Archive for August, 2018

NSFW Links: Aug 30, 2018

August 30, 2018 1 comment

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

Drawings of Hand Spanked Cuties: Aug 29, 2018 – Drawings of cuties getting spanked by hand.

Drawings of Caned Cuties: Aug 30, 2018 – Drawings of cuties getting caned.

More Drawings of Caned Cuties: Aug 30, 2018 – Drawings of more cuties getting caned.

Enjoy! Comments?

Categories: Uncategorized

Varna and Jati aka ‘Caste’ System Was Hugely Damaging to Indians: 2

August 28, 2018 6 comments

In the previous part of this series, I wrote about how many of seemingly peculiar but extremely damaging problems seen in India, even today, can be traced back to the Varna and Jati system. In that post, I also hinted that the ‘caste’ system as we know if today is not much more than a thousand years old in most parts of India. In case you wondered how I came to that approximate date, you will find out by the end of this post (at least partially).

So let me start by asking a peculiar question. Was (what we today call) ‘Hinduism’ ever a normal proselytizing religion? While the connection between that question and the topic of this series is not obvious right now, it will be as we go along. But why did I ask that question in the first place? Well.. because almost every single Indian you might pose this question will either say that it was never a proselytizing religion or it might have been in some very distant past. And they then will also claim that ‘caste’ system is somehow linked to that religion or is an integral part of it.

But is that really the case? Well.. let us look at the history of regions and countries adjacent to India. The world’s largest Hindu temple complex, Angkor Wat, built in 12th century AD is in present day Cambodia. It commissioned by a local king called Suryavarman II and completed by Jayavarman VII. Which begs the question- why is there no evidence of anything similar to the Indian ‘caste’ system in Cambodia either then or now? Sure.. the Khmer empire had a priestly class, warrior class, merchant class, everyone else and perhaps slaves. But that sort of social stratification is seen in almost every single pre-industrial society regardless of race or location.

So why didn’t the hideously complex ‘caste’ system co-migrate to other regions in Asia along with worship of Hindu deities? Before converting to Islam sometime in the 15-16th century, Indonesia was (for the lack of a better term) a region that worshiped Hindu/Buddhist deities. But for some mysterious reason, its ‘caste’ structure too never came to resemble its Indian counterpart and basically stuck to the priest, warrior, merchant and everybody else formula. Something similar is seen in what is today Thailand, in that worship of Hindu and Buddhist deities for many centuries somehow did not result in the establishment of anything approaching the ‘caste’ system in India.

Even the ‘caste’ system in a country as geographically and culturally close to India as Sri Lanka never reached anything close to what it did in India (especially among the majority Sinhalese). So what is going on? Why didn’t the ‘caste’ system in India co-migrate with worship of Indian deities and religion outside its geographical boundaries. How come it could not even cross over into present day Myanmar (Burma) even though a lot of Indian cultural and religious influence evidently did. To stretch it further, how is it that Indian cultural influence on Japan through a syncretic version of Hinduism and Buddhism did not also transfer the idea of its ‘caste’ system.

To make a long story short, what we today recognize as ‘Hinduism’ was once a proselytizing religion- just like any other. Furthermore, it remained so as late as the 7th-8th century AD (at least in some of the far-eastern and southern parts of modern-day India). Perhaps more relevantly- the worldview, belief systems and deities of Indic religions spread much further than the ‘caste’ system, even though most Indians today believe them to inseparable. And this brings us how the ‘caste’ system might became so closely intertwined with Hinduism in India.

Let us look at the first and chronologically earlier part (and version) of the ‘caste’ system aka Varna. The elevator pitch version of that system is as follows: There are four groups: Priests, Warriors, Merchants (and perhaps farmers with large holdings) and everybody else. Sure there is some bullshit about relative social position of each group in certain older texts which few people ever read, but overall it sounds very similar to that of almost every other proto-feudal and feudal society. One can therefore make an educated guess that it functioned in a similar manner.

Indeed, accounts of the Varna system in older Buddhist texts (~ 300 BC- 500 AD) suggest that it was fairly flexible and people did change their birth Varna, usually because they wanted to do something else or make more money. In that respect Varna operated, for many centuries, in a manner similar to class in our society- where for example, it helps to have university educated parents to attend university or rich parents and their social network to be successful at business. But we also have accounts starting in the 4th and 6th century AD which suggest that the ‘caste’ system, as we know it today, was getting firmly established in North Indian kingdoms.

So why and when did things start their terminal descent in the region of present day India? More interestingly, why didn’t this incredibly stupid idea (aka the full-blown ‘caste’ system) spread beyond the borders of present day India, even though other ideas (both religious and secular) did? What is the role of thoughtless ritualistic “vegetarianism” and other self-defeating dietary proscriptions in the caste system? Why are religions such as Islam and Christianity whose followers later conquered and ruled India for centuries far more egalitarian at their core- at least in theory? Why did Buddhism disappear from India at around the same time as the full-blown ‘caste’ system came into being? I will tackle these questions in an upcoming part of this series.

What do you think? Comments?

Varna and Jati aka ‘Caste’ System Was Hugely Damaging to Indians: 1

August 26, 2018 23 comments

I have been thinking, for some time, about writing a long-ish series on this controversial topic. To be clear, condemning it is not the controversial part, as any decent human being can clearly see that it was bad. Instead, I will talk about the incredible and systematic levels of damage caused by that system, both in the past and to an a lesser extent, even today. Along the way, readers will find out why I refer to what most western readers call ‘caste’ as Varna and Jati systems. As you will also find out, both those two systems are actually somewhat independent of each other, but combine in real life to create a far bigger fuckup than either one could by itself.

