This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists
Submitted by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,
A common misconception in America today is that our nation is evenly divided between conservatives and liberals in an absolute sense. This is not necessarily true.
Though national elections always seem to progress along a 51 percent to 49 percent opposition, with red states barely beating our blue states or blue states barely beating out red states, this is not a practical representation of the legitimate ideological boundaries within the U.S. What you really have in America is a wide spectrum of beliefs of varying degrees in-between ultimate extremes. I am of course referring to the general public in this respect.
The top of the political pyramid is a different story entirely. For them there are no sides whatsoever. Top Republicans and top Democrats are essentially the same animal with the same goals. They may wear different masks and exploit diverging rhetoric, but at the end of the day for elitists, America is a one-party system.
For the rest of us there is a hazy drift, with many people holding some views that lean conservative and other views that lean liberal.
Unfortunately, “moderates” do very little to direct the future of nations. Nearly all great changes and great upheavals are initiated by the elites themselves (extremists in their own right) or by smaller groups on opposite ends of the spectrum (which are often manipulated by elitists). At the very far reaches of the void of the left and liberalism festers what I would call a sociopolitical theology; the cult of cultural Marxism.
If you are confused as to what cultural Marxism really is I highly suggest you research as much as possible into the Frankfurt School founded by Marxist professors and academics in Germany during the 1920s and the early 1930s. The basic foundation of the Frankfurt School was to take the collectivist philosophy of Karl Marx, which revolved primarily around economic class structure, and apply it in a more sociological manner utilizing Hegelian dynamics.
The Frankfurt School sought to explore “class oppression” not only between the rich and the poor, the workers and the aristocracy, but also in aspect to races, religions, families, genders, behavioral psychology, etc. That is to say, the Marxists of the Frankfurt School were looking for new methods to divide and conquer existing societies and nations beyond simple economic conflicts.
After the rise of fascism in Germany, numerous members of the Frankfurt School fled to the U.S., bringing their ideological framework with them and applying it in U.S. universities and academic circles.
One of the primary character traits or strategies of cultural Marxists today is that they rarely if ever actually self-identify as cultural Marxists. This strategy allows them to change their colors on a whim, like a chameleon, and it prevents opponents from pinning down their world view in order to present a solid argument against them. It also allows them to disassociate from past cultural Marxists with negative reputations while holding the same beliefs as those historical figures.
The cultural Marxist denies he is a cultural Marxist, then he goes on to argue an ideology which perfectly matches what cultural Marxists have historically believed.
This is only one of the many reasons why most people, conservatives and moderate liberals alike, distrust and even despise cultural Marxists. The pervasive weakness among cultural Marxists in America is that they tend to believe their own propaganda. They think that they are an actual social force in this country with the numbers and support to back their activities. They fell into this delusion because for a time they have been effective at infiltrating popular media and generating a false consensus, not to mention organizing public and online mobs to be used as a weapon against others. They seem to be everywhere, yet they are few.
Lately, though, the illusion of numbers is beginning to collapse for them. Masses of people, even those that identify with the “Left”, are beginning to disown what are often referred to as “social justice warriors” (cultural Marxists) and are speaking out. Here is a list of reasons why the public is shifting and the tide is turning against social justice and cultural Marxists.
Third Wave Feminism
Cultural Marxists are collectivists at their very core. This means that their ideological pursuit is the eradication of individualism, individual liberty, and groups based on voluntary participation in the name of the “greater good of the greater number.” Collectivists seek to centralize everything. This goal could not be more evident than in the efforts of third-wave feminists.
Third-wave feminists are best understood through the lens of what they refer to as “intersectionality,” a made up social justice term that whitewashes the new feminist strategy of co-opting ALL other social issues and forcing them under the umbrella of the feminist movement. Feminism is not simply about creating equal opportunity and equal rights for women, not anymore. Instead, third-wave feminism claims dominion over women’s rights, all gender related issues, race issues, gay rights issues, economic “inequality”, immigration issues, etc.
Of course, if you believe in working for equal rights of all people regardless of their individual and ethnic traits, you would be called an egalitarian by definition, not a feminist. But feminists attack this distinction and continue to demand that they are the sole proprietors of “equality” and claim all other methodologies are irrelevant.
This kind of totalitarianism has provoked a growing backlash against feminists, even from more left leaning subsections of the American population. People are beginning to realize that there really is no need for feminism anymore. Women already have equal protection under the law, and they already have equal opportunity.
In fact, in many sectors women are given considerable advantages over men. Women are given greater favor in college applications and grant applications which is why women today outnumber men in universities. Women are often given favor in job applications, even in professions which men are more inclined to succeed in (like firefighting, for example); this bias in favor of women by employers is often inspired by government incentives and by a fear of civil suits. Women have far more institutionalized advantages in divorce court, and, women are more likely to receive reduced sentences for the same crime as a man.
The most common lie used by feminists to argue for the existence of inequality is the “gender pay gap,” which has long been debunked. A woman who works the same exact job as a man with the same effort and diligence, for the same exact hours, and does not take maternity leave or extra vacations is paid the SAME as that man. And if for some reason there is something amiss in the accounting, there are laws in place to punish employers that do actually pay women less for the same work. There is no gender pay gap except what women create for themselves through their own life choices.
Since women have the same rights and protections as men today, feminists are forced to create oppression out of thin air to then fight against. The new battlefield for feminists and social justice warriors is about "feelings" rather than law. That is to say, feminists believe that personal feelings should be protected by law and that contrary or discriminatory thought must be criminalized. Of course, the definition of criminal discrimination is left rather broad. Ultimately, it is the feminists and their allies in government that arbitrarily decide what thoughts are "bad" and what thoughts are acceptable.
The feminist movement must co-opt and absorb other groups and other issues and it must create exponentially more divisions and imaginary oppression in order to justify its existence. They will never stop. There will never come a day when feminists are satisfied because their goal is not equality. Their goal is social power, and to maintain social power indefinitely.
Mob Shaming And Self Censorship
Cultural Marxists will use any tool at their disposal to shut down or silence dissent, but they prefer to use mob tactics and public shaming as their bread and butter. Get enough of your cohorts together in an organized attack and the illusion of consensus becomes powerful leverage.
There are numerous instances of accomplished people being railroaded out of their jobs in the past few years by cultural Marxist mobs, and numerous people harassed into self censorship for fear of being labeled a sexist, misogynist, racist, bigot, xenophobe, homophobe, etc. This tactic, though, has been so overused that it is now losing its effectiveness. There is a growing movement of people who no longer care what they are labeled by cultural Marxists and when the mob no longer has shaming as a tool, they can only move on to more “direct” actions.
Physical Interference With Freedom Of Speech
Now that the shaming techniques are becoming passé, cultural Marxists are attempting to physically disrupt discussion or silence opposing views. From the notorious social justice mob at the University of Missouri, which called for “some muscle over here,” to forcefully remove student journalists covering the protest, to feminist mobs shutting down conferences on men’s issues, to the professional agitators bused in to disrupt Trump rallies, cultural Marxists are beginning to physically impede the rights of other people to speak, or listen and participate.
How do they rationalize this anti-1st Amendment activity? Easy! They simply argue that it is THEIR 1st Amendment right to disrupt YOUR 1st Amendment rights, even if you are in a public space. This is the kind of circular insanity that leads directly to Stalinist or Maoist totalitarianism.
