- 24 Dec 2016 16:51
#14754363
Well let's face it... I'm bourgeois. So there's a lot that I probably wouldn't do unless I decided I'm dictator for life and SHOULD implement things differently. I don't see that happening. So I just threw in with a thought experiment.
I don't see women as inherently evil. I'm just old school. So I see them as histrionic in a lot of respects. They're inherently valuable for fashion, ergonomics, etc. You can get some brass balled women that can run a country well like Margaret Thatcher, but they are the exception. You more often get some tragic figure like Angela Merkel who will give rise to the next Hitler while purporting to despise fascism with hopelessly naive and deeply misguided policies. You get some good scientists like Marie Curie or Ada Lovelace, but they are also much more often the exception than the rule. I don't think naked oppression is a great idea, but I think discouraging people from taking on roles they're not likely to be good at is reasonable.
Homosexuals I see in a darker light. In my view, homosexuals are critical of the larger society because they inherently do not fit in. Historically, they were the clergy--monks, nuns, priests--that made heterosexuality seem somehow unnatural, given to lust, etc. Sexual liberation from homosexual interpretations of heterosexuality isn't an inherently bad thing, but to replace it with banal hedonism is tragic in my opinion. Homosexuals are often society's critics, precisely because they never quite fit in. Like women, they can play a valuable role. However, unlike women, homosexuals and people with abnormal sexuality are often hostile to normal people precisely because they are intrinsically misfits.
I would think fascism would be inherently male-dominant. I know there are proponents of the idea that are not sympathetic to that view. Our erstwhile lesbian poster, Rei Murasame, comes to mind. While I found her views quite refreshing for their novelty, I also thought they were utterly impractical. She could not see Brexit or Donald Trump coming at all. As a fascist, she couldn't quite get Pegida, AfD, the Front Nationale, and so forth, because she was fixated on the enemies she wanted to destroy and so was more likely to throw in with Jeb Bush and Angela Merkel. That's kind of a good example, because she was anything but stupid, but she was clearly blinkered and unable to see what was on the way. People that support Merkel similarly don't see that they are giving rise to the next Hitler.
That said, I do think that the liberal-mindedness of the political left is based on humans adapted agricultural societies, whereas more authoritarian types like myself are more adapted to hunter-gatherer societies that ultimately preyed on agricultural peoples. We became their muscle so to speak. People who embrace that kind of cooperative thinking are always bested by the militant-minded. When you look at how pathetic Obama is now, limping out of office with the fall of Aleppo, hundreds of thousands of people dead, millions displaced, etc., you can see how the cooperative agricultural mind is blind-sided by the highly competitive hunter-gatherer mind. Obama was no match for Putin or Assad, even with the backing of a superpower military. It's comical to listen to him complain of Russian intereference when his big threat to Russia on hacking was, "cut it out." I still don't see why he can't just come out of the closet. We all know he's gay.
As for the media, I do think one tragedy of modern capitalism is the loss of a high culture. Where is our Shakespeare, Mozart or Da Vinci? Heck, even the low culture of the 1960s and 1970s was better. We can go from the Beatles to Taylor Swift or from Miles Davis to JayZ. Nobody bats an eye, but it is clearly inferior in every way.
Oxymandias wrote:@blackjack21 I am rather confused, are the ideals you presented not you ideals at all? My main source of confusion is that you more you think homosexuals and women see differently from straight men. Is this from the ideological perspective of a fascist or are they extremist interpretations of your political views? And if so, what are your political views?
Well let's face it... I'm bourgeois. So there's a lot that I probably wouldn't do unless I decided I'm dictator for life and SHOULD implement things differently. I don't see that happening. So I just threw in with a thought experiment.
I don't see women as inherently evil. I'm just old school. So I see them as histrionic in a lot of respects. They're inherently valuable for fashion, ergonomics, etc. You can get some brass balled women that can run a country well like Margaret Thatcher, but they are the exception. You more often get some tragic figure like Angela Merkel who will give rise to the next Hitler while purporting to despise fascism with hopelessly naive and deeply misguided policies. You get some good scientists like Marie Curie or Ada Lovelace, but they are also much more often the exception than the rule. I don't think naked oppression is a great idea, but I think discouraging people from taking on roles they're not likely to be good at is reasonable.
Homosexuals I see in a darker light. In my view, homosexuals are critical of the larger society because they inherently do not fit in. Historically, they were the clergy--monks, nuns, priests--that made heterosexuality seem somehow unnatural, given to lust, etc. Sexual liberation from homosexual interpretations of heterosexuality isn't an inherently bad thing, but to replace it with banal hedonism is tragic in my opinion. Homosexuals are often society's critics, precisely because they never quite fit in. Like women, they can play a valuable role. However, unlike women, homosexuals and people with abnormal sexuality are often hostile to normal people precisely because they are intrinsically misfits.
I would think fascism would be inherently male-dominant. I know there are proponents of the idea that are not sympathetic to that view. Our erstwhile lesbian poster, Rei Murasame, comes to mind. While I found her views quite refreshing for their novelty, I also thought they were utterly impractical. She could not see Brexit or Donald Trump coming at all. As a fascist, she couldn't quite get Pegida, AfD, the Front Nationale, and so forth, because she was fixated on the enemies she wanted to destroy and so was more likely to throw in with Jeb Bush and Angela Merkel. That's kind of a good example, because she was anything but stupid, but she was clearly blinkered and unable to see what was on the way. People that support Merkel similarly don't see that they are giving rise to the next Hitler.
That said, I do think that the liberal-mindedness of the political left is based on humans adapted agricultural societies, whereas more authoritarian types like myself are more adapted to hunter-gatherer societies that ultimately preyed on agricultural peoples. We became their muscle so to speak. People who embrace that kind of cooperative thinking are always bested by the militant-minded. When you look at how pathetic Obama is now, limping out of office with the fall of Aleppo, hundreds of thousands of people dead, millions displaced, etc., you can see how the cooperative agricultural mind is blind-sided by the highly competitive hunter-gatherer mind. Obama was no match for Putin or Assad, even with the backing of a superpower military. It's comical to listen to him complain of Russian intereference when his big threat to Russia on hacking was, "cut it out." I still don't see why he can't just come out of the closet. We all know he's gay.
As for the media, I do think one tragedy of modern capitalism is the loss of a high culture. Where is our Shakespeare, Mozart or Da Vinci? Heck, even the low culture of the 1960s and 1970s was better. We can go from the Beatles to Taylor Swift or from Miles Davis to JayZ. Nobody bats an eye, but it is clearly inferior in every way.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden
-- Joe Biden
- By Potemkin
- By wat0n
- By FiveofSwords