In future parts of this series- I will show you the connection between Hinduism ceasing to be a proselytizing religion and formation of a fairly rigid ‘caste’ system at around the same time (between the 4th-7th century AD). I will also explain why endogenous technological innovation of any sort ceased at round the same time. You will see the connection between the ‘caste’ system and medieval Hindu armies barely using archers (unlike previous eras) and never adopting the crossbow. We will also go into some detail about how belief in the ‘caste’ fragmented Indian society to such an extent that even small invading armies (Muslims) or a smaller bunch of merchants (British) could conquer large parts of India.

In subsequent parts, I will talk about how belief in the ‘caste’ system made it ridiculously easy for foreign Non-Hindu rulers to keep ruling India for centuries. I hope to show you why belief in the ‘caste’ system is so closely linked to the unusually high rate of treachery seen throughout Indian history. We will go into the connection of this belief with the apparent lack of interest in recording real history by Indians. You will find out how this belief affected who was in charge of artillery and why guns were looked down upon as weapons of war. You will also see how this belief retarded the adoption of newer military tactics in India and does (to a lesser extent) even today.

At the risk of making this preamble a bit too long, I hope to show you how this belief system destroyed the ability of Indians to study and figure out other people (especially their adversaries) with tragic results. You will start understanding such oddities as why Indians ignored the printing press for almost 300 years or why Indian kings never built warships during the era of sail even though they had the craftsmen and raw material to do so. Hopefully you will understand why many Indians are obsessed with vegetarianism though they have zero interest in animal welfare.. and yes, it has something to do with ‘caste’ system. Or why they pay so much attention to symbolic and ritualistic bullshit as opposed to actual actions and behavior.

I also hope to cover topics such as how the low social status of skilled craftsman and other people who work with their hands had a huge negative effect on technological progress in India. You will finally understand why China had no problem becoming ‘the world’s factory’ while India struggles (and has historically struggled) with manufacturing stuff. You might also understand why post-1947 India has produced an almost continuous stream of ineffectual and highly corrupt leaders (at national as well as regional levels) with almost no vision or capacity for strategic thought.. and yes, it has something to do with long-term secondary effects of belief in ‘caste’ system.

Well.. we are already at a bit over 600 words and the first topic I want to explore is going to take almost (or over) a thousand. So, I will close this part by talking a bit about the next one. In case you are wondering, the first topic is basically an introduction to the concept of Varna and Jati and how they often overlap and complement each other in ancient India. I will focus on how both evolved from something analogous to ‘class’ and ‘vocation’ respectively to the grotesque system they later became- and why this occurred between 4th-7th century AD. I will also talk about why so many Indians willingly went along with the ‘caste’ system at that time and yet somehow it could not spread outside the subcontinent.

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Aug 25, 2018

August 25, 2018 Leave a comment

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

Doggystyle Ready Cuties: Aug 10, 2018 – Amateur cuties ready to take it, doggystyle.

Plugged and Doggystyled Cuties: Aug 10, 2018 – Plugged cuties taking it, doggystyle.

Enjoy! Comments?

Categories: Uncategorized

Black CONservatism is Now Performance Art for an Old White Audience

August 23, 2018 25 comments

Some of my regular readers might remember that, in the past, I have written many posts on issues such as what the response of many older whites to black victims of extrajudicial executions by police reveal about USA as a society, why killing of unarmed black men by cops in USA has not decreased inspite of protests, why older black people are unwilling to call white cops murderers and how smartphones exposed police brutality towards black men in USA. I have also written on how a whole crop of black neoliberal “celebrities” rose and faded during 2016 election season.

As many of you also know, I have long held the view that “gaining respectability and acceptance” from whites in USA and embracing the slave-owners religion and its institutions had profound negative effects on the quest for true equality for black people in USA. Having said that, I am optimistic about the future since most black people below a certain age (born after 1970s) seem to have given up the futile quest for “respectability” and “acceptance” by whites as a precondition to forcefully demanding complete and total equality with them– as it should have always been.

And this brings me to the new and much smaller, but widely promoted on certain news outlets, bunch of black CONservatives such as CJ Pearson, Candace Owens, David Clarke and Diamond and Silk or as I call them grifter-in-training, female grifter, pin-collecting grifter and female minstrel act. Some of you might wonder, how come there are so many diverse black CONservatives on corporate media outlets if almost nobody within the black community is listening to what they have to say, other than for its entertainment value.

Well.. the answer is simple. Black CONservatism is now performance art meant almost exclusively for an older white audience. Think of people like CJ Pearson and Candace Owens as the black CONservative equivalents of Anita Sarkeesian and Chanty Binx for identity LIEbrals or Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro are for closet white racists. They are basically hucksters who want to get famous and rich off the stupidity and vanity of their chosen section of population. Then again, people who think CJ Pearson and Candace Owens are “intellectuals” are also the same ones who believe David Clarke is a brave upholder of “law and order” or ‘Diamond and Silk’ are something other than a third rate minstrel act who profit from the stupidity of their older white audience.

On the bright side, we have finally reached the stage where older whites are only real audience for black CONservatives. I see that as real progress, in more ways than one.

What do you think? Comments?

Thoughts on the Scandal surrounding Asia Argento and Jimmy Bennett

August 22, 2018 6 comments

A few months ago, an article by Ronan Farrow in ‘The New Yorker’ exposed the famous and powerful film producer, Harvey Weinstein, as a serial sexual assaulter/ predator/ exhibitionist and well.. an overall shitty human being. This was followed by a series of article about repeated instances of serious sexual harassment, assault and rape by Harvey Weinstein and many other powerful, old (and mostly white) men in media. Since then, more than a few famous older men in the field of media and entertainment no longer have their previous jobs or careers, and many deserved that outcome because what they did (and later confessed) was beyond normal flirting.

