Shortly after the election was stolen, I predicted that Republicans would never win anything ever again, and that Trump would go to prison, soon to be followed by most of the Republican party.
But, it seems that I was running on Musk time.  If you want to know what our enemies are up to, listen to what they accuse us of. Social Justice Warriors always project.
Hat tip PJ Media:
The Atlantic’s Barton Gellman wrote breathlessly, “the ballots cast by American voters will not decide the presidency in 2024. Thousands of votes will be thrown away, or millions, to produce the required effect. The winner will be declared the loser. The loser will be certified president-elect. The prospect of this democratic collapse is not remote. People with the motive to make it happen are manufacturing the means. Given the opportunity, they will act. They are acting already.â€
“The democratic emergency is already here. We face a serious risk that American democracy as we know it will come to an end in 2024, but urgent action is not happening.â€
So, if the usual inversion applies, 2022 will not be too blatantly democracy 2020 style, but 2024 will be.
Recap. The Democrats in 2020 had the usual fraud in place to deal with the expected Trump landslide, but got a Trump Tsunami instead, so had to stop the counting, and dump in lots of hastily printed ballots at four in the morning. These additional fraudulent ballots were centrally printed in the middle of the night, so unlike the fraudulent ballots issued earlier did not have the downballot candidates filled in.
The expressions of alarm reflect concern that the usual deniable fraud is not going to suffice, and they are going to have to go about it in a more obvious fashion, and stop worrying too much about pretending that democracy is still operating. But they figure the mask will fall off in 2024. Which does not mean it will stay on in 2022 – it fell off in the early hours of 2020 November the fourth, but they hastily put it on again and announced that no one had noticed.
I’m vaguely aware of right wing nutrition but does anyone know a good place for finding an overview of the theory? Something more in depth than twitter soundbites denouncing seed oils.
Saturated fat vs. non-saturated fat.
Processed foods. What kinds of processing are bad and why.
Agricultural chemicals and their consequences.
That sort of thing.
I know what you mean, but I’m not sure there are any aggregate infodumps for it. Bits and pieces you can infer from Goodrich’s blog (he’s the #1 anti-seed-oil guy) [1], then there’s JustMeat.co from the bitcoin carnivores [2]. I haven’t seen any strictly right-wing sentiment against processed foods, it seems very mainstream to me (Kevin Hall is extremely mainstream). Fat saturation is mostly a pony of the low-carb crowd, in opposition to Harvard, but I struggle to come up with a central figure here. Nearest to agricultural chemicals would be Time Mold Slime Mold’s series on obesity [3], but I’m not sure they’re right-wing.
[1] http://yelling-stop.blogspot.com/
[2] https://justmeat.co/
[3] https://slimemoldtimemold.com/
https://blog.reaction.la/science/obesity-nutrition-and-spiritual-pollution/
Much good discussion here.
https://www.americanpartisan.org/2021/12/the-american-partisan-nutritional-empowerment-program-guide-part-3-of-6-healthy-fats/
If you read The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet [by (((Nina Teicholz)))] (a thorough study of how the scientific consensus of fat developed and changed) you will discover that peer reviewed material is like a barrel of wine to which a bucket of sewage has been added. Her account of the Mediterranean diet is a particularly entertaining depiction of the manufacture of consensus and the subsequent development of peer reviewed evidence for that consensus.
What I’ve Learned and Dr. Eric Berg DC is my go to YT for anything related to health and diet.
True story, I fixed my balding hair by listening to Dr. Berg which he said is often caused by gut issue. I drank probiotic regularly nowadays and the balding sign is pretty much gone.
>Right wing nutrition
lol wut?
So left wing nutrition…
“I believe in open borders AND eating 350 grams of high fructose corn syrup (that a giant mega corporation I hate prepares for me) every day”
> Saturated fat vs. non-saturated fat.
> Processed foods. What kinds of processing are bad and why.
> Agricultural chemicals and their consequences.
It’s all very, very simple. You have similar hardware to your pre-civilised ancestors.
Yes, civilisation has forced our evolution to a degree, and there are less of us that suffer horribly from grain consumption.
