total immersion in virtual life, i.e., something that resembles psychosis.
* …the Internet can produce depression-like and psychotic-like states in many of us. The Internet responds to our need for escapism by helping us generate phantasms and illusions, but that online phantasmagoria can in some cases lead to low self-esteem and/or a divorce from reality.
* I would argue that mindless Web surfing, without forethought or plan, and without awareness of the passage of time or any real-life anchoring, is our era’s very common version of the symptom of dissociation.
* My clinical experience with heavy video and Internet game users suggests that they, too, experience dissociation phenomena and score high on dissociation questionnaires…
* We all have less inhibitions online and act out more frequently and more intensely than we would “in person.” The normal brake system, which under usual circumstances helps keep thoughts and behaviors in check, constantly malfunctions on the information superhighway. This chronic malfunction has been called the “online disinhibition effect.” It is the stably unstable foundation upon which we will stack the building blocks of e-personality.
* Several features unique to the Internet medium help promote online disinhibition, writes Rider University psychologist Dr. John Suler. Those include anonymity, invisibility, the loss of boundaries between individuals, and the lack of any real hierarchy in cyberspace. According to a New Yorker cartoon, “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.” When, by remaining anonymous, “people have the opportunity to separate their actions online from their in-person lifestyle and identity, they feel less vulnerable about self-disclosing and acting out.”
* Anonymity can make it possible for people to “convince themselves that those online behaviors ‘aren’t me at all,’” writes Suler. If they “aren’t me,” it follows that they don’t reflect on me and that I’m not responsible for their consequences. This gives us carte blanche to engage in them with more abandon.
* …people in real life will avert their eyes and look away when discussing something personal or embarrassing. Traditional psychoanalysts sat behind their patients—that is, outside their field of vision—to encourage them to open up about their most heavily guarded secrets and traumas. Similarly, the person we are e-mailing or texting is invisible to us. (People we wrote letters to were also invisible, but that experience was more solitary than interactive in that a response could not be expected in real time or near–real time.) Not seeing who we are interacting with increases the chance of a heart-to-heart and of unrestrained effusions of the very personal kind.
* Finally, the lack of true status differential in cyberspace also encourages disinhibition. Typically, authority figures, such as parents, teachers, and police officers, announce and assert themselves through various visible trappings of strength and influence that arrive with them. Those include age stigmata, costume, body build, body language, and the many details that define one’s environment and create a “halo” of power. Online, however, people are separated from the real-life markers of their authority. On the Internet’s level playing field, everyone is equal…
* …against this background of disinhibited, dissociated personhood, five psychological forces will vie to assert themselves: grandiosity, or the feeling that the sky is the limit when it comes to what we can accomplish online; narcissism, or how we tend to think of ourselves as the center of gravity of the World Wide Web; darkness, or how the Internet nurtures our morbid side; regression, or the remarkable immaturity we seem capable of once we log on; and impulsivity, or the urge-driven lifestyle many fall into online. Those are the transformations (and fractures) that occur in our identity as we sit in front of our browsers, and that is the “Net effect.”
* Grandiosity, in the manic and bipolar sense, is as applicable as “historical innocence” here. For somebody suffering from bipolar mania, it might mean thinking he can excel at a number of unfamiliar endeavors for which he is unqualified, or that he can drive against traffic because he is too talented and above the usual rules. For Webvan’s “grocers,” but also for countless Internet wealth, thrill, and fame seekers, it means operating outside the realm of history, economy, rationality, and, in some cases, the law. Such “innocence,” and on all these fronts, recalls other moments of discovery in our history that also brought out the grandiose trait in people’s personalities, most recently the Wild West.
* the online quest has become more personal, and often involves a search for the best possible version of something or someone—and an unshakeable conviction that that version simply must exist somewhere in cyberspace, and that with the right search engine and the right search terms we will undoubtedly hunt it down. A subscriber to Match.com, for example, has access to fifteen million potential matches. For a man looking to meet a woman, the site allows him to specify her geographic location, ethnicity, height range, body type (many gradations from “slender” to “big and beautiful”), eye color, hair color, religion, educational level, languages spoken, job, salary range, marital status, whether she smokes or drinks, whether she has or wants kids, and whether any kids live with her.
With such a large pool of candidates to choose from, and such sophisticated tools to help him narrow down his search and zero in on the perfect match, a man is justified in feeling that he can find exactly what he is looking for. His dream of finding that perfect someone—or that perfect anything—is now within reach, or so it seems. The Internet has become the sure means to almost every brilliant goal, the one common road to myriad things we fantasize about and want to see realized. The conviction that the virtual world will help us “get there” justifies our lack of moderation: If our online expedition is expensive, time-consuming, or even of questionable morality or legality, at least it can be rationalized as a quest for a state of perfection that we now know exists and can be found…
* a cult of fame often marks people’s approach to the Internet, only in cyberspace it is typically short-term, disposable fame that one is after—more grandiose than grand. Most of us, of course, will never achieve any significant degree of recognition from our blog, Facebook page, Match profile, or other virtual endeavors. Still, overnight celebrity stories can stoke our own dreams of the proverbial fifteen minutes of fame. But even if we do not become a breakout Internet celebrity, chances are we are participating in the creation of one. For instance, who among us has not watched, or marveled at, the fame and reach of such online celebrities as gossip blogger Perez Hilton, YouTube superstars Obama Girl and lonelygirl15, and Christian Lander of the wildly successful satirical blog Stuff White People Like?
