2010 July 06 Tuesday
Roissy On Independence Day

Roissy looks at the decline in patriotism, its causes, and the likely outcome.

On this 4th of July, We the post-Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 People should spend a moment to reflect on the tenuous grasp the inheritors of the great American tradition have to their homeland. When you wave your sparklers with your kids this holiday weekend, cast a wary eye at your neighbor. A disease has metastasized in huge swaths of the American population and threatens to suffocate the grandiose and noble idea that ironically nourishes their trite impudence. The host which ennobles has become the rotting carcass upon which to feed. Gnawing and chewing parasites dripping venom and toxic bile have replaced the immune boosting white blood cells and defiantly proud armies of red blooded corpuscles of a body politic once happy, grateful, and giddy to be alive. And not just any sort of alive; the kind of exalted living that comes from knowing your good fortune to have been born in a prosperous country culturally superior to so many alternatives. Yes, superior. The very word sends shudders down the spines of the mincing globocrats and mewling equalist butterfucks.

I think the globalizing Left is mistaken to think that the suppression of patriotism will cause people to shift their loyalties toward the whole world. More likely they will shift their loyalties toward much smaller scales like family, gang, and co-conspirators. The pride that comes with patriotism can be and has been very constructive. It makes possible the voluntary clubs and societies that work for civic betterment.

A vector of patricidal vengeance, a boiling plume of acrid anti-native stock spite, travels up and down our coasts, from Miami to Boston, LA to Seattle, in our newsrooms, our boardrooms, our schools, and our social gathering places, carrying a message of spastic hate for America, her founding ideals, and the historically great figures who have traveled her hallowed corridors. Pockets of internal organs are infected, Chicago and Austin. These are not traitors in action… mostly… but their souls are traitorous in configuration. Their feelings are the knee-jerk bleats of a bastard people at growing unease with the country they are required by law to call home. A nation of latchkey kids — stupid in their ahistorical ignorance and frightened of the breaking surf of censored knowledge about to crash on their heads — has been in open revolt against its beneficent parent for generations now, and the opiate of distracting technoporn and glam mags can only hold off the coming reckoning for so long. They live for the comforting swaddle of the trend, and right now every trend is pointing in the direction of dialectic anti-patriotism.

Regards "the breaking surf of censored knowledge about to crash on their heads" I keep getting hints that the truth in undeniable form is near. Anyone know when the key research papers will be published? Any in the next 6 months?

Click thru and read Roissy's whole post.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2010 July 06 09:47 PM  Civilizations Decay


Comments
James Bowery said at July 7, 2010 7:25 AM:

"I keep getting hints that the truth in undeniable form is near. "

You underestimate how nimble that minds were, and are, that imposed the theocracy posing as academy. We're dealing with one sigma verbal IQ advantage and the corresponding amplified disproportion in the multiple-sigma range.

They make the Jesuits look like amateurs.

kurt9 said at July 7, 2010 1:28 PM:

Randall,

Your earlier post about the "breaking surf of censured knowledge" in genetic science can lead to the notion of criminality being ultimately a medical issue. Greg Bear wrote an excellent novel, Queen of Angels, about a future society based on these kinds of findings about 20 years ago. I highly recommend this novel.

anon said at July 7, 2010 3:04 PM:

We're not a nation, we're a multi-racial empire, a colony of the world in the late Eugene McCarthy's words. Frankly, "patriots" are fools; since there is no longer a nation to be patriotic toward their patriotism simply feeds the imperial Revolting Elite, and aids them in the further destruction of the remnants of the former nation. Conservatives are forever adopting yesterday's liberalism and defending it even when it means their destruction, with multi-racialism and mass immigration being the top examples. They're like the crazed Colonel in "The Bridge On The River Kwai." I put patriotism in quotation marks above because today most so-called patriotism isn't, it's just a fear of losing a fat lifestyle. A real patriot of the past would have been, at the very least, rioting in the streets by now.

no i don't said at July 7, 2010 4:17 PM:

I'll have to pretty much agree with anon -to a point-
To me the word "patriotism" alone is revolting. It evokes terms like "fatherland". It means nationalism, which is the tendency to hate or disprise somebody for being born elsewhere and for speaking a different language. Patriotism is an archaic meaningless term.