Jack Kruse hides good knowledge behind seemingly insane ramblings. He’s like the David Icke of nutrition. But worth examining his stuff.
Left wing nutrition = Eat the bug, goy. Eat the soy, goy. Reduce cow emissions, goy.
Interesting. Details are slim, but this does NOT appear to be an RNA vaccine, but an advanced form of typical protein vaccine.
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/u-s-army-creates-single-vaccine-against-all-covid-and-sars-variants/
After some Googling.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.abi5735
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8651551/
It is a synthetic very large molecule that looks something like a virus – which is less likely to drive your immune system insane.
But nothing looks and acts as much like a virus as a real virus does
Omicron is the true vaccine for Covid, as cowpox was the true vaccine for smallpox:
“We have treated 24 Omicron-positive patients so far, but only two were symptomatic. One had low grade fever, sore throat, ..“
My elderly overweight parents who have heart problems caught Omni last week. Both were sick for 3-5 days, low grade fever, coughing, score throat. This week they’re still coughing a bit, but otherwise they’re fine. This shit is on par with the average flu.
[…] A comment I left on Jim’s Blog […]
Piggybacking off the HR discussion from downthread, I run a small <10-person startup that has so far managed to avoid any entanglement with HR, mainly by outsourcing payroll to external companies and outsourcing other human resource issues (recruiting, health insurance, onboarding, etc.) to freelancers that we can fire if we have to.
I imagine having HR in our company as a tentacle of the state would cripple our ability to hire (for example, forcing us to hire for "diversity" which luckily we've been able to avoid so far), and manage in ways that create value. I'm curious at what size exactly we will see pressure to hire dedicated HR people, as well as how to avoid this (i.e who to pay Danegeld to) for as long as possible.
If you have outsourced recruiting, the organization you have outsourced recruiting to is certainly affecting your hiring.
An outsourced HR is slightly better than an inhouse HR, but they heavily influence your hiring as you can’t hire anybody they have already rejected (and never showed you the application).
Try to take back recruiting from those freelancers and you’ll find out how powerful the governments tentacles are.
Used to be fifty employees, but I am doubtless out of date
I do kind of wonder whether the way that sucks the least to do ‘HR’ is to just give every boss who commands a Dunbar number-ish amount of people a minion or two. Call them secretaries. They report directly to that boss who is accountable for their actions, and they handle payroll, insurance, onboarding and personal stuff, as well as assisting in recruiting (in practice, a large fraction of your recruiting is going to be done by your employees—they know people).
Nothing says that HR needs to handle payroll. Just have a payroll department.
The boss needs to have sole handling of firing, and the bookkeeper should handle the ensuing paperwork – which has become an intolerable flood due to government intrusion into firing, which is an external powerbase of HR within the corporation. External powerbases undermine the cohesion of the corporation and destroy its ability to act as one.
Recruiting should be done by the boss, and by his existing workers with the boss’s approval and final consent. The people doing the work know other people with similar skills, and are in the best position to judge those skills. HR is notoriously useless and destructive in recruiting programmers. It is a massive obstacle sitting in your way.
The minion in question should be the bookkeeper. HR duties should be rolled into accounting, and those duties that cannot rolled into accounting are an intrusion into the authority of the boss, that undermines the corporate form by underming the capability of the corporation to act as one.
I’d like to hear how near or off the mark I am on this one — war veteran describes what its like to kill a man
My response, besides rolling my eyes, was thinking: nice humblebrag bro.
“I see it every night.” i.e. PTSD. He’s not bragging.
American combat soldiers tend to come from semi religious places in flyover country and I have on a couple of occasions met ones who said they were bothered by it… mainly it turned out because they were afraid they were going to hell.
In both cases they seemed considerably relieved when I said the proper translation of the biblical commandment was “Thou Shalt Not MURDER” not “Thou Shalt Not Kill” and that they could look this up.
PTSD is a healthy reaction of the subconscious to one’s act that, as the lawyers say, shocks consciousness. The reason we have so much PTSD whereas before WW1 it was practically not a thing, is operant conditioning and bombing weddings in Peshawar, while the state religion tells us that taking a life is the gravest sin (what the guy in the video intimates), and killing civilians is a most heinous “war crime” lol.