Of course, as many of you also know there also been instances of famous men being accused of sexual assault in instances where the evidence suggests miscommunication rather than anything approaching assault. A good example of such an overblown accusation was Aziz Ansari being accused of sexual assault by a woman he hooked up, because he expressed a desire to have penetrative sex with her instead of just oral sex. Some of you might have also heard of instances where some semi-famous guy (like Joss Whedon) constantly pushing his feminist credentials turned out to be a serial adulterer. To put it another way, we have seen the good, bad and ugly of #MeToo accusations- and there have plenty of all three types.

And this brings us to the recent exposé of the “odd” sexual relationship between Asia Argento and Jimmy Bennett. The short version of this still unfolding story is as follows: Asia Argento and Jimmy Bennett first met when they worked in the 2004 film ‘The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things‘ when she was 29 years old and he was 7. As a side note, I would recommend reading a summary of that movie’s plot, because the subject matter of that movie (which was also directed by her) gives an interesting insight into stuff that captures her imagination. Anyway.. she developed a close personal bond with him, which to outsiders appeared to be some form of surrogate mother-son type relationship. And that is what makes this story so.. peculiar.

Moving on.. she kept in touch with him as he was growing up and this somehow culminated with her seducing him and having sex with him, on or just after his 17th Birthday. Subsequently, he accused her of sexual assault (especially since he was technically a minor at that time) resulting in her paying him about 380,000 dollars to buy his silence. The reason why any of this is relevant to the ‘MeToo’ movement is that Asia Argento was one the first and most vocal accusers of Harvey Weinstein whose exposure was, for all practical purposes, the starting point of that movement. In others words, that movement has turned full circle.. if you can call it that.

I am sure we have not the last of the accusations and counter-accusations between these two. The latest update is that there are photos and texts which clearly show that they were sexually intimate on the day which he claimed. Also, she has not denied paying him that amount or money. It also appears that she justified this incident in her mind based on her own history- specifically dating a 33-year-old guy when she was 17. Whatever you might think about the appropriateness or inappropriateness of this relationship, it hard to ignore that she repeatedly treated him like a surrogate son before having sex with him- and that makes it well.. odd.

Here is one montage of relevant photos and screenshots from her Instagram account. Also the guy int the posed photo is not Jimmy, but someone with a similar body type and likely age group.

And here is another montage where she clearly refers to him as her surrogate son. Remember she allegedly had sex with a day or so after one of the Instagram photos in this second montage.

What do you think? Comments?

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 2

August 19, 2018 5 comments

In the previous post of this series, I put forth the idea that internet monopolies are increasingly behaving like despots who are widely hated and despised, as opposed to being simply feared. In a more ideal world such monopolies would never have been allowed to form in first place or have been broken up many years ago. Oddly enough, strict regulation of some monopolies as public utilities or breaking them up via anti-trust laws was normal practice in USA from the early 1900s to almost the end of the 20th century. But that is another, and very long, story. So let us focus on why the recent attempts by establishment politicians (especially democrats) to get internet monopolies to censor online content will lead to many problems with unforeseen consequences.

As Michael Tracey has noted- the ‘unexpected’ rise and victory of Donald Trump in 2016 over that crooked woman can be seen as the event which made the kleptocratic american establishment start worrying that their long-running scam was coming to an end because of alternative sources of news on the internet. To be clear, Michael used much more restrained language in his piece, but you get the point. All of the hullabaloo by establishment types over “fake news” and “Russian interference in our sacred elections” comes down to having to eat humble pie after losing the election to a reality show clown aka Donald Trump. Some of you might remember that I wrote something similar a few months ago (link 1, link 2 and link 3).

The problem with this approach, as Michael noted in his piece, are two-fold. Firstly, establishment types begging internet monopolies to censor content makes the later create powers which did not previously exist. Secondly, giving internet monopolies tacit approval for such behavior further concentrates power into the hand of a very small number of un-elected people with zero public accountability. Matt Taibbi has also expressed similar views on the deleterious effect of content censorship as decided by tech monopolies in two recent articles (link 4, link 5).

Of course, many idiots on the LIEBral side are short-sighted and delusional enough to believe that anything is OK to #resist Trump because “he is so extreme”- in spite of the fact that his actions so far have been, with a few exceptions, in line with standard republican dogma. These idiots can’t (or don’t) want to imagine the long-term consequences of giving tech monopolies such power, nor do they want to consider what would happen if that power was turned against them- and we have not even started talking about the inevitable blowback to such policies. Then again, excess consumption of soy milk and wearing of pussy hats while marching to protest Trump’s election are not conducive to objective thinking. Trump Derangement Syndrome is real.

Some of you might have noticed that the deplatforming of Alex Jones by internet monopolies has done something which even I once thought was close to impossible. Their concerted actions have made Alex Jones into a respectable martyr for free speech! We truly live in a bizarre world when an alcoholic loudmouth like Alex Jones can become an icon for those who oppose censorship and support free speech. I cannot resist pointing out that the character played by Alex Jones (in a cameo of sorts) in the 2006 movie, A Scanner Darkly, has now become reality. In case you are wondering, he plays a street corner preacher who rants about how the government is actually behind the drug epidemic caused by Substance D, and is then disappeared off the street corner by police in front of a small crowd for exercising his right to free speech.

But coming back to the topic at hand, establishment democrats and SJWs are delusional if they believe that their attempts to shut down gun manufacturers and shops by pressuring financial institutions or getting popular nutcases like Alex Jones kicked off internet monopoly platforms won’t have very serious and long-term consequences. Firstly, such actions do not make the people they were directed against less popular or influential. We no longer live in the era of three national TV channels, two national newspapers and a population that reflexively went along with whatever bullshit the government told them.. you know, the era between mid-1940 and late 1970s. Indeed, the very fact that somebody like Trump could win the presidency in spite of universal disapproval by establishment-types as well as over 1 billion of advertising against him should make them realize that it is no longer a viable strategy.