I’m sure that many people are also familiar with the heightened number of incidences in recent weeks of these same cultural Marxists being beaten up in response to their strategy. Expect this to continue and expect reactions to social justice mobs to become even more violent as we get closer to election time.
Reverse Racism
My favorite hypocritical claim from cultural Marxists is that there is no such thing as reverse racism. Meaning, a black or Hispanic or Asian person, etc., cannot be racist towards a white person. How is this possible? They assert that racism requires institutionalized “advantage” or “privilege.” Only white people can be racist because we have all the “privilege” and institutional protection.
Of course, bringing up the fact that the president of the United States is a black man does not seem to matter. The so called “patriarchy” reigns supreme, and the patriarchy is white.
If you think that reverse racism is not a real issue, then you might want to take a gander at this little debate at Harvard, in which the main argument by a Black Lives Matter activist was “white people do not have a right to life” (be sure to check out the links included with the video which affirm that this was not simply a debater “playing devil’s advocate”).
So, here is where cultural Marxism always goes wrong, or right, depending on who is benefiting. Communist movements like cultural Marxism, have a fantastic knack for eliciting fascist responses and driving otherwise even-handed people into the arms of fascist governments. It happened in Germany, Spain and Italy before World War II, and it could very well happen again in America today.
The debaters argue against the right to life of an entire ethnic group (white people), because they claim that white people have abused their privileges to exploit or oppress other groups.
First, like all collectivists, they have completely disregarded individual liberty and inherent conscience. All white people are presented as a singular group (which they are not), and all white people are presented as guilty for crimes which can be attributed to any other ethnic group at any other point in history as well. All white people are accused of having “privileges” beyond that of other ethnic groups, but no proof of this privilege is ever presented; it is just treated as a given fact.
Second, these cultural Marxists foolishly do not take into account that if they want to promote the extreme side of communism to support their views others could just as easily take the opposing extreme in response. What would a fascist say to the Harvard debater’s arguments?
A fascist might argue the other side of the coin — that all other ethnic groups suffer oppression because they are “inferior,” “weak” or “intellectually inadequate.” A fascist would probably assert that the weak survive only by the good graces of the strong, and that only the strong have a “right to life.” A fascist would argue that all groups that are so easily oppressed should be exterminated to make room for the strong.
This argument is just as absurd as the argument presented at Harvard because it completely overlooks the fact that individuals have a right to life, period. Being part of an ethnic group is not a crime in itself, but cultural Marxists would like white people in particular to ignore their individualism and believe they are defined only by their color and that they should feel guilty by association. This is the epitome of racism.
Black Lives Matter
Yes, black lives do matter, just as all lives matter. But as the Harvard debater above argues, certain ethnic groups matter “more” because they are supposedly more oppressed.
The classic tactic of cultural Marxists is to create new divisions or to exacerbate existing divisions in order to destabilize a society. Once a society is broken, it can then be rebuilt according the vision of a select few. One of the best methods of causing division is to exploit cultural differences based on obvious separations.
People do tend to separate more according to skin color and ethnicity. This is a tale as old as time. Is it wrong? Not necessarily. Ethnic groups develop their own belief systems, their own values and principles, and though many human beings share archetypal similarities and inherent conscience regardless of the time and place they were born, they still have anthropological discourse.
It is very easy to pit one ethnic group against another if the right pressure is applied. Black lives matter is nothing more than an effort by cultural Marxists to capitalize on race tensions and make them far worse through agitation.
Forced Multiculturalism
As stated above, different ethnic groups can have different priorities. The concept of freedom is inherent in the human psyche from birth, but numerous cultures are structured around suppressing that human desire and need. These cultures cannot be reconciled with cultures that do respect individual liberty. There are many other important differences that cause clashes between cultures, but freedom vs. collectivism is the most explosive.
Cultural Marxists certainly have no respect for freedom. Their only concern is artificial “equality,” because forced equality makes collectivism possible. This often means grinding down the best the world has to offer to match it with the worst the world has to offer.
Multiculturalism is really just a mechanism by which failed and unstable cultures are aggressively injected into more stable societies in order to disrupt and then homogenize them. Europe is now experiencing this in unprecedented fashion, and the U.S. has been dealing with it incrementally for decades.
Multiculturalism is of course a nice way of describing the Cloward-Piven Strategy, a strategy designed by cultural Marxists to deliberately undermine economic and social systems. The use of Islamic refugees as a battering ram against Western society is a perfect summation of this strategy.
Islamic culture abiding by Sharia Law and unfamiliar with Western traditions and beliefs is completely incompatible with European and American civilization. It is one thing for Islamic culture to exist with respect to Western values, it is another thing for Islamic culture to supplant Western values.
The process of forced multiculturalism is driving large portions of the EU and America to become violently opposed to cultural Marxists. I fear that this is leading to irreconcilable division to the point of war, just as what took place during the last Great Depression. And, as I pointed out at the beginning of this article, cultural Marxists are a tiny minority, a paper tiger posing as the real thing. If they do not stop with their incessant subversion and cultism they will end up being the first to pay the price. The rest of us will pay later.
»
- 238 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
" A woman who works the same exact job as a man with the same effort and diligence, for the same exact hours, and does not take maternity leave or extra vacations is paid the SAME as that man."
One of many inane qoutes from this article. I mean undercuts the essence of our entire existence. Women can be equal to men as long as the do not have babies. Stupidest thing I have ever read.
Hmmm, that's not what the article is saying at all. It is saying that women who do not take maternity leave will be paid the same as men in the same job, because maternity leave will naturally reduce hours worked for the women. Women who take maternity leave would naturally earn less because they are away from work.
If a woman wants to have a baby, which for most women is a biological imperative (or else you and I would not be here), she can not be equal to a man in terms of pay, in a capitalistic society. Nice.
They are born equal under the law. Then they make choices and compete according to their desire, abilities, and situation.
Here is a real good reason to hate a cultural Marxist:
University president says students scared, 'in pain' after 'Trump 2016' written on campus...
How many universities will implode when The Donald is sworn in?
Hopefully all of them. I cannot fathom sending my children to one of them. I think there will be a time when having a diploma from some of these places will be a hindrance towards getting a job rather than an ace up the sleeve. People will just assume you are one of these SJW assholes and not want you in their business. Which means they will probably just wind up working for the government in some pointless agency that shouldn't even exist.
If you want your kids to learn something useful in university, you have the option to send them in a Russian, Chinese, or Indian school (public, not private !). Chances are it will be way cheaper, however they first have to make it in (admission tests) AND learn the language. And that's the easy part...
That sounds like a good idea,,
For mid-term future utility, Chinese/Mandarin #1.
Russian #2.
Better yet, both.
And, I cannot recall ever having my hackles rise so much as when I first watched that Harvard debate with the activist, racist, Nazi f’n knigger punk.
That arrogant little F has a number of nasty beat-downs or worse in his future.
If he becomes a martyr for his cause, so much the better.
Germany was a really good deal for foreign students. Although committing to 4 years in Europe might be a bit optimistic at this point.
Germany WAS a good choice.
Past tense..
Until they get their act together.
As a German in knowledge and heritage only, you do not want that to happen.
Emmanuel Law: Never let a good crisis go to waste.
It is rare thing, that a spic has such a profound propaganda statement.