All research into PTSD is bought and paid for by the DoD, and is basically a massive PR effort to obfuscate this.
Your relocation divisions will sleep soundly 🙂
I believe WW1 was for most people in it pretty damn traumatic and terrifying…
In WW1 it was called shell shock and i believe stress from hearing constant shelling of fixed trenches was pretty real.
Shellshock is cattle realising they are cattle at the slaughterhouse, whereas previously they believed themselves to be fully actuated humans with a mission on Earth, or something. PTSD is a strict superset of this, and mostly comes from situations that are both objectively and subjectively individual.
The “hearing more explosives go boom than in all previous wars combined” is a DARPA-sponsored copout. The soundtrack is not a problem, people could literally sleep through it, until some of them
couldn’t.
Well lets look at probably the only good thing to come out of WWI, Tolkien.
Some aspects of his personality do strike me as a guy who never quite recovered from the war mentally. Making a whole fantasy world complete with languages… having to throw in the dead marshes and such.
Tolkien never went around saying the war fucked him up a little, but in some ways he was clearly mentally um touched by it. So its not ALL fake and gay.
I like Ernst Jünger’s writing. Neither his writing nor his bio suggest that the war(s) fucked him up.
According to Camille Paglia, abortion is killing, not murder.
According to jim, killing demonspawn isn’t murder.
And euthanasia…
In Hebrew and Arabic, killing is KTL, murder is QTL.
Why is the KJV so lousy at translating?
As you show, much murder gets redefined as either killing, or not even killing. If you think in words, you will be misled by wordsmiths. KJV is *obviously* not forbidding all killing. There will be a lot of killing of animals and plants, and indeed people. The Bible works as a useful reminder once you understand what GNON wants from you, which understanding cannot be gleaned from reading Bible alone.
GNON = Holy Ghost
No Sola Scriptura, but Papal Infallibility, amirite?
Wrong.
Church tradition, consensus of the community of the saints, lived experience, and scientific method. Judge by the fruit, respect your father, nullis in verba.
Interestingly there was a discussion on that subject among reactionaries a while ago in which the consensus was that PTSD is mostly fake.
PTS is real. It comes in different forms. It can be survivor’s guilt, good men struggling with having to do bad things, bad men discovering morality, and many others. The one that is “fake,” as far as that goes, is soldiers internalizing the proggy narrative that being hard and cold is evil. So, yes, many of the midwit military folk susceptible to the influence of memetic Progressivism suffer from fake PTS. Real PTS is almost always survivor’s guilt. And it isn’t isolated to soldiers. Walk across enough minefields intact, and dream state v. waking life will spin up some pretty awful subconscious inclination.
The cathedral has made it crimethink to celebrate warriors and the mighty deeds that warriors do. It’s been this way all the way back to WW2.
Mighty deeds like bombing weddings in peshawar in order to better teach girls how to put a condom on a banana.
If the guy were a warrior doing warrior things, no PTSD. But he is a peasant soldier doing shitty things in a country he has no business being in, and oh boy is that blood hard to was off.
More PTSD with WW1 because the war was completely for evil and everyone involved eventually knew it.
WW2 soldiers on the allied side felt good, they won and even if FDR and the allies were bad the Nazis and the Japs also did very bad things.
Vietnam even if we were the good guys we lost, the army was betrayed, and American society spat on them.
How come no one ever suffered from PTSD until demonization of warriors escalated spectacularly?
My monkey brain is rather proud of having survived troubles.
I think we’re both treading on thin experiential ice here, Jim. Survivor guilt does not come from surviving. It comes from surviving the unexplainable. The bird goes down and your buddies are in puddles and you don’t have a scratch. An IED sends your MRAP to Mars and you walk away while you’re bro is mailed home in a jar.
I’m going to speak for a few lads who cannot or will not speak for themselves right now: some shit just doesn’t compute, and the more you try to calculate, the worse it gets. No amount of therapy or happy talk will bring clarity and acceptance. Some people marshall their shit, others check out. I’m carrying a few flames for Bros that couldn’t handle it. No amount of explaining will fix the others.
