Post
by Speaker to Animals » Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:11 pm
With respect to the borders issue..
Look at how the "left" (again, I hate using that paradigm, but you know what I mean when I use the term) seek to erase distinctions in pretty much every ontological category they identify. They don't even recognize the distinction between male and female any longer. This kind of person is very likely to be interested in intellectual ideas like transhumanism. They are likely to want to eliminate national borders, ethnicities and human diversity itself.
They fuck up language all the time, so it's difficult to see it based on what they are saying, but when you realize that they fucked up language like the sophists that they are, you will be able to better see it. For instance, when they say they want diversity, they really want the opposite of that. They want to merge people together into some homogeneous future where everybody is "brown". Actual ethnic diversity, as existed up until these weird immigration policies existed, is an anathema to them. When they say they want to expand the number of genders, what they really want to do is eliminate the very concept of gender. You can see this for yourself by asking them to provide a definitive list of genders, and they won't do it because they want an indefinite list of genders.
Also, when you dissect their strange alternative moral code, you will see the worst sin you can commit is "intolerance". By that they don't mean that you should actually tolerate something you disagree with but, rather, you should be forced to agree with it, which is not tolerance at all (since, by definition, tolerance implies you do not interfere with some behavior with which you disagree). But dissecting it further, what they really object to here is the imposition of moral and ontological boundaries (borders). When you recognize something as morally wrong, you create a border between behavior which is acceptable and that which is unacceptable. When they scream at you and demand you "tolerate" that behavior, they really mean that you should accept it, which in turn requires that you suddenly no longer believe and affirm the existence of a moral boundary.
I think if a person reading this honestly considers what I am saying, they will begin to see it everywhere on the "left". This is their driving force: the elimination of boundaries.
Conversely, on the "right", people wish to maintain boundaries. They like to divide the world up into strict categories. They like to see the world as black and white. Something is right, wrong, or makes no moral distinction. They want borders to exist in the physical and social world. They like having a restroom assigned to a specific gender, and they don't like the idea that people can just subjectively decide that social boundary no longer exists.
If people like that (me) get too much power, then society likely becomes stifling. You always need that balance between the two. Right now there exists a war between the two. Insomuch as DrY once barely had a point, we need each other not because these are two competing ideologies, but two competing human traits. It's like there are two kinds of minds out there. You just have to grow up and figure out, without thinking about it, what you really are, and then you can look back at your life and realize how you got here. We don't need a balance between ideologies or whatever. We need a balance of power between these two kinds of people.