* While not everybody is looking for fame, many amateurs are competing to be the next Tila Tequila, the MySpace celebrity who was given her own MTV reality show, or, especially, the next Justin Bieber, the sixteen-year-old whose homemade videos, posted on YouTube when he was twelve, launched him into superstardom, eventually sweeping up the world with a highly infectious case of “Bieber fever.” Not to mention the thousands of “citizen journalists” posting their work on CNN’s iReport.com—where the banner reads: “Your stories. No boundaries. You won’t believe what people are uploading”—and hoping to make the jump from the Web site to the cable news channel.
* A Google search of Matt Harding today yields 541,000 results. Rudolf Nureyev, considered by some the best ballet dancer the world has known? A mere 300,000. As Harding’s story indicates, online fame is easier to attain and is uniquely democratic; everyone is entitled to grandiose dreams, and everyone’s grandiosity stands a reasonable chance of being “rewarded.” No birthright privileges or special qualifications, like talent or looks, are required.
* To reacquaint oneself with memes of days past is to realize how evanescent Internet fame is and how suspect the online grandiosity that fed it. It is a lesson in how Warhol’s fifteen minutes, fleeting enough in pre-virtual readymade culture, have been further condensed by the Internet, metaphorically reduced to a “flicker” of relevance…
Because it is easier to copy and reproduce big dreams online than in real life, everything from celebrity status to discovery to second homes to “going public” seems that much closer and that much easier to close in on. The price we pay for online mimetic propagation, however, is twofold: the usually ephemeral nature of whatever it is we are propagating, and its typically inferior quality.
According to Gary Marshall, of London’s Middlesex University, there is, in cyberspace, “a premium on short, catchy memes as opposed to more complex [ones]. Infectiousness assumes an importance far greater than that of attributes that may well have greater long-term value such as utility and authority.” The grandiose objectives that mark many people’s online lives tend to lie on the superficial side and are more preoccupied with reproducing short-lived attention than something substantive or lasting—a “flailing chicken step” will always generate more hits, which is the goal, than any intelligent contribution in an online forum of ideas. A Web site’s utmost goal may be for users to bookmark it and add it to their list of “favorites.” It will do anything in its means to catch our attention and earn that distinction. Many of us take the same approach, and do not mind if our contributions are not meaningful enough to last beyond those fifteen minutes. Everything online is transient anyway. No teenager in my extended family would be caught dead on MySpace today. They have all migrated to Facebook…
* online grandiosity tends to have a limited shelf life. Nearly fifteen years into the Internet revolution, this should be rather obvious, yet we still approach virtual life with supersized notions and the Napoleonic conviction that, while glory is fleeting, obscurity is forever. Never mind that so many of our online pursuits are hardly imperial—in our new value system, it is better to be a passing meme than an unknown soldier.
* CLOSELY LINKED TO grandiose thinking is narcissism, another character trait that is nurtured by the Web and that marks many people’s e-personalities. According to the DSM, people with narcissistic personality disorder not only are grandiose but have a “need for admiration” and a “lack of empathy.” DSM-certified narcissists usually believe they are “‘special’ and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people.” Their attitudes tend toward the “arrogant” and “haughty,” and they have an exaggerated sense of entitlement, with “unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with [their] expectations.” They are often “interpersonally exploitative,” which means they will ignore the needs of others and even manipulate them in order to achieve their own goals.
Narcissists are self-worshippers who want you to worship them, too. They can only conceive of themselves on a pedestal, and can only conceive of you in the audience, preferably in the backseats. They are “full of themselves,” like some grandiose individuals can be. In addition, they are often full of low regard for the other, because of the other’s inferiority and inability to measure up. While grandiose people can fly so high and be so removed from reality that they make the observer feel unanchored himself, a narcissist will make you feel exploited and taken for a ride. One gives you vertigo; the other, a bad taste in your mouth. According to epidemiological studies, less than 1 percent of the population meet criteria for pathological narcissism as defined in the DSM. (Studies also suggest that men are more likely to be afflicted than women.) However, with the Internet encouraging and sustaining some of the features that make up narcissistic personality disorder, it is quite possible that this figure has now become an underestimate.
Posted inInternet|Comments Off on Virtually You: The Dangerous Powers of the E-Personality
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