…but this is a very small group. The vast majority of dudes that talk about PTSD are cry baby faggots who have internalized a guilt narrative. I have neither time nor sympathy for them. But I have encountered a few of the legitimately broken, and that’s why I say PTS. It isn’t a disorder, it’s a consequence.
It occurs to me that these examples you’re offering, like the MRAP to Mars, are not moments of personal power, as killing generally should be, but of impotence.
A friend of mine was diagnosed with PTSD. And for what its worth he clearly is troubled by a particular incident. But like your examples, he pretty much wasn’t an agent in the event. He wasn’t even there at the time, close enough to hear but not close enough to see or do anything. But he has the sort of retrospective awareness that had he just talked to someone five minutes longer, hell even 30 seconds, they’d probably still be alive. Of course he had no way of knowing at the time.
This guy is proud of his violent achievements, and he has them. He has the stories and scars to prove it. What bothers him is when there is nothing he could do.
Of course he is troubled by the incident.
The shrink talking to him and attempting to make it into PTSD is, however, engaged in a hostile act against him.
Nuts right back at you, Jim!
You are overgeneralising your own tenuous interpretation of an n = 1 incident, an incident that you view from a very subjective viewpoint, a perception coloured by the then-recent trauma. And you are ignoring the mountain of evidence of all these people that obviously have something very wrong with them, people who vote with guns and bullets that their life is never going to be worth living, people eating the gun rather than endure the hell any longer.
People who never had seen the insides of a shrink’s office, who spend months on a waiting list just to get to talk to some slut who could barely scrape through the college, and who is just phoning it in. And you’re telling these people that their experience is iatrogenic, and that if they didn’t talk to that slut that is just phoning it in, they would not have had the experience for the past five years, and they would not have to want to eat the gun and end it all, they would not lose their job and their family, and they would not have to spend months on the waiting list.
If your explanation of a mountain of evidence involves time travel, perhaps it’s not the slut that is phoning it in causing it, perhaps it is not iatrogenic.
Are they?
Are people actually in distress over PTSD, or just pleased to have a socially approved justification for real or hypochondriac dysfunction, or a socially approved response to behavior they fear is socially disapproved?
The two examples of PTSD quoted in this thread is a chick who was looking to get brutally raped because PTSD, and a man who was boasting about killing another man having PTSD over it.
If having certain symptoms gets you off the hook in a society thick with pressure and disapproval, and your shrink puts pressure on you to have those symptoms, lots of people are likely to have those symptoms.
I am not seeing a mountain of evidence that people have distressing reactions to trauma. I am seeing a mountain of evidence that people have socially approved distressing reactions to trauma, which distressing reaction just happens to excuse all the things that they have done which are rightly or wrongly subject to ever intensifying social disapproval.
Let’s use accurate terms.
The official theory of PTSD, and the reality portrayed in for example Lady Macbeth’s plight, is that traumatic events are inherently stressful; if the stress is not processed adequately, this will result in a disorder.
You are writing that you have zero stress response to a traumatic event. This is impossible, this is nonsense. I don’t believe that is what you mean. Does your heartrate remain static as you torture kittens to death? Do you compose your grocery shopping list as you beat the shit out of some unfortunate sob in the boxing ring?
I believe what you mean is that people do not have disorderly reaction to the elevated stress from violent events. In your narrative, trauma is perhaps not the right word, because you seem not to view violence as traumatic, and I would agree.
Is that what you mean?
In this thread, apart from the two examples of the chick and the soldier boy, you are ignoring the small detail of the WW1 trench infantry, the bomber crews and the fighter escorts Pseudo-Chrysostom mentioned, the vets The Cominator mentioned, and the commonly found affliction that Lady Macbeth represents.
There is a lot of attention whoring, and people have “PTSD” from watching their boyfriend ejaculate on the pillow without their express written consent, but I don’t see those people’s functioning being affected. I have, on the other hand, PTSD wreak havoc in people’s lives, and it is hard to pin that down to seeking social approval for whatever they may have done, which was in the end quite insignificant compared to what they kept doing because of the disorder.