To compound that, there has been a systemic and very obvious loss of trust in professions and institutions in USA since the start of this century, but especially since 2008. There is a very good reason that fake anti-establishmentarians such as Trump and Alex Jones have flourished within the last decade, and will in all likelihood continue to do so in near future. I mean.. who can blame the masses. They have seen their low-paying jobs become even lower-paid and more precarious, their healthcare costs shoot through the roof with no obvious improvement in outcomes, higher education become a debt trap, housing in areas that are not dying out keeps on getting more expensive and a general sense of there being no better future has set in.

And all this is occurring at the same times when ivy-league parasites are telling them that everything is just great, financialization of every sector of economy is wonderful, globalization and outsourcing is glorious and if things are not working for them- its is all their fault. To make a long story short, the establishment has managed to get a lot of diverse and often irreconcilable constituencies pissed off against them at the same time. We are witnessing some serious political realignment right now. Some of you might have noticed that more than a few positions of the ‘alt-right’ such as support for universal healthcare, basic income etc are distinctly socialist in nature. The point I am trying to make that the anti-establishment constituencies are far more numerous, diverse and hard to fit within the traditional ‘right-left’ model.

One common thread which runs through many of these anti-establishment constituencies concerns their views on corporations and monopolies. To put it bluntly, both the ‘right’ and ‘left’ among these groups do not view corporations in a positive light. Perhaps this might have something to do with them witnessing those entities screw over normal people for all of their adult lives. The point I am trying to make is that establishment democrats and LIEbral SJWs face a far more numerous and diverse collection of groups who hate their guts. In such a situation, deplatforming a nut like Alex Jones makes him a martyr and rallying point for groups who otherwise don’t care about each other.

And this brings us to why Machiavelli wrote about rulers should avoid being hated and despised. See.. the thing with being hated by despised by the general population is that it unites otherwise disparate factions who want to see your head on the end of a pike. Also, treating your populace like crap and screwing them over with arbitrary decision-making makes even the more unsavory elements who oppose you look reasonable by comparison. Perhaps most problematically, it puts those working for you in a peculiar situation, where they are screwed if they don’t follow your orders but place themselves in certain future peril if they follow through.

In the next post of this series, I will write about my thoughts on how the blowback might play out in the current socio-economic-political situation. And yes, such blowback will most likely take diverse and multiple forms.

What do you think? Comments?

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 1

August 17, 2018 13 comments

Important: Please read this post in its entirety before commenting on it. The reason why I put this notice before writing even the first line of this post will be obvious once you start reading it.

So let us begin..

As many of you know, there has been a lot of talk and claims about whether censorship of large internet platforms by tech monopolies without even the tiniest hint of due process is a good idea or not. In case you haven’t noticed, I recently wrote a couple of posts about it (link 1, link 2) and think that it is an incredibly stupid and shortsighted idea. What I did not spell out explicitly in those posts is my belief that this extreme overreach by corporations based in SJW-istan, aka the Bay Area, will result in some incredibly problematic blow-back and reactions- of the kind that will soon make LIEbral idiots, who are still cheering for corporate monopolies to deplatform even more of their ideological rivals, regret coming up with idea in the first place.

But let us first be a bit more specific about what we are talking about. Many of you might have noticed that, since the 9th of November 2016, there has been a push by establishment democrats and contingent of useful idiot activists to use corporate power to go after “those republicans whose votes gave us Trump”. For example, there has been an unusually concerted effort by establishment democrats and dying corporate media to deplatform gun manufacturers and retailers from the highly oligopolistic financial network they created. It is funny how similar this approach is to failed attempts by american establishment to maintain its terminally declining power by imposing economic sanctions on various countries- from Russia and China to DPRK.

It does not take a genius to figure out that rest of the world (especially the parts which matter) are doing quite well in spite of these sanctions, which have unintentionally exposed the rapidly shrinking power of USA. Even very small countries, such as DPRK, have shown little interest in bargaining with USA. You might have heard that they just went ahead and tested their H-Bombs and ICBMs, before even having a formal meeting with USA. Only countries filled with spineless and white-worshiping idiots (such as India) have gone along with american establishment- so far. But what does any of this have to do with the topic of this post? As you will soon see, a lot.

Moving on to something which is similar and related- we have seen establishment democrats and their cadre of useful idiots go after something called “fake news”, which to be quite blunt can be applied to any piece of news or viewpoint one does not personally agree with. I am old enough to remember how anybody who challenged the official justifications for the failed occupation of Iraq in 2003 was labelled as an idiot or traitor by the corporate media. And we all remember how that worked out, don’t we? And who can forget all the other disastrous attempts at pushing narratives such as ‘there is no housing bubble’ as late as 2007 or how dietary carbohydrates were good for you while fats was bad for you- just to give a few of the more memorable examples of what was forcefully pushed by the corporate media as gospel truth.

An even more troubling, and more recent development, have been the willingness of LIEbral idiots to encourage and cheer on internet monopolies as they deplatform people with due legal process for “hate speech” as defined by whichever petty tyrant employed at said corporation is making the decision. Personally, I support the right of people to say whatever they want- no matter how hateful and unpleasant it sounds. Some of you might also be surprised to know that I not white. So ya.. I am perfectly fine with right of others to say hateful things even if I do not agree with it. In case you are wondering, I draw the line at actual and specific threats. For example: Person A wishing for the death of Person B, from say.. cancer, might be tasteless to some- but it is not illegal nor should it be illegal. But as we saw today, even something like this is now cause for suspension of Twitter accounts.

