Therefore the symmetrical response to break this propaganda, whose method is to humiliate you, is to humiliate *it*:

That was the purpose of Trump, our first Troll President, who understood that there is no "reasoning" with those whose goal is to humiliate you
This is an ideology that spits in your face, and then belly-laughs as you do backflips to explain why, as its warm spittle drips down your lips, we must be "more civil, more liberal" than it: we will just "reason" people out of their frenzy

lol, no

Liberalism had a nice run there, it was very pleasant for a while. But it's proven so impotent at leading that it can be taken over by a newsroom of 25-year-old "communists" with cow rings who spend more on their SSRIs and therapists than a healthy person spends on their home
Cheeto Hitler, Orange Mussolini, wanted to give you and your children just one more generation of your venerated mid-century liberalism, before the cow-ringed commissars completed their goal

But he was too "rude," lmao. So now you get the ruling class you deserve. Enjoy it
Honestly A Centrist is truly brave for a lot of the stances he takes. I want to admire him for that.

But what frustrates me beyond all reason is this idea that you can restore liberalism, through liberal means, when all of your elites have been trained to loathe it.
What's here is no longer "liberalism." It used up liberalism, and is now shedding it, to continue its ruling process

So you can no longer oppose it through "liberalism." It has already poisoned that ideology, and left it in the dust.

The snake has simply shed its skin
So what *you* need, if you wish to preserve any shred of liberalism, is to embrace the only ideology capable, within democratic rule, of opposing the ideology you enabled, and can't stop on your own

The irony is palpable. But again, you demanded this, it's what you *want*
You are them, you're just a defeated version of their old snake-skins, that's exactly what they want you to be, and as long as you look at the old desiccated skins that they've already shed, and say "Wow that's me!", they will always beat you

You need something harsher.
You won't allow it, though. You're the same "them" you loathe. The rational result of them. Why you can't argue against them, rationally, despite all the contradictions

Unless you are able to say "No, these are not, in the end, my values":

These are, in the end, your values.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Doctor-Baron 17cShyteposter, DDS

Doctor-Baron 17cShyteposter, DDS Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @17cShyteposter

23 May
In just fifteen pages of "Suicide of the West," Burnham's already proven a major thesis: that the West has lost the will to survive

Published 1964, so written before the Civil Rights Act. Always crazy to read people forecasting these processes so (relatively) early in the game Image
Really looking forward to the extrapolation of the passage that follows: that liberalism is the rationalization of this process of suicide

Probably best captured by "the conservative case for X," e.g. "the conservative case for chopping your son's nuts off" Image
lol. Basically, for liberalism, "the science is settled" on everything, and if you resist "the science" of the consensus, you are, as it turns out, the only group liberalism is justified in wielding force against

Feel familiar? Image
Read 30 tweets
22 May
Hard disagree on the first part (if you can even taste tannins an average person should be able to distinguish red from white 90% of the time on that factor alone)

But the overall thrust is right, b/c the main point of criticism is just to find dudes with similar taste to yours
Criticism of any kind involves two main branches of "expertise": sampling way more of the field than anyone normal has any time for, and then applying your specific aesthetic preferences to whatever you've just tasted/read/watched/etc
The first branch is, for almost all people, way more important than the second: so the goal of most criticism *should* be that of a humble aggregator

"I waded through all this so you don't have to, and here's the stuff I'd watch for fun if it wasn't my job"
Read 11 tweets
21 May
This is how progressives have been engineering "democracy" for years now, remember that the idea isn't to engage in discussion/debate, it's to bypass it through carefully designed rhetoric

Big data various iterations of propaganda until you find the form that achieves the goal
This was formerly achieved by passing the winning iteration to journalists who would then distribute it to the public

So once you've got enough data, it becomes possible to program JournoBots to guide unruly citizens through their dialogue tree to reach the approved conclusions
Of course normal people recoil at hearing the NYT say "So we built a little propaganda machine to help you route-around your fellow citizen's concerns in real time lol"

But this is all second nature to journalists, who've been steeped in this process for a long time
Read 9 tweets
19 May
To understand leftism, you just have to understand its fundamental animating goal, which it turns out is very straightforward: to dissolve us all into interchangeable human gray goo

Once you've got that in place, everything else follows from it
The mind naturally recoils from this goal, because of how unnatural it is. It throws up all kinds of rationalizations, "No, it's about protecting those who can't protect themselves"

Yeah, you're making my point. The value of harm reduction, continued to its end goal, is gray goo
This basic principle immediately exposes the flaw at the core of Marxism, which the modern liberal "right" treats as Ur-Leftism, because the "liberal right" is itself a ridiculous contradiction, doomed by its inability to reach back *beyond* Communism
Read 14 tweets
17 May
You know what, here's the hottest take I can drop, Stephen King *should* have been the next Poe or Lovecraft, he had both the imaginative horsepower, the narrative mastery, and the sense of horror necessary to become this.
Some of King's work, especially his early ones, and *especially* the first four Gunslinger novels, prove this. He had it in him. Immense, insane imagination, the sensitivity was there.

Bad. Ass. Author. But there was something just a little off. He couldn't quite do it.
So wait—my most volcano-scorching-hot take is that early Orson Scott Card, the Mormon, is the greatest horror author of our age. He sold out later but his '70s/80s shorts are the most horrifying works I've ever read from that period. Even more terrifying than King
Read 7 tweets
17 May
The only question at this point is whether Lovecraft would have been an anime avatar, a Roman statue, or a Central Asian dog
"How many layers of racism are you on right now?"

"I don't know, maybe 5? 6?"

"You are like little baby. Watch this"
"The value of a human being today is measured in terms of his economic efficiency and his erotic potential—that is to say, in terms of the two things that Lovecraft most despised."

lol. Houellebecq presaging a lot of his own soon-to-come preoccupations here
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!