Skip to main content

Goals


 

Somehow I never got this colored and posted.  Anyhow, everyone should be honest about what their goals are and what they have as intended results.  

ADDENDUM:

When I added Popper's Paradox to the "labels" on this, I did a quick check that I had his name right and saw the fast and dirty definition on wikipedia, that unfettered tolerance simply means that the intolerant will always win.  This is baloney, of course, because we can *contend* without being intolerant.  We can still advocate for tolerance among everyone.  But even so, it struck me just how Popper's Paradox plays into the Progressive/SJW ethos.

Intolerance isn't wrong.

Racism isn't wrong.

"Punching" isn't wrong.

Political violence isn't wrong.

Hate isn't wrong.

Not even fascism is wrong.

The Progressive/SJW ethos is that none of these things are wrong, they only become wrong based on who is targeted by those things.

Those who like to quote Popper believe intolerance a moral necessity; for them.
Those who promote Equity or Anti-racism believe that racism is a moral necessity; for them.
Those who attack others, or "punch", believe that "punching" is a moral necessity; for them.
Those who promote political violence believe it is a moral necessity; for them.
Those who excuse their hate believe that their hate is a moral necessity; for them.
Those who use fascist, jack-booted tactics, attack people at their homes, believe that their fascism is a moral necessity; for them.

Because they are GOOD, and you are BAD.

And all that Popper's Paradox means is that the most intolerant side wins, so be intolerant as hard and as loudly as you can.




Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 
Post a Comment
Read more

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism,
Post a Comment
Read more

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o
Post a Comment
Read more