And this is a problem. Or to be more precise, this type of behavior by internet monopolies has the potential to cause all sorts of problems, blowback and downstream consequences far beyond what they themselves can imagine. Let me explain that sentence a bit more clearly. Some you may might have read ‘The Prince’ by Machiavelli in which he famously writes that it is better to be feared than loved- if one has to make a choice between the two. Most people seem to forget the part where he says that one should avoid being despised and hated (even if one is feared) because having people hate and despise you is how you will lose power or get assassinated. But what does this have to do with the ongoing behavior of internet monopolies?

Let us talk about what Machiavelli said about the reasons which drive the populace to hate and despise their ruler. According to him, taking the property and women (property) of populace by the prince (monopoly) because he thinks that he can get away with it (hubris) will make them hate him because people do not forget material insults. He goes so far as to say that men are more likely to forgive you for killing their parents than for taking from them what they own. According to Machiavelli, a prince (monopoly) who acts in a fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute manner will elicit contempt from the populace. In other words, depriving people of their property or livelihood and acting like an undependable bitch are surefire ways of losing the goodwill and support of your subjects.

But why does a prince require the support and goodwill of his subjects? I mean, since the prince is technically an autocrat, shouldn’t he be able to get away with anything? Well.. if you have read any history, you will know that rulers who did not take care of the needs of their population were usually the last ones of their dynasty- in addition to having short and troubled reigns. But why is that so? Why is it so important to not be hated and despised by the populace? The short answer is that deep public dissatisfaction with their rulers creates a fertile ground for external invasions, internal power struggles, attempts at assassination etc. But these are just second-order problems created due to a populace hating and despising their ruler. The central problem concerns progressive and irreversible loss of institutional integrity and stability.

In the next part of this series, I will write in more detail about why the wide range of individuals and groups affected by the capricious behavior of internet monopolies pose an unusual challenge to the continued existence of these monopolies. Some of you might heard a saying about the perils of making too many enemies at once, and how the course of events subsequent to making such a decision can be highly unpredictable and even harder to control. And hopefully, you will better understand what I meant by ‘it won’t end well’ and also why I put that warning about reading it in its entirety before commenting on it.

What do you think? Comments?

An Interesting YouTube Channel about Homeless People in USA

August 16, 2018 5 comments

As many of you know, I have long held the belief that the relatively high levels of homelessness seen in the ‘West’, but especially in USA, tell us a lot about human nature and an almost childish belief in socio-economic systems such as capitalism. The simple fact that a nation state can spend over 700 billion dollars a year on “defense”, somehow have many tens of billions more to spend on absurd security theater such as mass incarceration and then pretend that it has no money for an adequate social safety net, says a lot about it and most of the people who inhabit it.

A small part of me is encouraged to see that white people who once had “normal” livelihoods (and probably sang the praises of capitalism and individualism) are increasingly represented in the chronically homeless and almost homeless. There is something to be said about people finally having to pay the price for believing in ideologies and institutions that were never meant to benefit them. Between this trend and kids of white baby boomers being stuck with horrendous student debt and precarious low-paying jobs, we can see that the proverbial chickens are coming home to roost for all those idiots who once believed that were on the verge of becoming rich.

YouTube Channel: Invisible People.

And here are a couple of clips.

Clip #1

Clip #2

What do you think? Comments?

Do Establishment Democrat FanBoys, Such as MikeCA, Have a ‘Plan B’?

August 15, 2018 6 comments

I have noticed that a few commentators, especially MikeCA, seem to just love the establishment- especially its democratic party version. From defending the “right” of cops to murder innocent black men, defending the darkly comic “RussiaGate” as gospel truth (too many to link), defending the latest idiocy of foreign “policy” establishment in USA (too many to link) and worshiping the newest brain-fart emanating from the mouth of failed “credentialed” elite in USA.

So here are a few questions, all of which center around the title of this post.

1] Do democratic party establishment worshipers such as MikeCA have a ‘Plan B’ if the Mueller investigation cannot show any direct collusion or serious illegal behavior between Trump and “Putin” or “Russia”? Do they have any ‘Plan B’ for the inevitable backlash, both from republicans and over-enthusiastic partisan democrats, when they realize that it was all a big failed farce?

2] Do establishment democratic party worshipers such as MikeCA have a ‘Plan B’ if the they do not win back the house in November 2018 mid-terms? Alternatively, what if the margin of victory (seats) is in single digit range and therefore functionally useless to start impeaching Trump? Are you going to keep on shouting “Russia, Russia” or “Putin, Putin” for next two years?

3] Do establishment democratic party worshipers such as MikeCA have any plan to deal with the eventuality that Trump will outlast and survive any ongoing investigation or future ones to run as the republican candidate in 2020? Do you have any other lines than “Trump is a bad.. bad man” or “Trump! Putin! Russia!”? Can people like you even think about such eventualities?

4] Do establishment democratic party worshipers such as MikeCA have a ‘Plan B’ if they lose in 2018 and 2020? And don’t tell me that it cannot happen. The democratic party lost over 1,000 state-level seats, control of most state legislatures and most governorships since 2008. So far, they have not shown the ability to consistently win against republican opponents who are not racist idiots chasing 12-13 year old girls.

So.. MikeCA, do you and others like yourself have a well-thought out ‘Plan B’ that does not depend on magical thinking for even a single one of these contingencies? And I am deliberately ignoring even more problematic issues such as possible wars with Iran, DPRK, Russia or a disastrous trade war with China.

What do you think? Comments?