Does "patriotism" mean loving one's country? And if so, what does loving one's country mean anyway? Does it mean loving every citizen in it? Does it mean loving all it's neighbours? bloggers? politics? places? trends? geography?

There are rapists, murderers, liers, clowns, thieves, buttheads, bimos, parasite polititians and mother in laws in every country?

When I meet somebody I only care if he/she is good or bad, friendly or harmful, biofiliac or necrofiliac, cultured or redneck. What the hell do I care if he's american, russian, mexican, venezuelan, german, polish, palestinian, french or jew. In the end nations come down to single persons with their actions and intentions.

What if a fellow american citizen breaks into your place and wants to steal, rape and plunder? What if a russian instead offers you a beer and friendship? I'm I supposed to hate every russian or mexican and love every american before any other nationals, just because they're co-citizens?

Gimme a break. Carl Sagan would say, "A new consciousness is emerging that sees the whole planet as a single organism, and an organism at war with itself is doomed" Patriotisms, religions and rabbid nationalistic fervours are begining not to work.

Maybe it's time to start writing nationalities and gods lower case and the word "Human" with a capital H

Randall Parker said at July 7, 2010 4:52 PM:

Kurt9,

Just added Queen of Angels to my Amazon wish list. I'll get to it. Sounds interesting.

anon,

Yes, there's the question of what to feel patriotic toward. Surely, it does not make sense to feel patriotic toward the government. But the truth might allow new factions to form that would be worthy of some allegiance.

Randall Parker said at July 7, 2010 4:55 PM:

Carl Sagan is wrong. The planet is not a single organism. The organisms are heavily competing with each other.

no i don't said at July 7, 2010 5:16 PM:

Carl Sagan is wrong??

Wow that's a very narcissistic statement. Fortunately, Carl Sagan was CARL SAGAN, while you're just... Randall.

I think you should read Sagan's quote again, Randall. And also one or two of his wonderful works.

no i don't said at July 7, 2010 5:26 PM:

'Cause I mean Randall, it's really easy to spit out "you're wrongs".

I mean, maybe Stephen Hawking, is also wrong, maybe Newton was wrong as well, but it takes a little more than "he's wong" to prove him wrong, you know...

In what college did they teach you such possitive and lazy dogmatism?

Prove Carl Sagan wrong, I dare you. ha, ha, ha

no i don't said at July 7, 2010 6:07 PM:

No, Randall. Not quite all organisms compete with each other. There was a time in the history of life on this planet when there was no competition or predation in live organisms. Mutual competition is not what defines "organism", even though it might be a characteristic in most organisms nowadays. Go get the dictionary and look up the word "organism"; quote it to me where it's definition says anything about competition being the main attribute of an organism.

Now even if Sagan was wrong as you claim, does that justify all the hate and trash talk towards immigrants? Towards other humans? Even if the Earth is not a single organism, does that justify nationalisms and patriotisms that threaten to destroy everybody, through great-scale war, hunger?

Thank god americans are not very patriotic, when it comes to dealing with Russia or Communist China, otherwise this civilization would've ceased to exist long ago.
Or is it that sometimes fear is hidden in the name of prudency??...??

Now Randall, think. The world is getting smaller and the population bigger, and it is now dangerously exponential. Massive global interactions are unavoidable. Travel is unavoidable. Linking is unavoidable. Immigration is unavoidable. Social programs are unavoidable. Implications are unavoidable. Before reality and inevitability, the world has only to choices at this point. Either it organizedly and in peace becomes one or it continues separated in national and international wars and hatreds, pollution, migrations, unilateral decisions, hunger, fear, lack and destroy ourselves. A True Effective Humane International Law is required at this point.

Deckin said at July 7, 2010 6:10 PM:

no i don't:

In what college did they fail to teach you to recognize an argument? Let me lay it out for you (feel free to amend, Randall).

Conclusion: Carl Sagan was wrong that the whole planet is a single organism.
Premise 1 (implicit): Whole organism don't have sub-organisms competing with each other
Premise 2 (explicit): The planet does have organisms competing with each other

As stated, the argument is clearly valid. Where you want to direct your firepower, such as it is, no i don't, is at the implicit premise. I suppose that can be argued by reasonable people but it's not obviously false. Ultimately, one will have to decide on the identity conditions of an organism; no easy matter.

kurt9 said at July 7, 2010 6:38 PM:

Regards "the breaking surf of censored knowledge about to crash on their heads" I keep getting hints that the truth in undeniable form is near. Anyone know when the key research papers will be published? Any in the next 6 months?