I have massive stress response to traumatic events. This is healthy sane, and normal. At the time the shrink was harassing me to have PTSD symptoms, I had, however, absolutely none of the symptoms he demanded that I have. He demanded that my stress take pathological and hurtful form, which form it did not resemble in the slightest. My stress response was so different from the stress response that he demanded as to be unrecognizable in his terms and his language, and I only now, at this moment, in response to your post, recognize that what he was fishing for was my actual response to the situation, redefined in pathological terminology. I did not recognize it then, and I only now recognize it.
At the time, and until this moment, this simply never occurred to me, that he was not conjuring up PTSD from thin air, but attempting to redefine my actual reaction to stress as an illness, as pathology. It simply did not occur to me until this moment that my actual response to stress was related to what he was fishing for, because my subjective experience of stress simply was not recognizable in his terminology.
The depression shrink came closer to the mark. And I told her I was rationally, appropriately, and proportionally depressed by objectively depressing events, and would get over it by and by. “Life’s a bitch and then you die. You have to laugh, or else you would cry” It simply did not occur to me to make a similar reply to the PTSD shrink, because his pathologization of stress made it unrecognizable to me. It simply never occurred to me until this moment that he was talking about my actual response to stress, translated into the language of pathology and sickness.
Until this moment, it seemed to me he was pressuring me to invent symptoms from thin air, but now that you equate stress with PTSD, it seems likely he was pressuring me to reinterpret and redefine my actual response to stress as illness. But I simply did not recognize what he was talking about as intended to be in any way related to my actual experience of stress. It seemed utterly and incomprehensibly alien to my lived experience, while what the depression shrink was talking about was recognizable.
Obviously I was badly shaken up by having had a rather rough time, but if PTSD is the medicalized and pathologized description of that, the description was not recognizable to me then, and it still seems mighty strange and alien to me when you equate the normal stress response with PTSD. It is absolutely nothing like PTSD.
If being shaken up by a rough time is “PTSD”, PTSD is a weird, unnatural, unrealistic, strange, and artificial description of it, which denigrates and belittles those who have been having a rough time, a strange, deceptive, and misleading newspeak originally cooked up by priests to belittle and condemn warriors.
If PTSD is the medical terminology for being shaken up by having a rough time, and this simply never occurred to me until you equated the two, it is just unrecognizable, alien, and irrelevant to way in which people actually get shaken up by having a hard time.
It never occurred to me until now that he was pressuring me to adopt the social role of victim because I had been having a hard time. I just thought he was babbling on about something weird.
If people have a socially approved disorder, they will wreak havoc, because they have socially approved superpower over other people. They are disabled, and everyone has to accommodate the disabled. Being disabled is high status, valorized, and state subsidized, so we get the enthusiastic mass manufacture of disability.
Disability is honored, subsidized, and empowered. Productivity is demonized, condemned, taxed, and intimidated. So, surprise surprise, we get more disability and less productivity.
If victims are honored, and warriors dishonored, warriors are apt to choose to be victims instead. If victims are honored, and the productive dishonored, the productive will choose to be victims instead.
You cannot have PTS*D* that close to the event. To an extent, it is a matter of definition, but the gist is, the symptoms (being shaken, having nightmares and even hallucinations, being dissociated, easily startled, aggressive or numb, depressed, not quite there) is perfectly normal in the aftermath of an event (the rule of thumb is approximately one month), and the prognosis is that it will just work itself out. After about a month, the prognosis is that something went wrong, and it will not just work itself out, and because the same symptoms going on for too long become ever harder to handle, it is by definition a disorder (i.e. an affliction that is uncommon and gets in the way of living one’s life in a functioning way).
So that close to an event, it is not disorderly, because it doesn’t get in the way of your living your life (any more than any other acute illness would), and because it is not uncommon or unexpected.