It isn't Jews who are slurred as spics, it is Puerto Ricans. I assume, like nigger, that it is a lazy contraction (of Hispanic). The Jews are slurred as kikes, and I have no idea where that comes from. Which brings me to why I bothered to log in. There was a distinct group overrepresented in the Frankfurt School (and later Columbia U). Let's just say that Barbara Spectre comes from a long line of troublemakers. The leftists raised a statue to Rosa Luxembourg, the Communist who stayed in Germany long enough to be murdered. Pity that the Frankfurt School wasn't also a smoking heap/future memorial.
/now that there is some critical thinking...
SPIC
Sock Puppet In Chief
Sorry guys. I have been called a Spic many times and I have nothing in common with our current sock puppet in chief. I resent even the implication. As a redneck Mexican I have more in common with my cracker relatives than some metrosexual twit.
Cultural marxists believe in fallibilism.
I.E. its ok to lie if the ends justify it.
my kids go to university here in germany. i was shocked SHOCKED when my daughter told me about her SERIOUS first year course load. shes studying law. no BS classes or repetitions of high school. full on high powered learning. university is serious stuff still here. no two years of adjustment BS with mamby pamby basket-weaving or english lit. french law, roman law, EZU law German law, civil, criminal .....
you want to get coddled and feel good stay in the USSA.
oh yeah, its CHEAP too. i can afford to rent her a small but very decent apartment for PEANUTS compared to the debt bomb paradigm in the USSA. she will emerge debt free and highly educated.
this will change, of course, if Ferkel and Soros have their way but for now its like the '50s in the USSA in the education dept.
No wonder everyone thinks so highly of Germany. Educated and productive.
Like the '50s in America.... oh, that hurts.
I wonder how they'll do after all the immigrants move in...?
They will use their diplomas to fish turds out of the public pools.
America's economy and cultural life actually require, maybe, 150 or so four-year colleges and universities, so hopefully most of them will implode and go out of business... and their faculty and staff can move on to find a productive role in society.
"and their faculty and staff can move on to find a productive role in society"
Well, we still have a shit ton of litter all over the nation. And we'll need body removers after the hangings.
Kobe Beef will convert Yale and Harvard into soap-rendering plants and crematoriums, respectively. The "delousing shower facilities" are reserved for Columbia University. Mandatory Right of Return for all graduates. Liberal Arts facilities at all universities accepting federal funds will become forced labor camps.
Kobe Beef for Reichsmarshall 2020. Do it for the Lebensraum.
Harvard, Princeton and Yale have their nugget enclaves, much of the fluff is padding to keep the ball rolling.
MIT has less fluff, but only a few percentage points now a day.
Pity.
Consider this: the modern quality of the Ivy League pranking has gone way down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Harvard%E2%80%93Yale_prank
Women can have both a career and a child but should they? Raising a child--being a mother--is an undertaking (I don't want to call it a "job" because it's beyond that) unto itself. Parenting in modern times has been largely stripped from us and relegated to the State through state sponsored child care and public schooling, which is detrimental overall to our society (as evidence I give you: US). The government does such a great job with everything they do, so why should raising our children be any different, right?
A woman should be allowed to have time off from work to have a child. But she should also accept her role as mother and give up her career ambitions in favor of being there to raise the child. That's what I did in my case, so it's not like I'm just soap boxing here.
I'm all for women leading independent lives but when you're with a man and you love him and he loves you and especially when you have a child together you become one, and the role of the man in that union is to provide, and the role of the woman is to nurture. It is what it is. That is nature. By throwing off the balance and having both provide, neither nurture, and there is imbalance. This is the way it is. Spare me any feminist derived horse shit. Accept reality.
I say that with a love of woman, both as objects of desire, and as mothers.
I am Chumbawamba.
Ha! The up/down votes are right about even right now, let's see how the gender war over my comments shapes up.
-Chumblez.
I agree with all of the above…
The roles of parents have been perverted by the overbearing government and the predatory financiers.
Few understand the long term sociological repercussions.
I don't follow the mainstream horse shit anymore so I don't know what's going on in that alternate reality. Do you remember when single motherhood was being promoted? We all know how that turned out. Talk about directly lying, misleading and victimizing women and children under the guise of promoting feminism and equality. I would hope even the dimmest of women have caught on to that farce. If they haven't, well, that's very unfortunate.
Consumers don't have families. They don't have communities. They don't have countries. They have no history, no ethnicity, no values, no gender, and no role other than to enable Global Growth and render their productivity unto the Owners of the People Farm.
Every Battery Chicken is Equal! FORWARD GLOBAL SOVIET!
Well sad. Had I the chance to do it over again I would have stayed home until our children were in grade school. Instead I worked Pm shift and my husband stayed on days. We were exhausted and it was hard on our marriage but we stuck together and made it work. Looking back we never should have bought a house. The land I was interested in was $30k so we should have bought that and lived in a trailer. I could have homeschooled and gardened which would have been very contributory to our finances. We were young and stupid to follow the pack.
Parental roles are different for the sexes but each are valuable. Parenting is basically nurturing and limits. With both did this in our own unique way. The trick is understanding and appreciating the other persons approach and work as a team. The other critical characteristic is laughing at things and letting shit go.
No job is as difficult as raising children. Nor as rewarding. It is thankless though you give 100% of yourself. When I see narcissistic young people with their attention scope locked on their phones today I just shake my head.
Miffed;-)
You can't blame yourself, we've all been coming out of the haze slowly, and the information that woke us up just wasn't as readily available a generation ago as it is now. And we get tricked into this modern parenting model and structure that has the kids mostly exposed to government parenting instead of our own, as I mentioned. I'm lucky in that I was able to have the wife stay home and raise the children, and I was only a mile away at my office. It was an ideal situation, for a time.
As far as the rest of your comments, you basically captured my sentiments exactly. Raising a child is a partnership where mother and father work in tandem, each playing their natural role. And it is indeed an extremely demanding and rewarding experience that people should take more seriously than just something they need to get done with in their life.
-Chumblez.
My wife gave up $100k+ /year to stay at home, with our first born. 10 years later, we now have two, and we homeschool. I work from home, own my own business. We drive a 20 yr old car. Stay out of debt. We have a nice arrangement with a retired research scientist who goes south for 8 months a year, and we live in his house. For the 4 months he's back, we hit the road for about 10k miles, camp/explore/hike and visit with family/friends all over the country. We know we're doing the right thing for our kids, and for ourselves. Strange thing, is that all of the people we meet who have kids, where both parents are slave to the job/debt/mortgage/lifestyle - they all express an envy of our lifestyle. And you can pick up on their longing to break free of it, but not really. They can't break free. They say they want something else...but the character isn't there to break the spell.
I can't fathom the idea of indoctrinating our kids into this .gov/Gates common core, no child left behind curriculum. I'm grappling with how to best prepare our kids when they inevitably must come to interact with their peers at some point. I can hardly stand my peers at this point. And it will be multitudes worse for my kids and their peers, as the separation between them will be far wider.
Good for you for daring to live your own life! The best way to teach children is to instill good habits and to be a good example. Beyond that, you have to let them lift off.
I cannot abide most people for similar reasons. Teach your children to surround themselves with like-minded fellows and not fear going it alone.
Good luck.
No brainwashing. No vaccines.
No child left behind = no child advances. No individuality. Everybidy gets an award, rendering all rewards and honors meaningless. It is a fraud, like multi culturalism.
Your kids will be the "diamonds in the rough" when someone of an older generation looks to someone of a younger generation for someone they can count on, someone to take over.
Their "peers" will be perhaps inseparably left in the dust as the "social justice warriors" begin chopping off each others' heads.
