The Empress Wears Moldy Lingerie

Edward Thatch writes a brilliant little satire over at Return of Kings in which he strikes at the heart of what needs to be done to win back the narrative, both in the aggregate and in our own lives. Commenter Mark brought this up briefly, but I’d like to expand.

Leftists like to think of themselves as the “nicer” of the two poltical persuasions.  We know how much they “care” (or at least how much they like saying they do).  If you tell a “differently-sized” woman she’s being lazy, a “sensitive” leftist will come to her defense.  After all, it hurts to have somebody call you “fat”, and the left is here to keep us from feeling any unnecessary pain.  They tell us how important it is to reinforce the self-esteem of each and every student, no matter how pathetic or lazy they may be, for they know that where self-esteem prevails, academic success is sure to follow.  When If things don’t work out as planned, it’s obviously because somebody failed to make the poor darlings feel as good about themselves as their caring teachers wished.

We’ve no right to shame the urban thug.  Instead, we should reiterate that he spends most of his life in prison because there weren’t enough people in his life who believed in him.  You might think as you watch his mother wailing “MY BABY!  HE’S SUCH A GOOD BOY!” as he’s carted away for the seventh time that she believed in him plenty, that perhaps he needed a father to tell him to shut up every once in a while, but you would be wrong.  He somehow thought he was God’s gift to everything and deserved whatever the hell he wanted that anybody else might have had because he lacked a sufficient sense of self-worth.  Or something.

Shame and punishment are a masculine tools of correction.  They cause discomfort.  Many an athletic man (and woman for that matter) who was a pudgy child grudgingly thanks the other kids in class who mocked them.  It hurt like hell, but it got them to change.  My grandfather came over here from Poland when he was nine years old and didn’t speak a word of English.  He felt lost and lonely for about two years because he couldn’t talk to anybody else in his little country school.  He learned English and spoke it with no accent for the rest of his life.

I’m not claiming that the loud voice and the fist are the only ways to foster change.  The feminine emphasizes self-esteem, and believing in yourself definitely has its place.  A fatty may change in part because she decides that she deserves more out of life than she’s getting, but it will harder for her to make sufficiently recognize the contrast between what is and what should be if we soften the ugly realities of how far she’s falling short.

At first glance, it would appear that lefties reject masculine correction entirely.  If one examines just a bit more deeply, you realize that on a subconscious level they don’t AT ALL.  They know we’re right.

Smoking.  Racism.  Greed.  Homophobia.  Islamophobia.  Santorum’s sweater vests.  The leftist thoroughly recognizes the value of shame, she just wants it to serve her own ends and her own ends only.

Michael Richards got no sympathy whatsoever for his insensitive remarks.  Nor did George Bush.  When Boehner cries, they laugh at him (for myself, I’d like to knock his block off, but I digress).  How sensitive is Bill Maher towards Sarah Palin?  Steven Colbert towards anybody not on the left?  Listen to lefty talk radio for an hour or so and let the softness and sensitivity wash over you like a warm and bloody piss-bath.

On some level, the leftist recognizes that retribution can in fact lead to change.  They do it to us because they want us to stop what we’re doing (opposing them), and they’re entirely SHOCKED! SHOCKED! if one of us ever does it to one of them.

Regarding their leadership, this is perfectly understandable (although BS that needs to be countered–more on this in a later post).  Every dig at the other guy is fair game, every dig you send their way is uncalled for.  Where it gets more dicey is how they respond to those for whom they proportedly care so damn much.

Single-mothers with multiple children from different fathers.  Violent criminals (not white collar–they deserve prison).  Kids who don’t learn in school.  Immigrants who don’t learn English.  Lardasses.  Teachers who don’t actually teach anything.  Minorities living on the dole.  Food stamp recipients.  The left will do everything in its power to keep others from shaming them.

Does this mean there’s something more at work?  I suspect it does.  Notice the phenomenon Rollo brilliantly describes wherein women encourage each other to feel great about bodies that shouldn’t necessarily inspire high self-esteem.  Rollo:

The truth of course is that she could be semi-fuckable after dropping another 15 pounds, but in telling her she’s hot ‘as-is’ the idea, in the form of an encouraging compliment, is to get her to relax and stay fat. Thus the complimenter(s) simultaneously feel relaxed in their fat.

It’s a perfect strategy for the Anointed.  First, they get to feel good about themselves by keeping the poor babies from feeling discomfort and thereby get to see themselves as morally superior protectors.  Second, and most insidiously, by keeping the “victims” from feeling uncomfortable, their victims remain as such and never change.  Hence, the Anointed are needed in perpetuity.

We therefore have leftists actively discouraging minorities from developing stronger work habits (acting white), immigrants from learning English, teachers from teaching to any sort of acceptable standard, and the obese from losing weight.  EBT cards were created to lessen the stigma of food stamps.  In short, they “help” by making sure their constituents stay destitute and dependent.  This is epitomizes Peart’s “kindness that can kill”, and its ripping us apart.