This close to an event, it is termed post-traumatic stress (not disorder), and the problem is, if you suppress that stress, you suppress the processing of the stress, and anyway, if you give a midwit shrink something, he will try to pigeonhole it. If I, an autistic, go to a shrink, he will probably be overjoyed I have this officially holy jewish disease, but when I was a kid, it was not a thing, so people would just think I was obtuse, and probably thought my mother didn’t love me, and tried to get rid of me as quickly as possible.
I cannot make heads or tails of at which point you’re talking of PTS and when of PTSD. I suspect you are using PTS, PTSD interchangeably, and also stress and sterss processing interchangeably, and also stress and trauma.
In your telling, the bad guy tries to talk your limbic system into having not had processed the stimulus. That cannot possibly work. Either he was talking to you shortly after the event, at which point he would be fishing for (acute, normal, expected) post-traumatic stress, or he would be talking to you after the deadline for orderly processing the event has passed (roughly one month), at which point you either had the (chronic, abnormal, disorderly, still expected but only in a fraction of instances) post-traumatic stress disorder, or didn’t, and no amount of talking could possible make your lizard brain travel back in time and change its mind.
Sure, you can reject the official model of how the biology and psychology of it works, and you can reject the official vocabulary, and the etiology of the thing, or that the thing even exists, or that it is one thing and not multiple disparate things, and I sure do that in parts, but if we are to have a meaningful discussion, we must keep to some definition of terms.
Your retelling is drastically divergent from the official doctrine on PTSD, not just in the sense that they would underhandedly do one thing and piously profess they are doing another thing, but that their supposed actions do not match with the official doctrine of what their actions should be. They act very roguish and maverick in your story.
That is probably the framing they adopt, and the reason they do it is officially they are non-judgmental, and unofficially DoD who pays for all the research insists that the soldiers that get it are the good guys. In fact if you have PTSD it is always your damn fault, by definition, according to my theory of it.
There certainly is something in the system that tries to derail the processing of the trauma, for example the Duluth model, but that is just kinda whatever. If one is not a victim, one is not easily talked into it. You turned out fine, after all.
That is certainly true, but PTSD sufferers are treated like dirt. Any service that you need to access, be it medical, social security, financial, whatever — requires capacity for action that you at that point simply do not have; look at what VA does to vets, months on waiting lists to just talk to someone. You are holy if you get “raped” and parade your holiness in the newspaper, but the guys who eat a gun are not holy, they’re out of sight out of mind. Little boys who get sodomised are not holy. The plurality of PTSD cases are car accidents, but you wouldn’t know that, because it is not holy, it is performatively holy, but people with PTSD scarcely have the energy or desire to perform.
You are trying to process my words into language that has a lie at its core. Don’t do that. Your language is in large part the cause of PTSD. Your account of how people respond to stress is a lie. Stop being deceived. It is not like that.
Some people who have been very severely stressed are very vulnerable to suggestion for a quite short time after the events. Not all of them, probably not most of them, but a great many of them. This has been known for a very long time, long before there was such a thing as PTSD. If someone believes his immediate stress response was like that, this is what he has been told, not what he in fact experienced.
If doctors hastily get at someone who is still very badly shaken up, there is a good chance he will be persuaded to believe any bullshit he is told, and will internalize it. This is brainwashing.
It that is true, and I have no reason to think it is not, it would mean that some of our biggest social problems will disappear like magic as soon as people adopt a new weltanschauung. While it is not possible to talk someone’s limbic system into not having PTSD, it seems that you had a much healthier, ancient subconscious frame, and what causes the rise of PTSD is the modern frame, the modern worldview. Nice thing is that we don’t have to understand how the new software subverts our biology, we only have to reinstall the old software.
Sure, but only immediately after the event, not months or years after the event.
I observe first-hand, and hear second-hand, people being in a state of shock immediately after car crash; I observe nightmares after traumatic events indicating processing during sleep; I see people being easily startled or developing phobias, and gradually incorporating the phobias into their lifestyle. Most people who experience PTSD never talk to anyone, and when they talk to a professional, it is years after they could possibly incept PTSD into them. The official story is skewered with lies, but they are built on kernels of truth, truth that was uncontroversial hundreds of years ago when Shakespeare wrote about Lady Macbeth.
Ok how do people respond to stress?