Many of these younger folks will grow out of it - but they are still young and making mistakes. It means that we of the middle and older generations (me/us) are going to have to be careful. You cannot turn the keys over to the sniveling "victims", Else we end up like we are now - with puppet demagogues everywhere in power.
I can hardly stand my peers at this point.
my sentiments exactly.
underman, Chumbawamba, Manthong, It is good to know there are a few humans out there.
If I may offer one addendum; "And we get tricked into this modern parenting model and structure that has the kids mostly exposed to government and the culturally marxist dominated television parenting instead of our own, as I mentioned."
On 14FEB79 I married a 23 year old woman, I was nineteen...there was a shotgun in the background.
On 07AUG79 we had a son.
Mom quit work, I did whatever I could find. At the time I was full time at Dizzy World making something like $1.82 an hour as an Advanced Baker.
Fell into a job peddling weekly premium insurance, which rasied my weakly pay to the equivalent of $2.50 an hour.
Along with that I took a part-time job as a radio DJ on WJBU-AM/WJST-FM, working four hours weekday nights and 8 hours on Saturday and Sunday. In the midst of that I carried a pager as a Volunteer on the County Ambulance as an Volunteer EMT, Wife stayed home with our son, working on getting him ready for school and using flashcards and shit. We used wood to heat, because we couldn't afford the $20 gas bill associated with it. We struggled to pay the $7 bill for cooking as it was. Electricity was also hard to pay, as was the $100 rent. We were blessed to be in a small town where everyone knew everyone (except I didn't know who anyone was but everyone knew me) in Port St Joe, Florida. My wife's hometown. Our landlords were forgiving and gracious and weere satisfied with gradual late rents. We always paid, just not on time necessarily.
In the early 80's costs got high all of a sudden. Everything seemed to double overnight. I stopped the job at the radio station to become an assistant manager for a Hardee's, scheduled around my insurance route. I started selling a lot of policies and dollar volume and made the million dollar round table for the company...so my boss took over my route and fired me.
I found a job for a wholesale pizza outfit and moved from PSJ to Panama City. We leased a house for a year, after three months the owner sold it and not only paid us $1,000 to leave, but paid moving expense. We used the $1,000 to make a down payment on a house for $30k, privately financed by a little old lady that relied on us to pay her so she could be retired. (I was late once and got the most humiliating phone call of my life, and payment was little over $100 a month, I ws never late on that lady again...my $100 was her food money.)
In these years, wife has started some part-time work, son is in third grade, wife volunteers at the school and works at retail. I'm up to $30k a year, she's making less than $5k. Second Oops baby shows up, 21JUN1989, wife is back to being homemaker and mom. This time strictly stay at home until 1993.
1993 I'm in the actual story of "How to Succeed in Business Without Even Trying". I'm managing $5 billion in union funds, I have a staff of fourteen running contribution accounting for Union Benefit Funds. And overnight, it's done. So I go to college and I become a bean counter. 1993, wife starts volunteering at a dog grooming place, learns how to do it, and starts actually doing it as an independent contractor. From 1993 to 1995 we basically lived of of her income and welfare.
I moved on to becoming a bean-counter, Controller, Director of Finance for LACMA, independent consultant CFO, temporary inventory adjustor for a literal bomb factory next to Magic Mountain, CPA candidate at a public accounting outfit, and where I am now Corporate Controller for a rahter large, privately owned, mining, ready mix, steel, steel fabrication, recycling, real estate, transportation, and apartment rental outfits (over fifty entities). Wife is still at her job at the same pet groomer since 1993. She predates the current owner by a factor of fifteen years.
In the early, hardest times, there were weeks that the only thing I ate were a few rolls or danishes I harvested as I baked them at DizzyWorld. It's what you did, as the man, back then. You worked your ass off for your family and didn't give up.
Mom raised the kids, with your rather limited influence due to the work, and my adjustments were centered on what she was doing, rather than what the kids did. One of my adjustments was getting the fuck out of Florida to remove my kids form what I perceived as education gone batshit. (She didn't appreciate that until years later.)
I have two sons. One is 37 the other 27, i i'm calculating right. Neither has been arrested, ever; neither does drugs, ever; neither are drunks, but do imbibe (we're Irish, for fuck's sakes); One is some super secret civilian bigwig in construction and has been in Afghanistan for 14 years, the other is on track to be a manager of a Starbucks (and an Eagle Scout). I can leave cash out in the open without concern. They have keys to come and go as necessary, I may need them to do a task (if the other is home, otherwise it falls on the younger.) In short, I have two sons that I have no embarrassment about.
That's a rare thing in today's world. And I owe it all to my wife.
[Edit] Oh, by the way, in the past I talked about my adopted Uncle Ray, who I've known my entire 57 years. Veteran of WWII, Korea and Viet Nam as an Air Force Transport pilot. Logging in over 15,000 flight hours. I arranged for him to go on an Honor Flight on June 10, 2016 (look up honor flight) in January. Well, he died this morning, aged 90.
Thanks for the narrative. I thought the early 80s were very tough. I was a kid - but when the family goes through tough times, the kids feel it - usually in terms of hunger.
RIP Uncle Ray
Sorry for your loss.
My condolenes, and thank you for the snapshot into your life and heart.
People need to have the clarity that the org structural hierarchy is different between a Natural org and Economic/Political org.
Natural Hierarchy of Loyalty = Self, Nuclear Family, Extended Family (Clan), Tribe, Nation, Race, Species. In that order.
Artificial Hierarchy of (Economic or Political) Loyalty = Group (Club, Dept), Company/Team, Country, Elite (Oligarchs/Monarchs/Clergy)
Typically the latter group is at odds with the former group. If you live in a Western Society, the pressure is to succumb and submit to the Artificial Hierarchy, and put its Interests and Benefits above the Natural ones. As such, we are even expected to set aside our allegiance to our Nation and Race, and subjugate them to those of Companies, and the Elite -- all under the pretense of "Egalitarianism". It is not about 'Equality' that you find in an Equitable relationships. Rather, it is about a Sameness type of relationship -- a kind of standardized and modular swap of Labor Commodities.
That is because in a Western society, we (Christians and Jews) only pay lip-service to Human/Natural values, but do not practice them. We've succumbed to the real Deity: Mammon, Usury and the 7 Deadly Sins.
Our standardized religious habits and rituals are mere Placebos and conditioning, intended to keep the Masses calm, from rebelling and from killing the Elite. For those who no longer subscribe to the Programs of the Clergy, we now have Programs from the MSM, to steer our Worldviews and Values.
If this helps you get Clarity, you/we all have our personal life-choices to make as to which Hierarchy we feel great allegiance & loyalty, and which life/career values we will pursue as a result of these most basic of life choices.
As The Masses/People are starting to wake up, I rather suspect that they are waking to the reality of which of these two Camps they are, and in which they would rather be.
That is because in a Western society, we (Christians and Jews) only pay lip-service to Human/Natural values, but do not practice them. We've succumbed to the real Deity: Mammon, Usury and the 7 Deadly Sins.
yup
The simple problem is the size of the government and the amount of money it takes, and prints for itself. It is nearly impossible for any people to put up an organized resistance. The resistance must be individual, and the baton must be taken up by the many, individually, and in order for that to happen they must wake up individually.
definitively a call for more scholl shootings
This is even better - and humously portrayed.