The recent publication of a paper purporting that parasitical diseases as a cause for the differential mean IQ of various country may be an attempt to "prep" the public for the onslaught of these genetics research papers.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/06/29/rspb.2010.0973.full

http://www.economist.com/node/16479286

I suspect the genomic papers are on their way.

Hornady said at July 7, 2010 8:34 PM:

Things will probably get nasty. My vibe is that things might get similar to the ways and means stuff went down before the full war broke out in the former Yugoslavia. I'll again advise all to invest in precious metals like brass and lead as well as delivery systems. This can be done inexpensively and simply. Better now then when the SHTF...

Randall Parker said at July 7, 2010 9:50 PM:

kurt9,

Yes, I saw that report as good news because it assumes the IQ differences. That the obvious can be assumed is a step forward in this case.

Hornady,

In event of civil war I think the key is to have the ability to hide or escape. Though 50 cals would help if you can't avoid getting caught up in the fighting.

no i don't said at July 8, 2010 11:44 AM:

"Premise 1 (implicit): Whole organism don't have sub-organisms competing with each other"

Wrong again Randall. You are a whole organism and you have organisms inside competing with each other. Thousands of them; they are called viruses, fungi, bacteria, parasites. All competing against each other as well as against your immune system defenses (which are also organisms). New organisms replacing old organisms. But even a modestly educated 9th grader knows that.

It's not that you don't know that Randall. It's simply that you will not acknowledge your dogmatism, your narcissism, and therefore the possibility that you could be wrong, or at least not know something for sure.

Please Randall, just read your "premise 1" again. I know you can realize this exercise is not mentally hard, but it might be psychologically hard at first, because it is not a matter of high or low IQ, it's a matter of disposition, will, aknowledging.

no i don't said at July 8, 2010 12:04 PM:

It really is not what goes into one’s mouth what defiles him/her, but what comes out of it…

When I first read the opening post above "Roissy on Independence Day" and its obscene content, I thought it was produced from a sexually repressed bible-belt fundamentalist, but as I read it again, I realize that whoever wrote it displays the three psychotic tendencies that together manifest the gravest pathological state and root of depraved destructivity and inhumanity in a person: Necrophilia, Narcissism and Incestuous Symbiosis.
Let’s take a look again…

“A disease has metastasized in huge swaths of the American population…”
“…trite impudence…”
“…rotting carcass upon which to feed. Gnawing and chewing parasites dripping venom and toxic bile…”
“…your good fortune to have been born in a prosperous country culturally superior…”
“Yes, superior.”
“…mincing globocrats and mewling equalist butterfucks.”
“…patricidal vengeance, a boiling plume of acrid anti-native stock spite…”
“…spastic hate…”
“Pockets of internal organs are infected…”
“…but their souls are traitorous in configuration.”
“Their feelings are the knee-jerk bleats of a bastard people…”
“…latchkey kids — stupid in their ahistorical ignorance…”
“…the coming reckoning for so long.”

Whew! I’ve found lots of hate and nationalism in this blog, but I think this message beats them all. Its anger-loaded content seems like one of those speeches from convulsing Hitler, but it’s too sloppy even for Hitler.
I’m not sure I had ever found such nationalistic rhetoric in English before, but I know it is frightening to many foreigners and citizens, believers and nonbelievers, native and immigrants.

no i don't said at July 8, 2010 12:07 PM:

Necrophilia.

The person of necrophilic orientation feels attracted and fascinated by everything that doesn’t live, by everything that is dead: carcasses, decay, feces, trash. The necrophiles are individuals keen to talk about diseases, pain, burials, death. They start to live when they talk precisely about death. Their deepest satisfaction is in witnessing a total and absolute destruction. The necrophile lives in the past, never the future. His/her emotions are essentially sentimental; they nourish the memory of emotions that they had yesterday or that they think they had. Their values are exactly the opposite to the values we relate to normal life. The necrophiles are characterized by their attitude towards force; the force to turn a person into a corpse, to humiliate, to take away one’s freedom. For the necrophile, man’s greatest achievement is not to give life, but to destroy it. For the necrophile the use of force is not a transitory action that circumstances impose, but a way of life. For the necrophile the fundamental polarity is not male-female, but those who have the power to to kill and those who lack it.
While life is characerized by structured functional growth, the necrophile loves everything that doesn’t grow, everything that is mechanical, repetitive, routine, machine-like. The necrophile is moved by the desire to turn what is organic into what is inorganic; to view life mechanically, as if all living persons were things.

no i don't said at July 8, 2010 12:11 PM:

The narcissist is a person who has lost interest in the world around him/her, and therefore cannot distinguish between the “I” and the “not I”
Narcissism.