Freedom of Speech Matters, Even if the Provocateur is Alex Jones: 2

August 13, 2018 8 comments

As mentioned in the previous post of this series, laws to protect free speech are really about protecting unpopular speech. For a long time, organisations such as the ACLU understood that standing up for highly unpopular speech was necessary to prevent the creation of legal precedent to suppress other forms of free speech. Of course, that was before the ACLU was influenced and infiltrated by SJWs– and yes, I am aware of the irony my linking to a piece on a LIEbertarian rag such as ‘Reason’. But the point still stands- organisations which once stood up for the right to free speech, especially its unpopular forms, are now trying to justify their unwillingness to fully support obnoxious characters such as Alex Jones.

But why are so few willing to support Alex Jones? Sure.. the guy is an obnoxious character whose style of acting makes William Shatner seem restrained. But so are many other people, both public figures and private citizens. I mean.. there is no law against being a loud obnoxious asshole with a penchant for hammy acting. Nor is hawking “dietary supplements” of dubious efficacy a crime in USA- thanks to all that wonderful lobbyist-paid legislation passed in mid-1990s. In other words, Alex Jones is not any worse a human being than many YouTube celebrities I can think of right now. And let us be honest- the “conspiracy theories” he is purveying are no more sane or insane than what you see on TV shows such as Ancient Aliens, in its 13th or 14th season now.

So why have so many LIEbral idiots and presstitutes.. I mean “objective credentialed journalists” gotten their panties in a bunch over a character whose bullshit and scams are as American as they come. And why do they keep on repeating some nonsense about how his online presence is somehow hurtful to the mental and physical well-being of “normal folk”. Are they suggesting that people who peddle crazy shit and hilarious lies should not be allowed a public forum? Because if that is their central argument for deplatforming Alex Jones, they themselves are guilty of far greater crimes with infinitely higher real-world body counts than anything he is even remotely capable of pulling off. And they have doing it for a long.. long time.

Some of you might be aware that public support for wars as old as the Spanish-American War of 1898 was largely created by lies published by state-supported journalists of the day. The same can be said of WW1 and WW2. But since none of us are old enough to remember that, let us start something closer to out time- namely, the role of these “credentialed objective journalist” in pushing the Vietnam war to an ignorant and racist public in its early years. To make a long story short, the vast majority of american journalists (print, radio and TV) kept on selling the war to the american public until the 1968 Tet Offensive made it just too hard to ignore reality.

But until then these CONartists.. I mean “honest objective journalists” had no problem reprinting press releases from the american government as news and publishing pretty much any other bullshit in order to demonstrate their loyalty to the system. It might come as a shock to some people now, but there was once a time when Americans volunteered for the Vietnam war- partly under the assumption that they were going to win it, based on the lies and bullshit spewed out by mainstream journalists of that era. Of course, things got real once it became hard to hide the increasing number of body bags and crippled soldiers coming back to USA.

So should all the journalists of that era who willingly and enthusiastically lied for the american government be held responsible for the unnecessary loss of life on the American and Vietnamese side? How many of those who wrote glowing articles about American intervention in Vietnam prior to the Tet offensive lost their jobs because of knowingly publishing lies and bullshit? What about NONE! But why stop there.. Remember the lies published by those “objective professional journalists” to help convince the american public of the need for first Gulf War in 1991? Or what about enthusiastically spreading lies about presence of WMDs in Iraq to justify the failed occupation of Iraq in 2003. Did any journalist lose their job over publishing government-sanctioned lies? Heck.. many of them still write in NYT, WP and appear on cable news.

If you support deplatforming Alex Jones because of some negligible real-life harm people who listen to his shows may have done, how can you justify the continued ability of those who cheerlead disastrous wars such the Vietnam War, Afghanistan War and Iraq Occupation to still have careers in journalism? Aren’t american journalist responsible for tens of thousands of american soldiers who got killed or crippled by those senseless conflicts? What about the millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians who died during Vietnam war? What about hundreds of thousands who died due to conditions created by war in Afghanistan and failed Iraq Occupation?

If you believe that some mentally unstable idiot who listed to Alex Jones show and then went with a semi-auto rifle to a Pizzeria in DC is sufficient for Alex Jones to be deplatformed, how can you justify the continued ability of the vast majority of journalist in USA who work for corporate news outlets to still have a job? If you think Alex Jones allegedly doxing parents of kids who were killed in the Sandy Hook school shooting is bad enough for him to be deplatformed, what do you think about all those mainstream journalists whose carelessness over the years has resulted in torture, imprisonment and death of their sources? Face it.. “credentialed objective journalists” who work for corporate news outlets in USA have been responsible for crimes that are thousands of times more horrendous than anything Alex Jones is accused of.

What do you think? Comments?

Freedom of Speech Matters, Even if the Provocateur is Alex Jones: 1

August 10, 2018 13 comments

As I briefly talked about in my previous post on this topic, the willingness of large monopolistic corporations to cut off essential services to an unpopular person without due process is highly problematic. Some of you might say that people like Alex Jones, who are cheerleaders of an ideology which hold private and corporate power to be supreme, deserve to be screwed by the very system they worship. And, Yes.. it is darkly funny and ironic that a prominent cheerleader for libertarianism got run over by large corporations acting as surrogate government agencies.

Some of those who commented to my previous post put forth excuses such as.. “they are private corporations”, “he was doing illegal things”, “Google, FaceBook and Apple are not monopolies” and “Free Speech protection does not apply to private corporations” etc. I for one find the sudden love among LIEbrals for private corporations, private property rights, insights into laws about monopolies and free speech rather amusing. Wasn’t it barely two weeks ago when LIEbrals were loudly professing to believe in exactly the opposite of what they are claiming this week?