Watson: Absolute Proof Liberalism is a Mental Disorder [Video]
May we see their SAT scores by chance?
jb
James B,
I find you guy critters just so fascinating. You can just do the most useful stuff with motors, plumbing, and carpentry. You start the lawn mowers and weed eaters with nary a complaint.
Women, on the other hand, I don't find much use for.they seem to excel in running the roads and spending money.
+1
Women do, in fact, have a use, despite your apparent inability to formulate the appropriate descriptor: Entertainment. Check out SlutWalk. 'Nuff said.
No. They Are NEVER BORN EQUAL.
WRONG
legally all are to be treated equally
In a legal setting. Especially when charged with a crime. Due Process to escape the caprice of Royalty. .
THAT's IT
Women have every opportunity to choose whether or not they want kids in our society today. Therefore, they are the ones that choose to step away from work and lose out on normal pay and raises. The wage gap in this case has nothing to do with their gender and everything to do with their choices. What do you expect, to recieve the same pay and the same raises as a woman who chooses to wait on having kids and who works harder for longer hours?
Women actually earn much more than men, if you want to talk about it relative to inflation. The push for women to work was an ideological drive knowing that two people would work for the same amount of money. In essence, they took half of men's work and most households are left working double the hours for the same household income (or less).
Economists always speak of rising wages and increase of quality of life. Well, draw a graph of women's wages, employment rate, etc. from 1960 to today alongside men's wages and employment rate: you'll see quite clearly that women go from 0-25% employment while men go from 80-25%. In terms of wages it is 0-30,000 for women and 60,000 to 30,000 for men. For hours it is 0-50 for women and 40-50 for men. (Just rough, rambling figures, not intended as real math.)
This would mean that men's work value has more than quartered while women's has gone up infinitely. Or in more straightforward terms, women working alongside men have created double the work for less wages than they used to earn.
Strangely, feminists wanted all women to recognise themselves as socialists. But instead of staying home to work with the family they would go to work for a wage and work against the family by turning the men into socialists.
Divide the sexes and there can be no retrun to constructive family and community life. Hence, no possibility of revolution.
Women en masse are not returning to iron your shirt for room and board.
NO ONE WANTS TO BE AN INDENTURED SERVANT.
Quite disrespectful to women ancestors to suggest that their taking care of the family was slavery. And dismissive of the problems of real slavery as well.
None of this is to say that being in isolation to take care of a household is without its struggles, but relative to men literally slaving away women's work was quite freeing.
Set your own hours, work at your own pace, have a drink, invite friends over to help you out. If we're not careful someone might try to invert cultural marxist theory - then we'd see that women are the bourgeoisie in such a scheme, and men the proletariat.
In keeping with the modern tradition of worsening yourself just so long as you take someone down a little worse, feminism has made women the proletariat and men the lumpenproletariat.
Thanks for your comment though.
The women who operate the dry cleaners I use and the woman who owns it would probably disagree. Their wages/revenues probably pay their bills. There is literally nothing wrong or shameful about serving people, in some capacity just about all productive labors are a service at their core.
Swamp - Make me a sandwich.
Many women servicing in Iraq magically got pregnant while servicing there... free ticket home.
and of course there is this gem...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sTHRgdG6XA
Oh and look the guy is risking his own life to save her... oh how culturally programmed - don't cha know.
If women don't get equal pay for less work the human race will die off. Got it.
P4K, one week four days. hang around for a bit and we won't think you're a troll, right now your opinion doesn't carry much weight. Just sayin'
P4K - member for one week and 5 days.
OK
P4K it doesn't matter if you are here for ten years. If you keep spouting idiotic nonsense like that ignorant tripe you just posted, you will be soundly mocked and derided. Justifiably so.
Welcome to fight club. douche.
P4K the article is simply pointing out that taking maternity leave can result in an income gap. I have taken paternity leave to the same ends. I can also attest to the fact that as a male I have less chance of promotion within my company and that is policy. Equality is the narrative these days but not the end result. Welcome to fight club, stick around awhile. :)
Employers are not obligated to pay for the reproduction of their employees. The parent to be offers no work to the employer during their leave of absence, and thus earns no pay for the work not provided.
Employers are not in the business of producing more humans. Employers do not hire employees with the objective of increasing the offspring count of their employees. Employers are in the business of commerce, not employee reproduction. Family matters are personal choices for which the employer has no authority, input or financial obligation.
Hope that clears up why maternity leave reduces pay for women. The woman takes a leave of absence. She doesn't earn pay during this time.
Get it?
BOOK OF ENOCH:
"Employers are not obligated to pay for the reproduction of their employees"
Then WHY IN HELL am I as a homeowner required to pay for the schooling of those same employees. I resent to absolute fucking infinity the fact that my choice about having children and schooling them is in NO WAY related to what I must pay to the local school district to school other people's decision outcomes!!
As a childless professional, I experience the same injustice. Slaving away to edjamudcake the vibrant little rascals who will mature into welfare queens or incarceration wards of the state.
There's a reason you're 'childless,' and it has absolutely nothing to do with inequality, nor any other form of imaginary 'injustice...'
One word: Fugly. Try not to pretend otherwise, hmm? ;)
Another way of saying that is, the woman is taking 5 to 10 years or more right out of the most productive, formative part of her career. How can you expect to do that and think you'll be worth the same value as someone who never broke the continuity of their career?
Not that it matters. By the time the Cultural Marxist Divorce Court strips all the assets away from a man a awards them to a woman this will more than make up the $0.25/hr gender pay gap that they think exists.
I remember so many instances- but one in particular, while working for corporate America, shortly after I graduated:
3 engineers- me, another guy and a woman.
The woman was squirting out babies all 5 years I was there.
She worked 1/2 a year, then took off for maternity leave for the next 1/2 year.
Me and the other engineer carried her workload 1/2 of every year.
When she was working- she always got awards (just like me and the other guy).
She got paid nearly the same.
Same benefits.
All for doing less than half of the work we did.
It was an eye-opening experience, that helped me to predict how bad things would soon become.
And yet I was optimistic as to how far things would descend.
The whole argument ignores the fact that, it shouldn't take multiple incomes to raise a family. It's wholly unnecessary that we spend so much time at "work" so we can pay someone else to do the things a stay at home mom, and a father who had more time around the house, would traditionally do, as if keeping up your home, and feeding your family weren't work.
If "money" were real and held it's value, if bankers weren't living richly on other peoples labor, if there weren't multiple layers of finance between the producer and the consumer gobbling up capital, if Government weren't bloated and enabling the lazy to steal the labor of others, if markets and price discovery were free of corruption,
the average family could live comfortably with one family member working less then 40 hours a week away from home. All that freed up time could be spent making yourself wealthy, rather then working to make someone else wealthy.
This is spot on, the Fed and its enablers have twisted our monetary system so badly in pursuit of the oligarchy's goals. Social engineering at the pointy end of a printing press..
Their lies are collapsing, it is beautiful! Women get paid less, socialism is the answer, flouride is good for your teeth, all religions are equal, multiculturalism benefits all, Hillary is a woman....
I can't believe he actually said, "reverse racism".
Brandon, you just lost a lot of respect. Racism is racism. No reverse. If a white kills a black guy its murder. you're saying - if a black guy kills a white guy its reverse murder? uh. no..
I'm a bit puzzled by your downvotes. IS this not an obvious truth?
The SJW crazies have infiltrated ZH
As is Moochelle.
"Hillary is a woman"
You went too far with that.
