This is a response to the following video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl1ujzRidmU
The first thing to address is possibly the most obvious, already noticed by some people in the comments on youtube: what is the point of uploading the video? What does he aim to achieve by humiliating his daughter like this, and handing out all the other punishments he said would make his daughter’s life ‘a lot harder’? All it will do is make his daughter obedient for fear of punishment. It will not make her a better human being, or change her mind. If anything, it will make her worse by breaking down her resistance and making her passive. Any change he might believe will be positive will be entirely superficial - a superficial change to suit the mind of a superficial parent. The relationship between himself and his daughter is typically of all relationships in Gentile society. It is an honest power relationship. The person without power has a choice between between one course of action, which leads to punishment, and another, which does not. It is an uncomplicated, almost economic, exchange. A true Gentile relationship fits this model completely, although true Gentile behaviour is rarer than it once was and he complicates this simple idea by introducing dishonesty, which makes it all the more disgusting. This dishonesty manifests itself as an attempt to introduce moral arguments telling the powerless that one choice is ‘right’, rather than giving them a plain choice and simply stating that one choice leads to punishment. By using moral arguments, he is being dishonest to both his daughter and himself, since he believes there is a moral justification for his actions, and is thus denying the reality of this exchange and lying to himself about his motivations.
Let us examine this morality, and see why it is nonsense. Here is a quotation from him:
‘When I was your age I had… went to college while in high school, worked two jobs…’
But to what end? Perhaps his circumstances were such that he needed to do this to survive, but his daughter’s are not, and hence there is no reason to criticise her for not doing it. It is one thing to believe in the importance of necessary work, and to do enough to keep oneself alive and healthy for a purpose, and another to believe that the harder you work, and the more destitute you are, the prouder of yourself you should be, even if it serves no purpose. There are even those (such as many Communists) who raise the status of the man who works extremely hard for little gain to the status of a hero. This is part of a wider trend of idealising the victim, or emphasising meaningless competitions of endurance and excess. ‘I can work harder than you can. I am more destitute than you. You could never put up with this, so I am better.’ ‘I can eat more steaks than you can.’ It goes on. Is this not the mentality of a slave?
He believes in the value of work, perhaps, for the purpose of attaining material comfort and luxuries. Emphasis on these ideas, but lack of concern for his daughter’s humiliation at his own hands or her own concerns and opinions, captures perfectly two ideas on this site - the difference between freedom and liberty and contempt for survivalism, which are very much linked. It is very telling that he hints at the sentiment that his daughter should be grateful to him for improving her computer so that she can educate herself. To what end does he want her to educate herself? We have already seen he does not care about genuinely improving her mind, so it must be to make as much money as possible to indulge her material desires, beyond the requirements of a simple life, for which there is little need to be educated. For some reason, this is seen as being more important than her freedom to express herself honestly (and she must feel that she cannot do this, or else she would not have felt the need to hide her letter.) If she had been able to express herself honestly, they could have discussed whatever issue it was that was making her concerned about the amount of work she had to do, instead of uploading a disgusting video to youtube. There is a term on this site for whatever it is her father thinks she will get out of education and the work ethic he wants to instil in her: ‘Goy biscuit.’ When I was her age I was always annoyed when, at school, we were told that if we worked hard enough we could have things like a big house and a fast car. How dare anyone assume they know what I want out of life, I thought! And out of everything they could have chosen, how dare they choose something so mundane!
We get the impression throughout the video that the father thinks his daughter owes him something, either because he pays for her food and gives her a home or some other reason. We get the impression he thinks he knows what is best for her. Fuck you, cowboy man! The child never owes anything to its parent. The media bombards us with images of happy families. Centuries of perverse culture has long ago stamped the idea that the family is the highest ideal, and that the birth of a child is a joyous occasion to be celebrated into the Gentile consciousness. The reality is that whenever you have a child, you bring another instance of suffering into the world. In extreme cases, the child could be deformed or disabled, but people reproduce every day without guilt because they want a family to ease the hardship of their lives, or want a fuck, or even just to prove they are normal or fertile.
So much for the faults of the video itself. The thing that most shocked me was not the video, but the overwhelmingly positive response to it, even from young people. In fact, I could not find, out of more than a dozen responses I saw, even one that disapproved. Where does this attitude come from? I have various theories, and whenever two theories that sound equally valid are presented there is a danger that they are idle speculation, but I would say that they are all grounded in consistent experience and are all contributing factors.