For the narcissist, the world and people around have ceased to be real. The narcissits is a completely self-centered person who believes that others are always plotting against him/her. The narcissist cannot learn because he/she considers that any critizism to be a direct personal attack. The psychosis is a state of absolute narcissism, in which the individual has broken all conection with external reality and turned his own self in its substitute. The narcissist its completely filled of himself and has become “god and world” to himself. The narcissist is unable to see or accept that others may not love him or agree with him/her. The narcissist is easily identified. He/she is the fellow that displays all signs of self satisfaction; one can tell that when he utters trivial words he thinks he is saying someting of great importance. The narcissist generally doesn’t listen to others, nor is he interested really. If intelligent, the narcissit will hide this fact by asking questions and pretending to be interested. The narcissist is prejudiced and biased, and talks in a superficial and trivial way, but with the ceremony and tone of one who pronounces the most wonderful and interesting words. Subjectively he has the euphoric feeling of being “in the top of the world”, while in reality he is in a bloated state. He and his things are overvalued and everything exterior is undervalued. For him the outer world –the “not I”- is inferior, dangerous and immoral. Narcissits believe their group is the only group that believes in the true God, that it holds the right values, that it is the most important.

no i don't said at July 8, 2010 12:16 PM:

Incestuous Symbiosis.

Incestuous Symbiosis is the exagerated dependency to the mother or the mother figure also known as Oedipus Complex. Genetically, the mother is the first personification of the force that protects and provides security, but in no way is she the only one. Later on, when the child has grown, the mother –as a person- is replaced or complemented by other substitute “mothers” that provide protection comfort, shelter and love, such as the group, the race, the nation, the clan, the religion, the political parties. As it is always more likely that mothers die before their children, the need arises for the adult of an immortal mother figure. Besides, as the adhesion to a personal mother leaves the children alone and isolated, in adulthood a mother-dependent person seeks a “mother” common to others to whom he/she is joined under one same idol mother. The cult to the Virgen, the cult of nationalism, patriotism, national sport teams, give testimony of people with a strong attachment to the mother and joined by exceptionally strong bonds with the nation, the race, the fatherland. As the child grows up it is fundamental for a healthy development to gradually gain more and more independance from the mother figure.

Mike said at July 8, 2010 8:28 PM:

Since I'm not a libertarian superman, like 'I don't know', who can presumably rise to the top of any corrupt third world shit whole, like the United States circa 2050, I'd rather live in a reasonably safe western country, which pays living wages and has police who will actually help rather than ask for a wage top up. There may be only a few few left, but I'm still quite happy to live in one and fight for it.

In said at July 10, 2010 7:15 AM:

I think it is worth pointing out that nationalism as well as global sentiments can both have their place. No need for a false dichotomy. Randall is correct that patriotism/nationalism frequently provides utility. no I don't (and Carl Sagan) is correct that the world is becoming more and more globally interconnected, which makes globalist/humanistic sentiments more utilitarian.

I think what is called for here is an integration. Why can't we choose to be patriotic when it makes sense to do so and humanistic when it makes sense to do so? patriotism and humanism in the context of the world "organism" are analogous to emotions within the individual. They serve a function, but there is no inherent check that they fire in the right context. To despise patriotism or humanism is like despising fear or other emotions not realizing that they are designed to protect the individual.

no i don't said at August 1, 2010 2:54 PM:

"...who can presumably rise to the top of any corrupt third world shit whole..."


I r e s t m y c a s e.

Gorilla said at August 3, 2010 8:38 AM:

Roissy and the HBD people are pretty much just like the UFO feaks: both insisting that undeniable truth is just around the corner. 15 years after "The Bell Curve", 60 years after Roswell and not a shred of evidence or respectable proponents.

Mthson said at August 4, 2010 5:20 PM:

Gorilla, you're clearly spot on. All human brains ARE identical! Anti-HBD forces win again!


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©