She is a clone of john mccain.
From a biological standpoint, life is a reproductive cycle. There are two things of paramount importance to living beings: survival and successful reproduction. It is not unusual for individual survival to be sacrificed to the goal of successful reproduction--meaning that the offspring survive, thrive, and go on to reproduce successfully in their turn.
My feeling would be that child-bearing and child-rearing are the central and most important of all human functions. All other human activity is properly the support structure for the continuation of the species by providing the security and abundance to ensure that offspring thrive.
Where feminism has gone wrong is in urging women to abandon this central role. Of course, one reason it was not difficult to persuade women to abandon it was because it was, and still is, rather a precarious career choice, and all too likely to be a largely uncompensated career choice.
Feminism would have done women and society as a whole a much better service if it had focused on finding means to provide women with dignity and security in their more essential social roles--the first of which would be as mothers. But I think there are many other essential cultural roles that tend to fall to the distaff side, among them the transmission of culture and the power to transform the raw materials of life into a good and gracious life. A fine haunch is a fine thing, but there's an art to making it into a fine dinner, and a still higher art to making a fine dinner into something merry, warm, and gracious.
Any ideology that undermines this most essential role of women is detrimental to both women and society--the next thing to a suicide march.
On the other hand, women embraced feminism to begin with, for the simple reason that women found that the more traditional feminine roles were either no longer an option, or had become unbearably precarious from the standpoint of offering security. Along about 1970, I, along with about half the women of my acquaintance, were left high and dry with kids to provide for after husbands absconded. We were all pretty pissed if we found that we were not compensated on an equal basis with men doing the same work. And we most generally did find that, and/or found that more highly compensated jobs were closed to us.
And though so many women found themselves the sole support of their families starting around 1970, things had not been all that great for women who were mothers and homemakers during earlier decades. Women were not highly valued in this role (and more likely denigrated), and had no legal protection and little social protection if a spouse was, in ways to numerous to mention, doing a substandard job. The traditional feminine role has, for most women, most often been kind of a raw deal.
While I'll grant you that life, for most people, is often kind of a raw deal, I'd say it's rather consitently been more of a raw deal for women. True feminism would have sought some ways to address that instead of further denigrating more traditional feminine roles--and even largely making it socially unacceptable for women to choose those roles.
+ 1,000,000,00,000.00
You spoke truth.
Love this.
I find it interesting that you say around 1970 is when so many women you knew found themselves without a husband and entering the workforce. Feminism has been blamed for today's limp wristed boys who can't grow up but it seems this isn't a recent problem.
In order to have these ideal single income homes where the man works and the woman cares for home and family the man must be a man. I'm in my thirties but few women I have know have found good marriages. Lots of working single mothers. I work and take care of myself but haven't met a man worth hitching my wagon to, so to speak.
I'm moving out of the city soon. I can't wait.
"and even largely making it socially unacceptable for women to choose those roles"
Why would they make it socially unacceptable, what was the purpose?
It's obviouse to me, starting with WWII, there was a push to get women out of the home, to join the serfs. Slowly, gradually, like boiling frogs, we've come to the place were the choice for the wife to leave the home and go to work, has become neccassary, no longer a matter of liberation, but of forced neccessity! Not only are both husband and wife now forced to work to make ends meet, but the children too must work outside the home to pay their fair share, and YET most of use who do, still live week to week and struggle to make ends meet.
This had nothing to do with "liberating" women from there traditional role, and everything to do with creating MOAR Slaves!
The combination of FIAT, Corruption, an out of control financial industry and an equally out of control, bloated Government have forced us all to work for someone else.
The American Family has been turned on it's head!
Most men don't want to be women, but there sure is a lot of p3nis envy in the 'Usually Not as Physically Strong' or Weaker sex as the old guys that made this country the power house it is (was??) Used to say. That's why Bruce Jenner is Such a fucking anomaly and why people who have things like bills and kids and don't have time to think about tucking junk or adding a prosthetic cock can't, under stand the shit. I'd go as far as to say the State and it's largesse on People like state workers and welfare queens that contribute NOTHING to society has made it easy for these bums, who aren't worth a fuck anyway ( genetically? Perhaps.) to really get down into their most degenerate desires and tax payer money is giving them the time to project their intellectually revolting and lazy pseudo "science " on the motherfuckING engines ( middle class) that keep the whole Sodomite and Lesbion practitioners going. These people are leaches and rodents pests with a brain deficiency who want to spread their inferior life styles on the rest of us, maybe so they can get a pat on the head by a normal person, "it's allright Jon if you want to put Jeffs tube steak in your mouth and butt, instead of using self control, go ahead and do shit you'll be ashamed of forever, then I'll come back here and let you know it's totally cool with us normals bro." And the reason the average person isn't like wait a minute this is bizarre shit, is because they are shouted down by pop culture big mouthpiece shit stains that don't have enough self esteem not to give into every sick base desire they have, so screaming about licking a Vajayjay on national tv as a 40 something cat lady is in no way embarrassing to them, how could it be?
This article is insane. Please do not post articles like this.
Uh oh, the social justice crazies have sand in their vaginas.....again...
Written by a college student? The cultural Marxists are part of the Free Sh!t Army, a growing cancer that's been created by dishonest, FED-fiat money. It's no mistake that the nursery they use is the safe harbor of state-supported colleges.
People hate them because they return no benefit to society for what they take. In a real economy that has been shrinking for years, people are losing patience for freeloaders, especially loud and obnoxious ones. Hopefully, they will piss off so many people this year that they will soon find their freebies cut off. It's not fascism when the free handouts cease. Notice that word is always, always used by members of the FSA. It's code for "Panic time, I might have to get a real job!"
this is not a safe space, asshole!
Don't let the door hit you in the ovaries on the way out, sister.
....nor PMS.
Correct. A human should pe paid the same regardless of gender. If one gender has a different biorhythm cyclicity it is for very well founded natural grounds who shall not constitute ground for different levels of pay.
What if an indvidual merely exhiibits lesser work product output as a direct result of gender related burdens (and choices too) such as PMS, menstruation, and pregnancy?
you are an idiot.
Day labour rates for agricultural work here are €30.00 to €40.00 for men, €20.00 to €30.00 for women. This isn't sexism, it's reality - women can't do the same amount of work that men can do.
We have volunteers come to help us with the farm work, and I do delight in explaining to the girls that we don't expect them to do the same work as the men, because they aren't capable. Feathers are almost always ruffled, until I ask them to load 50kg (or 110lbs) sacks into the truck. Equality suddenly seems an entirely unneccessary affectation at that point.
Work the same anount of hours, earn the same pay. Work less hours, earn less. Period.
A woman choosing to get pregnant and taking 3 months off is no different than a man choosing to take 3 months off to look after his newborn child, or choosing to go take care of his dying parents, or any other life choice.
Either way, neither one is working and neither one will/should get paid for the time off. Saying a woman is entitled to get paid the dame yearly pay as a man, even though she takes several months off and the man doesnt, is asinine. In effect, the woman would be making MORE money per productive hour than the man would, which is not equality.
I totally wanna work for you, dude! I'll breed, have PMS, sleep in , mood swing, menopause, lactate and feel secure in the equal pay safe space you provide me until you go out of business for piss poor management.
"Women can be equal to men as long as...." What? The goalposts are moved sufficiently? One swallows feminist doctrine hook, line and sinker? Men and women ARE NOT EQUAL!!!! Any imbecile can see this. One is not greater or lesser than the other. We were designed to compliment each other. Brainwashing can, and must, be reversed.