Then again, establishment LIEbrals have been enthusiastically kissing the ground which Mueller and his fellow NeoCons walk on for almost a years now. They act as if the failed and highly expensive occupation of Iraq never occurred. They pretend that all these newfound icons did not lie through their teeth about the presence of WMDs in Iraq, how american soldiers would be greeted as liberators, how the occupation would cost less than 60 billion USD etc. And don’t forget all those ‘mainstream’ media outlets pimping fake intelligence in 2002 and early- 2003.

My point is that there is something very wrong and short-sighted about cheering on a bunch of wannabe tyrants just because they are persecuting some unpopular person first. And this raises the even bigger issue of why protection of free speech is so important. Let me begin this part by saying that we have laws to protect free speech because it is implicitly understood that free speech is often unpopular speech. Nobody is going to persecute you if you shout “USA, USA” at some game or “thank some veteran for his or her service”. Protection of free speech is, therefore, exclusively about protecting unpopular speech.

Free speech is about calling an asshole an asshole. It is about openly criticizing unjust institutions and systems. It is about organizing and protesting against injustice and unfair treatment. It is about expressing viewpoints contrary to the popular narrative. It is about expressing a dissenting viewpoint in as colorful a manner as you choose. Free speech, especially unpopular speech, provides a feedback mechanism for society to find out and address problems, both temporary and systemic- if it chooses to do so. As you will soon see, there is a good reason behind my decision to put a photo of Alex Jones alongside MLK, Malcolm X and Larry Flynt in the attached graphic.

I am sure that a few of you might be scandalized by my decision to compare the current travails of Alex Jones to such historical and notable figures such as MLK and Malcolm X. That comparison is however far more accurate than many of you would want to admit. For starters, the biggest controversies surrounding MLK and Malcolm X during their lifetimes centered around what they said and the causes they openly supported. Let me remind you that Jim Crow laws, overt “legal” discrimination against blacks and generally treating them as less-than-human was the accepted way of doing things in USA as late as the mid-1960s. In other words, their speech was unpopular speech.

Now ask yourself, have you heard of any instance of either MLK or Malcolm X being denied phone connections by the Bell monopoly of that era, because of their unpopular views? I am sure many whites would have loved to see that happen, but it did not. But why not? Well.. there were laws and regulations that prevented monopolies such as Bell from denying service to people without due legal process. Long story short, they could not deny telephone connections to anyone who paid their bills on time and did not intentionally damage their rented equipment.

The same was true for gas, electricity and water utility companies. Similarly, it was quite hard for major public venues (even at that time) to deny them space for holding large meetings. Compare that to the situation today. Do you think FaceBook would have let groups which openly protested “existing laws” exist on their platform? Would YouTube keep hosting videos in which someone like MLK encouraged his supporters to break “existing laws” even when those laws were clearly unjust. Let me remind you that majority of whites in 1960s were against civil rights and racial equality.

To put it another way, even somebody like MLK would have been deplatformed by internet and communication monopolies such Google, FaceBook and Apple if they had existed at that time. Let us now talk about Malcolm X, or more specifically what he said in his more well-known speeches. Do you think he would be able to remain of social media platforms such as FaceBook, YouTube etc after his famous ‘The Ballot or the bullet‘ speech? Ever considered that a lot of what he said in his other speeches would have gotten him multiple strikes for “hate speech”.

Or what about Larry Flynt, whose first famous conflict with the establishment was over his decision to publish spread nudes of women in the 1970s. And yes, I know they were very hairy- because it was the 1970s. Was the telephone company able cut his connection because they disagreed with the ‘morality’ of his business decisions? What about the press who printed his magazines? Moving on a bit further, do you remember how he got himself into that famous supreme court case. In case you don’t, he used his magazine to incessantly troll religious and conservative frauds such as Jerry Falwell. He won the case and they made a film about it later.

The point I am trying to make is the laws to defend Free Speech are really about defending Unpopular Speech. There is a reason why the standard for what constitutes Free Speech is set such that it is not easy to suppress it with spurious claims of libel and slander- especially if you are a public figure. To be clear, this does not mean you can libel and slander people in a malicious manner. In fact, I know people who received satisfactory settlements against certain well-known news outlets who had libeled and slandered their good name.

If Alex Jones libeled and slandered people or actually incited violence against specific individuals, he should be sued by the affected individuals and the case should be tried before an independent judge and jury and under conditions where his legal counsel can cross-examine the plaintiffs and their witnesses. In other words, even somebody like Alex Jones deserves the benefit of due legal process. His fate should not be decided behind closed doors and on the whims of some petty and unaccountable tyrants employed by internet monopolies such as Google, FaceBook and Apple.

In the next part of this hopefully short series, I will talk about why corporate media outlets peopled with supposedly “professional” and “objective” journalists are a far bigger hazard to public well-being than an alcoholic clown continuously screaming at the camera and hawking nutritional supplements.

What do you think? Comments?

Quick Thoughts on Deplatforming of Alex Jones by Internet Monopolies

August 6, 2018 11 comments

Over the past few days, but especially today, I noticed that many “liberals” on the internet show us their collective orgasm-face as internet corporate monopolies such as YouTube, FaceBook and Apple progressively deplatformed the Alex Jones show. It was darkly comic to watch one allegedly “liberal” commentator after the other enthusiastically defend corporate monopolies while spouting all the shitty arguments made by “libertarians” regarding corporate rights. Though I have nothing but contempt for CONservatives, I am no fan of establishment-worshiping LIEbrals either.

While I have no love for Alex Jones or his show, the idea that monopolistic corporations can cut off essential services to their users without any worthwhile legal recourse is highly problematic. Sure.. Alex Jones is a greedy shithead, but a society which cheers on as large corporations mistreat their customers based on some highly subjective moral standard is even more fucked up. Think about it.. how many of the idiots cheering those monopolies today would feel the same if their electric utility cut them off based on what they read, saw or who they associated with.