Talking to friends and acquaintances, and making it into a story is one of the ways to deal. Elation and renewed energy is another. What else?
Does not last very long, which is probably why shrinks like to get into action right away as soon as real doctor goes away and emergency lets them in.
What you are calling PTSD is a system of delusions pushed hard by shrinks, and adopted partly by people taught lies by shrinks, and largely by people seeking victim status and the social super power of victimhood – with people in the latter category being far more common and prominent these days.
Sleep that knits up the ravell’d sleave of care,
The death of each day’s life, sore labor’s bath,
Balm of hurt minds, great natures second course,
Chief nourisher in life’s feast.
I wake, and the dream fades, ah, it was just a bad dream. And then I hug my wife, and in the morning she makes me coffee. I seldom remember my dreams. That is what dreams are for.
Today, PTSD is a popular and high status story, because victimhood is high status and gives license for anti social behavior. When laughing in the face of danger, or going to sleep in a terribly dangerous situation because there is no way to escape the danger, and it just goes on and on, is high status, and licenses for anti social behavior are not so liberally handed out, you will hear different stories.
>While the ability to dissociate is likely universal, or nearly so, some people are clearly more susceptible to dissociative states than are others. There is little question that someone’s innate ability to dissociate can be greatly enhanced — although not necessarily by ethical means. The most severe of the dissociative ‘disorders,’ MPD/DID, is in almost all cases created by psychological trauma so severe that the traumatic episode(s) cannot be integrated into the experiences of the core personality. By far the most common cause of MPD is early childhood trauma — usually, but not always, resulting from horrific abuse by a parent or other adult guardian. Dr. Frank Putnam noted in 1989 that he was “struck by the quality of extreme sadism that is reported by most MPD victims. Many multiples have told me of being sexually abused by groups of people, of being forced into prostitution by family members, or of being offered as sexual enticement to their mother’s boyfriends. After one has worked with a number of MPD patients, it becomes obvious that severe, sustained, and repetitive child abuse is a major element in the creation of MPD.†Dr. Deirdre Barrett, writing in 2001 for Psychology Today, offered a similar observation: “‘dissociaters’…have the following traits in common: Many such subjects reported a history of child abuse. Although some remembered this directly, some had been told by others that they had been battered…Other dissociaters who had not been abused had suffered childhood traumas such as prolonged, painful medical conditions and before the age of 10 experienced the deaths of their parents.â€[…]
>[…]And how would that control be attained? Estabrooks shied away from the details, only alluding to the severe psychic torture that is required to split a person’s core personality and then exert control over the alter personalities that are created. The trauma is often referred to euphemistically as “a form of hypnotism.†In one passage, for example, Estabrooks noted that multiple personalities “are caused by a form of hypnotism in the first place! We will see that emotional shock produces exactly the same results as hypnotism.†Later, he came a little closer to the truth: “multiple personality [can] be both caused and cured by hypnotism. Remember that war is a grim business. Suppose we deliberately set up that condition of multiple personality to further the ends of military intelligence.†Still later, he came even closer: “everyone [can] be thrown into the deepest state of hypnotism by the use of what [I] termed the Russian method — no holds barred, deliberate disintegration of the personality by psychic torture…The subject might easily be left a mental wreck but war is a grim business.”[…]
>[…]Verdier went on to explain that in order to achieve truly lasting states of brainwashing (or mind control), it is necessary to subject the victim to “profound and deep emotional states.†The recommended emotional states are fear, shock, and anxiety — all of which have “an intense disinhibitive effect on the human brain.†Even more effective is pain — because, “according to the eminent neurologist, Dr. Wilder Penfield, sensations of pain from the muscular sensory system enter the sub-cortical brain regions directly.†With a passage seemingly lifted from Estabrooks’ writings, Verdier left no doubt that pain and fear are the most useful items in the MK-ULTRA toolbox: “Russian political scientists do support the belief that given enough punishment, all the people in any time or place are susceptible to hypnotic control.†Verdier echoed other of Estabrooks’ beliefs as well, including the idea that “brainwashing†could and should be widely utilized for “benevolent†purposes, and the notion that children are ideal candidates for mind control programming: “Brainwashing can be slow, insidious and sure when applied to children early in life.. .It is likely that there is a short period of time following corporal punishment when the child is in a state of decortication — hypnosis, so to speak. This is the ideal time to plant the positive instructions for better behavior in the future.†What the good doctor considered “corporal punishment†and “positive instructions†was left to the reader’s imagination.