Nailed it and everyone knows it except the feminazis.
50 years ago I'd agree.
But let's be honest Serena Williams could whoop that masculine ass of yours with her male silver back gorilla physique. Don't kid yourself. No one I know thinks Serena is completely woman I think some genes got criss crossed there and I doubt she is even capable of having a child (but she'll still stomp you like a twig)
Men can be equal to women and to that the world gave us Bruce, er, Caitlyn Jenner. Do you even know if it has a dick or a pussy and is it gay or a gay lesbian? See...you can't tell the fucking difference. You don't know what you're getting into when you jump on that boat. Things have gotten so equal no one really knows what the fuck is what.
And let's not forget Michael Jackson. The first experiment where a black man turned into a white woman.
We truly are in a brave new world.
Yeh, to much estrogen in the water supply will do that to ya.
You don't see that phenomenon in countries where they are still breeding like rabbits
As for Serena Williams, she still cant compete with the top male tennis players, and never will, and that is why male sports players are paid more
Yes. Equality between the sexes would mean that women are free to become the best women they can be just as men are free to become the best men they can be. The difficulty is that men and women have to place different constraints on themselves and overcome different obstacles so that they may work to become the best they can be.
Recognition of the skills you are best at and when to step down to listen to another with greater understanding is one of the necessary paths to becoming free and equal to others. Equality and freedom cannot be dictated nor passed on. It is relative: complimenting your life, the community, your family, society, and humanity itself.
Men cannot do anything themselves to make women equal, only pass on their view of feminine strengths and set certain boundaries as to what would be destructive. Counter to this, women cannnot do anything themselves to make men free, only support men in whom they see strength and encourage them to destroy boundaries which limit him and equate his life to hers.
When men struggle against equality this actually increases women's freedom.
Women are affirmative and free by nature, men are negative and equal. By this I mean that women tend to free themselves to men, find their freedom relative to men, while men will equate themselves to women, often sacrificing their freedom in the process. Women, feminist ones, have sought equality through abandonment of their freedom - and in doing so have created an impossible absurdity as they try to take up what men have already done for them.
None of this is to say, however, that women have it easy. They have their own struggles in this mad world, it's just that men cannot do it all for them, nor can they just let it go when they see women taking the wrong path. And both men and women have taken very wrong paths, to the point where divisions between the sexes are now bibilcal.
We're all on bell curves ... the economic output of A woman in A job can be equal to that of A man.
When I started to work like a man I worked less intensely, made as much money and enjoyed life much more. When I slowed down and looked around at how little they produced by comparison I was through.
When I started to work like a man...
I lol'd when you claimed you 'worked.' ;)
+1
Women are not the equal of men. They never have been.
The master class love their Girl Fridays. They're conscientious, submissive, and utterly lacking in the creativity needed to come up with the idea that will put the firm out of business, or the entrepreneurial spirit needed to strike out on one's own and make that idea a reality. Progress, real progress, is men's work. Men discovered America and put other men on the moon and returned them safely to the earth. Had it been left to women we'd still be living in caves, if not the jungle.
Anyone that believes the brainwashing lie that women get paid less FOR THE SAME JOB than men is a fucking idiot. On that, only someone who can't read a chart involving statistics would disagree. I might add that typically women get paid a minute fraction more in today's world, but I'm not some tit-for-tat little bitch, so who cares. Men get paid somewhat more on average in a pool of random people in the West since they work harder and riskier jobs. Not in the same job, just a random sample. Women prefer job security slightly more than the average testosterone-fuled risk appetite (and propensity for manual labor) so it makes sense. Nothing about women makes them inferior dude. They just have different preferences, like most people do on some level.
Women's rights were not created for equality purposes. It was so the government could collect more taxes and the children could be indoctrinated by the state.
Get a brain
In USSR, all women were paid the same as man, and they had the right to a PAID maternity leave of 3 moths - one year (it changed, being shorter right after WWII and longer in 1960s-1980s). In USSR, all people enjoyed free medicine, free education, free higher education, free post-graduate education, people were given free flats in block of flats after 10-20 years of work (it differed from factory to factory etc.), and during that work they were given quite decent accomodation at the government's expense. All studends were paid monthly grants high enough to buy food and clothes. There were many other things, for which you should hate Marxism, Communism and Socialism, cause all of them make you feel inferior and actually fucked. And we never heard that anybody might work longer than 40 hours per week or that there might exist any racism in USSR. Hate it!
Hate Russia, because Russia still has some remnants of USSR benefits, such as free basic medicine, free education, free higher education (it shrank a bit, but it's still there) and free post-graduate education (it shrank a lot, but it's still there).
Who paid for all the "free" stuff?
Old Soviet aphorism:
We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.
The stuff people *really* wanted not only wasn't free, it wasn't even there.
you are incorrect.
I was raised in the former USSR, in a far east republic (I am of german decent, btw).
Even in that god forsaken country there was wrigleys spearmint gum available, and anything else the "west" was so proud of producing.
Capitalism works fine in the black markets! It is just more expensive.
the rule of dogma has it's seed of destruction within, as no dogma written by man can account for every possible action of a mass of people..even when adjustments are made, chaos will rule. entropy always wins.
Orc you either forgot your sarc tag as this seems like you believe this tripe or incredibly you believe this tripe and should get whatever taxpayer money you paid for a higher education returned to the taxpayer.
"Women can be equal to men as long as the do not have babies"
No, they can't. And nature didn't set it up that way to begin with. And there's nothing wrong with women not being 'equal' to men, just like there is nothing wrong with men not being 'equal' to women. That is how the board is set up and it has worked fairly well for a good long time.
Why are you always going on about women, Stan?
Probably because women are worthy of constant ridicule...?
I've got a spare tampon if you're in need. Just be careful of excess sand; I hear it is a terribly grating experience.
this is all bs. Most oligarchies become criminally ordered at some point-meaning their efforts to continue to function increasingly are driven by a need to prevent prosecution/incarceration/even death.
The risks for all the above increase with increasing economic turmoil.
The oligarchy then import foreigners so the locals fight with them rather than the oligarchs.
We are what we produce. If you produce less than someone else, for whatever reason, by choice - then you have less than someone else. It has nothing to do with equality. It has to do with what you ACTUALLY produce, not your potential. No one should be rewarded for their potential, just for their actual accomplishments.
A tour de force, in literary terms, but no numbers. The result of all the compassion for special needs, sums to 20T of explicit national debt, accumulated outside of any half serious war, plus impossible future promises held off books.
The funny thing about American politics doesn't turn out to be the politicians, in fact, it is the ignorance of the electorate (which I'm sure is laughed at behind closed doors in the Capitol)
For example, Republicans being scourged for their long history of racism, and in particular Donald Trump being attacked viscerally over this straw man. I saw the head of the NAACP just last week comparing Trump's (or his policies I can't remember) to "A modern day Jim Crow with hairspray" (or something of the sort). As it turns out, if one was so inclined to actually read a history book, the KKK and Jim Crow specifically, were primarily affiliated with...the Democratic party (they pretty much controlled it). A Democratic party whom has kept groups of minorities in the depths of poverty by providing, at no cost to them welfare, ensuring that the vast majority has no inclination to work and enabling them to stay at the bottom wrung of society. It's particularly ironic that Trump is called racist because out of all candidates I've had the utter displeasure of listening to has economic policies that benefit African Americans and Latino Americans far more than any other candidate.
