This is an informal post written partially in jest.
Here's a new article;
"Man jailed for leaving a bacon sandwich outside a mosque is found dead in prison halfway through his 12-month sentence"
Long story short. A man puts a bacon sandwich outside the front door to a mosque. (Good for him). A sanctimonious British judge puts him prison for a "hate crime." In prison the man is murdered by Muslims. The prison murder is "under investigation," as if the authorities care, as if they don't already know who did it.
So basically a British judge put a man to death for a prank.
Here is what that sanctimonious judge said about the bacon sandwich;
It was "an attack on England."Wow. Hysteria much?
Now I could talk about the evil of the Cathedral, or about how progressivism is a mental disorder or some such. But I am not going to. It goes much deeper than that. Because the problem is not really progressivism. The problem is conformity itself. And that means the problem is human neurotypicality itself. Yes, that's actually a word. And it's a problem.
Because neurotypicals get their sense of reality from conformity. And neurotypicals get their sense of morality from conformity. Basically, a normie can't think a thought without his friends telling him that it is right, true, and good. Without conformity — without the herd as a reference, he doesn't know right from wrong, up from down, truth from untruth, or real from unreal. He needs an externally validating agent to keep him grounded in reality — and to keep him moral. As Slavoj Zizek and Lacan would both say, he needs a "big Other." Yeah, and THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
He shouldn't need a big Other. He should know what is right, true, and good independently of any kind of Other. He should simply know what is right, like me. And he should simply know what is real, like me.
(I say this with a tad bit of humor).
Unfortunately most people who are utterly certain of their own morality are either smug liberals like Pajama Boy or schizophrenics and shit. And pajama boy is a conformist.
So how do I know what is real without reference to the herd? Am I schizophrenic or something? (Maybe. I'll just have to let you decide.) But I like to think that I'm not. And I like to think that it comes down to this: I observe reality and they don't.
You see, there is this really neat trick to understand the universe. Just see what is in front of your noise. Someone told me to do this years ago back when I was a normie and I've been doing it ever since. Because a really, really smart person will be really, really dumb if he can't observe anything. There are tire mechanics with more common sense than geniuses. This is because they work with their hands and can observe their tools and machinery. Trust me, if you are bad at observation you will be a bad at fixing tires. I know. I used to be both. Then I got good at both.
So if you observe reality long enough you are bound to come up with a sense of what is true independently of others. And if you observe reality long enough you will probably develop a moral code something like, "things that don't work are evil" or some such.
If you've already done this congratulations. This article is not about you.
And that works just fine. And it doesn't depend on herds. And that's a good thing because they are all insane anyway. Next time someone dies ask yourself a question: if nobody conformed would this guy be dead? Then witness your horror as you slowly realize after hundreds of observations that all these dead people are only dead because of neurotypical conformity. Pretty soon you will say to yourself, "ah, another one dead from other people's conformity."
"Another miscarriage of justice from conformity."
"Another suicide bomb from conformity."
"Yet another war from conformity."
Then you will realize that it isn't really the Hitlers of the world that are the problem, but all the many sheep who pull the trigger. The true horror comes from realizing that it is the sheep who are malevolent, not der führer. Then you realize all these sheep progressives constantly hate on poor Adolph because what they really fear is not the Man but themselves. Because sheep pull triggers and they're sheep. Hitlers only give orders. All poor ol' Adolph ever did was give a few speeches!
And if you are really smart you may realize that you are one of them — one of these trigger pulling normie sheep.
And if you think either one of us in't a trigger pulling sheep then you are deluding yourself.
Chew on that. I will gas you friendo.
It isn't "following orders" which is the problem. I goes much deeper than that. It goes to the very way men construct their morality to begin with. To say "I wouldn't follow orders" is deluded because if you are neurotypical then the very way you construct you moral code is dependent on the herd. When the herd goes insane so will you. You will then believe, sincerely, that you are doing the right thing. Moreover, when you are given that order you will believe that it is right, true, and good — that you are defending the fatherland! Heil! . . . um. Cough.
Would I put you in a gas chamber? Of course. And you would do the same to me. This is not a moral condemnation. I am not judging you. Though there is one crucial difference between us. I am enough of an outcast that if the day ever came I would be long gone from this country. So I would probably never be put in the position of being forced to make that kind of moral choice to begin with. My neuro-atypical ass would look around and say "the normies have finally really gone nutters," and I would be out of the country on the next jet. I predicted the elections of Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump. Do you really think I wouldn't see muther fucking Adolph coming? Figuring out how neurotypicals go insane is my lifelong hobby, like entomology. It's what I do. It's a survival skill everyone like me develops. We must predict the normies. They're dangerous to us.
A typical sperg has spent a lifetime being bullied. He can tell when the shit has hit the fan. You can't. You're one of them.
The greatest delusion of the normie mind is the false belief that when all others change that he won't change. Somehow, this man who always perfectly conforms to everything, who has spent a lifetime fitting in, he believes that he is somehow the exception to the rule. He genuinely believes that he thinks for himself. That he has his own unique opinion. Never mind that he thinks exactly the same things as what talk radio and his friends are telling him, (or NPR and the Daily Show for liberals). He will always labor under the delusion that yes, he really did formulate his own viewpoint. But get this. Most people can't think. And if we're honest, most people probably shouldn't think. They're libel to develop opinions that get them ostracized.
So the world is essentially divided into two groups. (1); a tiny minority that can think for themselves a little bit, and (2), all the millions of people they manipulate.
Even the smallest amount of original thought is grounds for influencing hundreds of millions of people. Even when those thoughts are wrong. Remember Ayn Rand? What was her original thought? Right. "Selfishness is a virtue." What about Judith Butler? "Gender is constructed." Or Herbert Marcuse? "Tolerance of intolerance is intolerance." Howard Zinn? "White people are evil." And Curtis Yarvin? "Democracy is a form of totalitarianism."
Yes, I know this contradicts my past statements in support of Yarvin's ideas.
One could easily see a vast herd of normies pulling triggers for any of these ideologies in the future.
If the world were either composed of all original thinkers or all conformists this would not be a problem. A world of all thinkers would never agree to kill anyone or do much of anything. A world of all conformists would never think. The disaster is that they inhabit the same space. As someone who fancies himself a thinker I like to think that being an idiot conformist is the problem. But thinkers are a tiny minority with a vast influence. The obvious solution: segregation.
If this is the way the world is to be; a vast herd following a tiny, mostly insane minority of ideologues, then the sensible solution is to quarantine the philosophers in their own republic. Let them live. Give them a garden paradise even. No need for it to be drab. But let them live apart. Because the neurotypicals are never going to stop obeying orders and the ideologues are never going to stop issuing them. Herds need the absolute absence of thought to function. They need ideological security. Thinkers need freedom.
The Constitution guarantees freedom of thought. It might as well guarantee freedom of manipulation. Freedom of thought is for the man who can think. Let there be a system within exitocracy for free thinkers. If a person wants to say whatever he likes he can emigrate there. The rest can have ideological security. Then, when the philosophers come up with something new it can be presented to a "board of ideological security" composed of various religious leaders. Only if they are unanimous is the idea allowed to escape the free republic.
What do you think. Good or bad idea? Totalitarian hell? New dark age? It would definitely make for a peaceful planet.