The feminine assumption is that what causes pain is bad, what helps us avoid it is good.  Men know otherwise.

I read somewhere very recently (I paraphrase from memory), “they want us to be men, they just don’t want us to feel good about it” (let me know if you know where this comes from so I can give proper credit).  Likewise, they aren’t SHOCKED when we shame somebody because they know it works.  They just want to make sure it’s used the right way.

Our job is to not let them get away with it.  We see them do it, and we criticize their double-standards incessantly.  It seems like only David Horowitz and I recognize that it isn’t working.  They don’t fight fair, they won’t fight fair, and we respond with impotent cries of “You don’t fight fair!” as they clock us upside the head yet again.

Instead, we’ve got to make it hurt.  Some say, “Punch back twice as hard”; I say “Punch back until they bleed”.

To do so we don’t have to resort to empty BS tactics like they do.  We need not shame them for stupid reasons, for there are plenty of ways to shame them without having to stretch in the slightest.

Drive through Detroit sometime.  Shame.  Look at the national debt and what it’s doing to our children’s future.  Shame.  Regulations strangling the American dream of countless small-business owners.  Shame.  The black and hispanic children we’re raising to believe that the evils of America outweigh the opportunities they have here, and the whites who aren’t far behind.  Shame.  The college graduate waiting tables at Applebee’s with more student debt than she’ll ever be able to pay.  Shame.  The thirty-two year old SWPL who’s just hit her wall and realized she didn’t sell when her stock was high.  Shame.  The teacher’s we’re paying to waste time in rubber rooms in New York.  The executives who made out like bandits after running Freddie and Fannie.  Benghazi.  The mother who just broke up her family because she wants to feel empowered.  Fast and Furious and the anonymous dead Mexicans who died.

And they shame us.  Fuck you, bitches.  This is war.

This entry was posted in Feminism, Politics, Rhetoric. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to The Empress Wears Moldy Lingerie

  1. YOHAMI says:

    I’d offer that shame is feminine and guilt is masculine. Shame is based on the being, guilt is based on the actions.

    They reject cause and effect, actions. – Tell a woman that she can work out to lose weight ( guilt, action based) because she will feel shame of who she is. Pointing to the behavior ( over eating ) translates to perceiving herself as flawed, which she doesnt like.

    They live in a world of shame, with actions and guilt disconnected, with no cause and effect, only beings. And a desire not to be shamed for whom they are (which is really, what they do) – but since shame is all they understand, shame is also their weapon of choice when they have to defend themselves.

    How do you dare to shame on me – shame on you.

    Stupid but it is what it is.

  2. YOHAMI says:

    [edit] tell a woman that she can work out to lose weight ( guilt, action based) and she will feel shame for who she “is”. Point to the action, they go under the skin and see the action as a reflection of who they “are”. You might be pointing at problematic behaviors that can be addressed, but they perceive an ego attack.

    Then… there are lots of men like this, but it’s mostly women in my experience. And leftists.

    • Martel says:

      The guilt/shame thing has many divides, and yours seems pretty valid. I was thinking in terms of guilt=internal, shame=external. Shame is the unpleasantness caused by others looking down on you, guilt is the feeling you get for knowing you did wrong, regardless of whether or not anybody else knows about it.

      I agree entirely on how women can often confuse a criticsm with a condemnatin of their very essence. I can strongly disapprove of a behavior while recognizing that the person with whom I disagree still has a soul and may be decent in other respects. Leftist have a hard time with this, both in how they give it and take it.

      It wasn’t good enough to criticize Bush as a bad president, he had to be PURE EVIL. They assume that when we criticize Obama we’re calling him out on having a malevolent soul, which isn’t necessarily the case.

      I am getting close to seeing him that way, but when he first got on the scene I just though of him as another dumbass liberal. I gave him the benefit of the doubt even though I disagreed.

      Fool me once….

  3. Love the fire and brimstone.

    As per the comments discussion of leftists’ psyches, I believe in democracy, even if it means failure. My gripe is that failure in my country does not target the perp because we have redistributive everything. A collapse with accountability would quickly become a victory. You just can’t have civilization with ‘leftists’ for what they are mentally. I think they should and shall be culled by the cold logic that they as net consumers must be eventually, and it is only a matter of how much more time and collateral damage (i.e how much more of you and me). I don’t think anyone can cull the behavior without culling a good portion of the physical bodies. It ain’t real for leftists until someone dies, not when the system dies and many people just like them, and I say that as a student of history and human nature. With fire and brimstone, with heaven and hell, not everyone is redeemed or redeemable. The circle of life is the sanctioned salvage operation of life, and we can’t cut out all of the middle man called Death. Talk about credit bubbles. Is that not the stuff of civillized collapse? Expanding civilian credit that can never be repaid by subprime recipients. The housing bubble, The car loan bubble. The education bubble. Just fermentation bubbles as prelude and progression to the overarching structural one.

  4. I meant ‘no, when the system dies…’.

  5. Pingback: When Love Is Hate | Alpha Is Assumed

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s