But march, protest, and agitate a largely uneducated electorate will do impeding the right to free speech for the very man who stands to help them the most. It's hard to find the flag stomping, effigy beheading, road closing, and violent protestors disgusting. After all, it's not their fault anymore than a child throwing a temper tantrum when mom tells them not to touch the fire. Unfortunately in this circumstance the child has already been burned and seeks desperately to touch that pretty flame one more time, except this time, the child would like to stick the entire arm in.
The cultural marxists taught the public that Jim Crow, racism, the KKK etc are associated with Republicans.
They did that in the public schools, public universities, public television, and the FCC approved media.
The long march through the institutions.
It's desturbing how effective they have been.
Disturbing, yes. Surprising, no.
While we were out on weekends, hunting, fishing, shooting, working on the car or truck, or going to a ball game, they were busy networking, organizing and planning.
We play for fun, they play for keeps.
/ But, don't worry, for "Blessed are the meek and the poor", some Jewish rabbi said. Keep grazing . /s
That's why we have the second ammendment.
All I want for Christmas. They would be heading back to Saudi sandnigger location. Two other ME parties involved. Very sad to know the bad people on K-Street. Very fucking sad.
DEADLY FAST us military M134D gatling machine ...
Easy, Barack Hussein Obama, JR married to a tranny.
Frank rolled out his commie agenda.
Frank Marshall Davis - Dreams from My Real Father
Frank Marshall Davis (1905-1987) was a Communist Party USA (CPUSA) propagandist in Chicago and Hawaii.
History Lesson:
http://www.tomatobubble.com/rothschild_romanov.html
Of course, as the brilliant Ayn Rand pointed out it is always a battle of the individual vs the collective. And those with skill and ability will always favor the individual and thus freedom and liberty. The other second rate mediocrities will favor a form of parastitism sometimes called socialism, fascism or communism. If you've never had a job, like Bernie Sanders you'll gravitate to socialism and the "free lunch". If, like Ron or Rand Paul, you are a talented doctor, you'll favor liberty and propose term limits as Rand did in his platform. If you don't want to compete, just eliminate the competition-and thus the cartel called the FED was born in 1913. Its always about eliminating competition and/or the profit motive. But competition is the central principle of both evolution and capitalism. You must be willing to accept failure and take chances-that's just the way life evolves.
We no longer have a liberal party or a conservative party. We have a Black Party led by Hillary Clinton, who sings hosannas to Saint Trayvon and all other blacks shot dead while committing felonies. And we have a White Party led by Donald Trump.
White Democrats are an endangered species -- on one side Trump is luring them away with his nationalist law-and-order liberalism, and on the other side they're getting robbed, raped, and murdered by Black Democrats.
Ideology only matters in ethnically homogeneous polities. A multi-racial society is like prison: you stick with your own race or you're a dead man.
The truth is that there are inequities in the work place. I think women do get passed over for advancement. But you know who else does? Fat people. Also, the ugly. Good looking people get paid more. Tall men are frequently chosen over short men for leadership positions. There is ample data to support this. And I think it's OK to talk about it and acknowledge it exists, and even say that it's unfair because it is, but it's an entirely different matter when you start making laws about it.
If your a short ugly fat bald dude you're screwed.
"If your a short ugly fat bald caucasian/celtic/norse dude you're screwed."
There fixed it for ya.
Dont forget to put "OLD" in there, then you reall are screwed
Hang on! I know this guy!
Oh,it's me, isn't it.
Doh!
There is no data to support those claims. One could just as easily argue that a person was passed over for advancement because of their lack of merit or work ethic rather than their obesity or height. Although, I probably wouldn't hire a clinically obese person based on the fact that if they can't be bothered to put effort into their own health, why would they put effort into helping my business and earning what I pay them?
There is data to support those claims. I'm not going to spend the time finding it for you though.
You just gave the perfect example of prejudice about fat people. I have worked with some fat people who are very good. Just hired one recently actually.
Some discrimination is perfectly rational and people have every right to choose their associations. Also, what you say may or may not be true, but I'm not really interested in your anecdotal evidence. You shouldn't make claims you can't back with evidence, and you shouldn't expect other people to prove your points for you because you are too lazy to do it yourself.
Discrimination is not "rational". It's an emotional coping mechanism humans acquired as shorthand. Rational is treating every human as if they are their own person with their own traits and motives. Prejudices can't be avoided and we all have them, but it's not "rational". Knowing and understanding your own is helpful.
If you want an airtight study on race and hiring, this is a pretty good one: http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html
I'm not going to try and find every study I've read on the matter in the last decade.
My larger point is that life is unfair for many reasons, we deal in a world of prejudices and perceptions, but it shouldn't be the role of the government to smooth any of it over. It's one thing to say we should be more fair to people, it's entirely another to force people to be the government's definition of fair.
Yes, discrimination can be rational. We often have to base our associations on the impressions a person gives. If a person presents a bad impression then we have to decide if we want to gamble our time and money on that person in the hopes that he/she is not what they seem, or, place our bets elsewhere. There is nothing wrong with this. Usually first impressions are the right impressions. On the other side of things, if you are an employer that for some reason loves fat people on little motor scooters, then you are welcome to hire them to you heart's content and shun people who take care of themselves.
The study you linked to is not "airtight", it was conducted in only two cities - Chicago and Boston. Hardly comprehensive or representative of the whole nation.
Yes, life is unfair and government should not be invoved in making it fair. The problem is that life will never be completely fair, for anyone, ever, and that includes people who are tall, or skinny, or attractive, etc. Unless you are part of the .01% richest bloodlines you are not making it through this life with an unfair advantage. We all have to crawl through the muck.
I discrminate every day, I chose who my friends are and are not, sue me!
Arnold
Vote up!
0Vote down!
0Five weeks? must be a new moniker with the attitude you've got.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NvgLkuEtkA
Whine, whine, whine. I want to hate someone who disagrees with me; I choose to call that someone a "cultural marxist", but the bastards won't self-identify, or even agree to use my crazy definitions. But ZH will publish my crazed rant, so here we go ... (ZH: please, next time you see a "cultural marxist" rant, just stop and do not publish this garbage)
This is Fight Club, and that was pretty weak, go practice on trees.
Sounds to me like he is saying people are upset because they want to live in a world where their racism and bigotry is not looked down upon.
You should have marked this comment as a duplicate as well.
Sorry for the dup comment.
Use it for a second thought , dude.
Because they're cunts.
Good to see this topic, which deserves to be a regular feature. This is why at an anti-Islamic domination protest, the socialists turn up shrieking racist, homophobe, sexist and wave their tits around when none of those critical theory slogans apply to Islam, a way of life in their own words, which demands literal submission of all, and no separation of powers, ie Shariah. Who wouldn't want to throw these half naked kuffar Marxist cunts into a German cell bursting to the seams with rapefugees for some diversity training and hatefact education? Cultural Marxists are not any ordinary set of mind and society wrecking cunts. They specifically go to college and learn Frankfurt cuntery such as critical race theory in their insanely misanthropic quest to subversively divide and rule relatively healthy communities. Same for gender, sexuality, in fact any form of identity where there is an in group and outgroup they can politically exploit and set against each other. Whoever does postgrad study on this is surely the cunt's cunt. It just doesn't get much more cunty.
"Frankfurt Cuntary", has a ring to it, nice one Centurian!