Migrants don’t get paid less because they’re latecomers to dwindling Western economies. No! It must be because of their race, their skin tone, just because they look different!
Women don’t get paid less for the same work because they’re also a latecomer demographic added to a prop up a dying economy. No! It must be because of their crotch, their gender, their makeup!
We can only begin to understand leftists and leftism (progressive liberal disorder) when we accept that their entire reasoning about everything is based on bodily sensations. Their universe literally ends where their skin begins, whereas for right-wingers, our universe begins where our skin begins, and ends where the universe ends.
Of course, I believe there is a spiritual world where bodily sensations inform us of our gut feelings, our confidence, threats or fears, and so on, but to claim that these feelings somehow dictated how the universe ought to operate is a bridge too far. And this, I think, is where we find the biggest difference between left-wingers and right-wingers, for it is the difference between the body and the world.
Do you believe the causes for what goes on in the world lie within your own body? Then you’re probably a leftist. Do you believe the universe has its own causes, which may or may not affect your body? Then you’re probably a right-winger, at least psychologically speaking. This has nothing to do with your preferred political party or philosophical inkling.
It’s the difference between physiology and physics. So, where does the leftist preoccupation with their bodies come from? In leftist narratives, we often hear that people are “just bodies”, or bodies in motion. What does that even mean to them? It means they believe the whole universe exists within themselves, not outside themselves, and that, therefore, changes to the universe must occur within the body.
You may have guessed it by now: This is why liberals and progressives believe a man can be a woman. They genuinely believe they can alter the physical universe by changing their bodies. It doesn’t occur to them that they are merely misleading themselves. In some cases, they are mutilating themselves. The fact that other people don’t see how self-mutilation somehow changes one’s reality just means they’re ignorant, uneducated, or worse: fascist.
In this context, I believe their word ‘fascist’ is meant to designate “anyone who can still think rationally, reasonably, or logically”. A fascist is someone who can see difference, someone who understands cause and effect. These abilities, of course, are all the hallmarks of the equally defamed “White supremacy”. That’s why they say math is racist, because mathematical formulae don’t originate from our feelings, but from the rational world that lies beyond our control.
Once more, this is the difference between accepting an observable world that can only to understand, what we call reality, versus attempting to manifest one’s irrational, even hysterical feelings into new realities, but without plausible cause. The leftist denial of reality then leads to severe cases of self-delusion, so that this labor politician or that Democrat politician can say, “This demographic doesn’t do as well on standardized tests, and therefore, the solution is to give them more money.”
If only we would begin to perceive backward demographics as our equals, then they would become our equals. If we would call a man a woman, he would be a real woman. Or if we said, “we’re all one human race”, then it is magically so. Except, it’s not. But the body-oriented crowd can’t accept facts or truths. They believe facts only exist because fascists believe in them. Ergo, the Antifa crowd seek to attack those fascist believers and bludgeon the world into what they want it to be.
But hold on—what if they’re right? What if there really exist this superior ability to grasp and observe the reality outside our bodies, and that predominantly White men, white masculine right-wing men, the so-called racists and fascists who can see difference, have won, through evolution and struggle, the greatest expertise in precisely this field?
What if it is true that White people, in general, or White men, in particular, possess this uncanny ability to do science, to reason about cause and effect, to logically deduce the past from present observation, and to extrapolate past events into the future, so that we may repeatedly make the sort of predictions necessary to keep a highly technologized civilization operating?
You may say you want to decolonize the Western curriculum, but are you also prepared to move back into muck huts after we decolonize Western architecture? What are you really trying to achieve, if not the destruction of that which causes feelings of envy in your body?
Imagine now if the body-oriented people, i.e., those with a poor ability to perceive the physical, material world, were to take over a higher civilization designed by superior men with superior mental assets. They wouldn’t grasp an iota of our society’s technical complexity. They would not be able to even begin to study the root causes for both wanted and unwanted outcomes, nor that preparation and a tested, systematic approach to work matter.
Our society would crumble. On top of that, I have noticed that these body-oriented people tend to be feminine, by our standards, at least. And this surprises me, because it implies that most so-called minorities, namely the races of Africa, Asia, India, and Latin America, by and large supply the world with men who are, like women, much more body-oriented, rather than world-oriented.
My surprise also makes perfect sense. Despite the aggressive machismo put on display by certain alien races, and their apparent uncontrollable sexual urges to rape all that moves, I’ve observed that their attitudes are merely self-protective measures, namely to hide the fact that they hold a very poor grasp of reality’s inner workings. Their own inability to understand things offends them, yet they’ll willingly blame the White man for creating these inexplicable conditions.