Then again, these are the same idiots who believe that removing guns from hands of average people while doing nothing about progressive militarization of police in USA is a great idea. They also think that unreliable “renewable energy” can magically displace conventional power plants and how forcing everyone to be vegetarian is a fantastic idea. And then they wonder why all their SJW-driven, “celebrity”-promoted and “ivy-league” endorsed beliefs result them in losing the 2016 election against a reality show clown. But who cares about reality outside their bubbles..

Anyway, I will make one prediction about the most likely result of this enthusiastic support for corporate monopolistic power suppressing free (if tasteless) speech. To make a long story short, the precedent they are cheering today is guaranteed to come back and bite them in the ass soon- most likely before 2020. They are not going to be able to keep basking in the glow of this “success” for long- not unlike Gollum after he finally got his hands on the ‘One Ring’ inside Mount Doom.

What do you think? Comments?

Why Trump Supporters Want to Believe Fanciful Bullshit such as QAnon

August 4, 2018 6 comments

In the previous few weeks, I am sure that those of you who spend too much time on the internet might have come across something known as QAnon. To make a long story short, QAnon is a collection of conspiracy theories named after the eponymous online handle first associated with it, which claims to have internal knowledge of an ongoing counter-coup lead by “true patriots” against the “deep state” and “liberal” Hollywood and corporate media types. In other words, they are just spewing the same bullshit that alt-right types such as Mike Cernovich aka Sterno and Alex Jones have been tweeting and shouting in online video clips for the last two years.

So why did I decide to write a post about QAnon today even though I first came across it a few months ago. For starters, it is a remarkably unoriginal and comically tragic conspiracy theory- for reasons that I will soon describe in more detail. But secondly, and more importantly, it is of little consequence other than its entertainment value- like watching a mentally retarded guy trying to pick up some hot girl. One should not really enjoy watching such stuff because of principles concerning basic human decency, but it is just so damn entertaining. So, that is why I have kept an eye on the latest twists and turns in this tragically comic farce.

Now, let us talk about why I described this farce as a ‘remarkably unoriginal and comically tragic conspiracy theory’. And Yes.. I decided to write about it today since I was too bored to finish an intellectually stimulating article. Having said that, let me ask you a simple question: What does the type of belief displayed by believers in QAnon remind you of? Where else have you come across a bunch of gullible losers believing that a top-secret bunch of benevolent and powerful beings secretly planning to overthrow the current ‘unjust’ system and expose ‘morally’ corrupt elite which will result in a new reign of the ‘righteous’? What does it remind you of?

What about any religion based in Apocalypticism.. you know, like Christianity? If you replace “true patriots” with”god and angels”, “unjust current system run by morally corrupt elite” with “corrupt global system run by Antichrist”, “exposure and arrest” with “the final battle” and “new reign of the true patriots”with “kingdom of heaven”.. you get a pretty familiar narrative. That is also why the almost exclusively white CONservative losers who support Trump are so willing to believe in this tragically comic bullshit which has the same overall narrative as the other big crap they believe in.. or claim to believe. I hope you are starting to see what I am talking about.

So what kind of person believes in Apocalypticism? The simple, but unpleasant, answer is a loser.. in more ways than one. And do not, for a moment, think that I have a better opinion of secular apocalyptic cults such as global warming- now been rebranded as anthropogenic climate change. People who believe in apocalypticism are, almost exclusively, either currently without control over their future or have no agency in their own lives or are rapidly losing whatever control and personal agency they once used to have. Now think of the type of people who are most enthusiastic about Trump becoming president. Does any of this ring a bell?

Long story short, the most ardent Trump supporters are socially CONservative whites of mediocre intellectual capacity who once had stable and well-paying blue-collar livelihoods but are now either already living the precarious existence which was once restricted to non-whites or are well on that path. You might have heard terms such as “economic anxiety” and “economic populism” thrown around my corporate media types during and after the 2016 election. And yes, the more ardent Trump voters and supporters are losers- in more ways than one. And you know what.. I would be sympathetic, if so many weren’t also full of beliefs such as white supremacy.

But let us not get carried away by the idea that only Trump supporters are gullible idiots. I am sure more than a few of you remember Louise Mensch. Remember how her hilariously nutty claims about double-secret investigations against the Trump administration were catnip to the ‘I’m With Her’ types. Remember how she peddled her bullshit in allegedly “respectable” national newspapers and talk shows? But why go that far back? Just have a look at the late-night TV talk show hosts such as Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher, Trevor Noah etc. When was the last time they did not devote at least 15 minutes of every show talking about the “Mueller Investigation”, “Russia”, “Putin”, “Collusion” etc?

I mean.. can you say (with a straight face) that people who believe that “QAnon is real” are bigger dumbfucks than those who endlessly prattle about “Putin”, “Russia”, “Collusion” and the “Mueller Investigation”? How is belief in one delusion superior to belief in another? At this stage, I am willing to say that people who believe in grey aliens performing rectal probes of random people in flyover country sound more sane than those who support QAnon or the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy. Seriously, why have so many people taken crazy pills? This is nuts..

What do you think? Comments?

NSFW Links: Aug 4, 2018

August 4, 2018 Leave a comment

These links are NSFW. Will post something more intellectual tomorrow.

Cuties with Glazed Buns: Aug 3, 2018 – Amateur cuties with freshly frosted buns.

Doggystyled Amateur Cuties: Aug 3, 2018 – Amateur cuties getting, doggystyle.

Enjoy! Comments?

Categories: Uncategorized