The first factor is a false moral instinct. Most people accept the morality they are given as a child as absolute and do not question it, mostly due to the trust they invest in adults. By the time this trust is gone, morality is usually too deeply ingrained to be revised. Even if some details are altered, the most basic principles are never questioned because they are not even noticed. It is by appealing to unquestioned moral rules that the majority of mankind is most easily herded. Here, the moral rule includes love and respect for one’s parents. It is accepted as axiomatic.
The second factor is a combination of lack of freedom and certain peculiarities of the (absolute) Gentile mind, which applies to the purer, more archetypal Gentiles in the audience. The Gentile mind, being the mind of a hunter, has an instinct for playfulness and sportsmanship. The father, in posting the video, is immediately viewed by the Gentile as someone engaged in competition with his daughter, who has won through cleverness, and that this should be accepted by his daughter as if, having been in a fair competition where the daughter might have had the upper hand and humiliated her father had things turned out differently, it would be unsportsmanlike for the daughter to have complained. The Gentile mind is unidealistic because of these factors. Instead of trying to resolve conflict or take an unconditional stance against the enemy, life becomes a game, where everyone is expected to be in competition – to respect the others in competition with them as acting rationally and ‘in their interests’, to accept defeat gracefully, to enjoy the playful insults and camaraderie as enhancing the spirit of the competition etc.
These attitudes are enhanced in a society where freedom is gradually being taken away. Instead of rationally and unconditionally fighting for freedom, the Gentile is drawn to extreme views and actions that give immediate satisfaction and seem to ‘get back’ at the enemy, giving a false sense of freedom and defiance. Sometimes, it does not even matter what these things are, as long as they are extreme. Maddox is an example of this. The father shooting the laptop is an example of this. The Gentile is attracted to this because it seems to be an extreme action in defiance of those who say he cannot ‘discipline’ his child, as if those people exist in great numbers, yet look at the positive response to the video! Look at how easily these people are being herded by setting up one opinion that makes them angry, then herding them into an opposite extreme! This is exactly the point we have been trying to make when discussing the imminent transfer from PC to ZC attitudes. PC is outrageous hypocrisy. ZC is also outrageous, yet people will follow it because they will want to react against PC in an extreme a way as possible. Why not just follow the people who are thinking about things rationally and join us?
The third factor is related to the second. Morality in society is disintegrating. This is recognized by right-wing polemicists, but in a crude way. I do not think it is entirely true that people are getting worse. Genetically, they are the same. I think the morals and social expectations that kept their behavior under control are being eroded, and they are regressing to their natural state. The recent past (the 1950s for example) was not an ideal time, but a time of hypocrisy and false piety, although there were some people, as in every time, who genuinely had strong and noble principles or were genuinely lifted to a higher level by the social institutions available. Those elements of the population who recognize some of the more superficial problems in society and are nostalgic for a time when these problems did not exist are, again, being herded. The more positive aspects of such societies are being lumped together with all the other aspects of them to create a false ideal. One of these aspects is discipline and strictness in family life and schools, hence the strange positive response from some young people, who recognize some problems of society (caused partially by their parents’ generation), but who, in the absence of idealism, are being herded towards a belief that their parents should be respected. I do not even think the portrayal of family life in earlier times shown to us is accurate. I once knew a man born in 1912 who refused to buy his dog a cage ‘in case he felt like a prisoner.’ His son, born in the 1960s, disagreed, and told him he should buy a cage.
Her father does, at least, probably without knowing it, point out one flaw in his daughter that is possibly true - that by her age he had left home. I hope she has the means to leave home, is not prevented from doing so by her own concerns or some outside authority, and finds herself able, without distracting herself from whatever she thinks is really important, to find work that gives her the means to take charge of her own destiny. In an age where the ancient Zionist plan of creating a slave society looks set to succeed, few seem to care or be fighting for their freedom. Many of those who commented on the video seem to have had their priorities turned upside down. Perhaps they would welcome slavery, but I hope there can at least be an allegory, a microcosm where someone does refuse slavery and takes the hard road to freedom. This is an even more specific allegory - the father is the Zionist taking control of the internet with SOPA and PIPA and all the other means at his disposal, and that video mirrors the result, for just as he stole his daughter’s letter from her, invaded her privacy and punished her, so will the Zionist invade the privacy of anyone whose opinions do not fit into their paradigm and purpose, and then punish them. It would be nice to think there are many such microcosms of what should be happening on a wider scale happening to individuals, and that the world is not lying down to accept slavery on every scale.
Good article,
It is as the old Norse saying goes, “The fierceness of men rules the fate of women.”
Hopefully both their lives improve, with or without living together.