The body-oriented people, made up of leftists, feminists, and minorities, appear to be stuck inside a mythical, motherly womb. They have been born into the world, but their minds have remained trapped inside their mothers. Doesn’t this sound plausible?
There is a famous Jewish saying from the Talmud that goes, “You cannot see reality how it is, but only how you are.” This, however, I think, betrays much about the Jews themselves, namely that they are people who cannot perceive reality how it is, only how they are. White European men are built differently. We can see the reality how it is. Per the Jewish saying, this makes us real.
The European patriarchal mind, then, distinguishes itself through its ability to pry into the real world and discover there its causes and effects, its mechanism, systems, its math, its physics, its formulae and its constants, its predictable nature. This, by no means, intends to discredit the female world of bodily feelings. Rather, the world of masculine science simply complements the sphere of the body.
However, it would be a catastrophic mistake to think that we must give preference to feelings over facts.
European scientists and philosophers and even theologians have together augmented our bodies with a greater understanding of what lies “out there”, culminating in space-age visions of distant galaxies teeming with intelligent life. If our superior abilities to see the reality as it is make us superior, then so be it. We should, at any rate, never feel any shame to it. We should be proud of our ability to see beyond the color of our skin.
This brings me to the fetishization of the human body, as leftists have done. They revel in torturing and mutilating themselves, from nostril piercings to the removal of body parts.
This is also why feminists, furious and angry, claim men denied them the vote. They don’t say that White American men invented modern democracy. If women cared so much about democracy, why didn’t they think of it? Why was it White Greek men who invented direct democracy at the Acropolis? How come all the African, Asian, Indian, and Latin American races came up with despotism as their only political innovation?
The point about despotism, here, is crucial. Despotism is the worship of the tyrannical baby, the dominant child. It is a society whose development has been wholly submitted to the needs of an aggressive baby. Indeed, this type of despotic society is, in fact, a feminist women’s society!
Let me repeat: Historically speaking, men invented democracy, but feminist women invented despotism. Women and minorities aren’t angry at White men for inventing the vote. They are angry that the vote offered White men freedoms outside an otherwise naturally despotic system.
The freedoms White men have won include, for example, exploration, colonization, and conquest, not by sheer force of moving one’s people into new lands, as with migration, but by first conquering other lands by means of mental domination, by introducing, for example, superior forms of governance and agriculture.
Through the imposition of his mental faculties onto lesser peoples, the White man won the world. It was the White man who first began dreaming of alien life inhabiting other solar systems, whereas, for example, Native Americans thought the night skies were a giant bear hide and that stars were small punctures through which that hide revealed a bit of sunlight. Certain African tribes used to believe that the moon was a giant gourd their ancestors once swung into space.
What we call primitive beliefs are really matriarchal beliefs. They are the beliefs of people whose minds are stuck inside their bodies. These people must explain their surroundings in terms of their own bodily anatomy, i.e., they are body-centric people. Thus, we see how a moon could be a gourd, and the sky could be a bear hide. But to imagine that the sky is really a vast empty space carrying other planets and stars governed by laws and constants—that is, indeed, a feat of White supremacy.
The feminist and minority aim is not, and has never been, to elevate themselves to the levels of understanding professed by the European intellect, but to impose on European advances a weight that may not be moved. This weight is meant to drag us down, as perhaps the boulder in the story of King Sisyphus.
And yet, we march on. Even the collapse of modern civilization won’t stop us, for our long-suppressed creativity, namely under the weight of maintenance and other obligations to keep things running, will find its outlet in new adventures and new endeavors. Shall we, perhaps, colonize the Sub-Arctic regions of our world next, and found the mythical state of Hyperborea where a new race of blue-eyed, blond-haired men shall evolve to prepare for the conquest of planets Mars and Venus?
The universe is not a giant womb. Although I feel strongly drawn toward the spiritual world, this doesn’t stop me from understanding, logically and rationally, the rest of the universe. I believe the physical universe itself may be yet another spirit, but one that moves at a much slower pace than we can observe, so that it may appear to us as immovable, such as space itself, or as mountain ranges, planets and stars.
But what we cannot move or change, we can study. What we cannot influence, we can learn to work with. This is what I call supremacy—a willingness to deal with the reality as it is, and not to impose fantastical delusions onto something we do not understand.
I believe there is a God, that people have a soul, a free will, and a mind of their own, and that there is also a physical reality separate from all of this. Making these distinctions, of course, is an act of fascism, according to feminists. They would like to erase the difference between their fantasies and the physical world.
But I think man was born as a being-in-between, i.e., as a link between God and the universe, and that, through us, through our bodies and minds, we may devise solutions, through hard work and creative endeavor, to ultimately, build the world we deserve.
Share this post