St. John’s quotes remind me of a book called The Rape of the Mind by Joost Merloo. Written in the 1950s by a Dutch Underground member who was tortured by the Nazis, then escaped. He later testified before Congress regarding the “treason” of captured American pilots in Korea. Free EPUB online. The book basically explains how actual mind control works. Fascinating stuff.
Jim, I detect what seems like bravado and braggadocio regarding PTSD. You’re the leader, so it is your job to tell us what we should mock, ignore, or exalt. At the same time, and this is anecdotal, I’m pretty sure there a lots of potentially useful men trapped in the “weltangshung” or whatever of modern victimology. Getting through to them without talking down to them is probably a useful tactic. As Gavrilo Princep taught us, even pussified skinnyfats can topple empires.
Prince Charmin Ultra Gay is basically outing himself as a flaming academe shill with his pronouncements about this or that mental affliction. Modern psychology in every one of its forms is alchemical at best, snake oil at worst. The former is a necessary misstep on the path towards actual scientific progress, the latter is grifterism. Faggots with degrees drawing make believe lines between imaginary afflictions is peak woke. Communism is always the haunt of mind-men. This is not to say there is nothing there. Mental affliction is exactly like the climate: of course it exists, and no your rain dances and human sacrifices have nothing to do with it. Notice how niggers don’t get PTSD. Octaroons do, but only if they identify as conservative. Notice how white man PTSD results in suicide and trannyism in no particular order. Notice how female PTSD results in pushups, pushup bras, and revenge. Notice how Nobel savages don’t get PTSD, they get even.
If you are in an elevator with everyone you love most, and it falls, and everyone gets pulped while you are unscathed, you’re going to have a bad time. You will have unhealthy responses to the stress you experience after the temporal effects of a given trauma have ceased. You don’t even have to script crazy horror movie happenings. Look at the little boys that get diddled by powerful sodomites. It’s the same thing. They aren’t being diddled anymore, they aren’t even kids! Snap out of it, wuss! It doesn’t work like that. Not will any amount of talking about it. Action must be taken. And some of those actions (suicide, perpetuation of sodomy, transference to innocents) are ameliorative and destructive. Other actions can be ameliorative and be beneficial. There’s little hope for the truly broken. But there are probably a ton of people who are vicariously victimized who need a very forward conversation, a very rigorous beating, and a new purpose with a good amount of oversight at first. This will cure them of the chronic ghey that ails them.
There’s too much noise and too little signal on this topic. Too much entertainment memery and no basic facts. Outside of personal experience, every single source on this subject is completely converged.
> (((Joost Merloo)))
Early Life:
Take a large pinch of kosher salt with whatever he has to sell. It won’t come as a shock to the readers here, but torture porn biopics are something of a shtick.
Kunning your inability to shut up about things you know little about is nauseating.
@jim
It really isn’t. Flaunting certain holy characteristics but only in very narrowly approved of ways is. So for example, it is holy to cut your son’s dick off, but it is very unholy to talk about the level of suicides (50%) this effects, and try to do something that actually helps. It is holly to go to gay pride, but it is unholy to go to conversion therapy. It is holy to be a nigger, as long as you stay on the plantation, but god forbid you don’t.
What I am saying tracks well with observed reality.
You are stretching your narrative to fit reality reported to you by people and books, and you are stretching the narrative, and it doesn’t fit, so you ignore most of the points made in this thread that disprove your narrative:
Most people with PTSD never see any medical professional whatsoever. It is difficult to see a professional even if you want to, and there are delays that prevent you from seeing anyone very shortly after an incident, because long waiting lists. And the system could do that, you could have mandatory counselling after car accidents, but you don’t see that, the state is quite unwilling to even send a badgenigger, and drivers are disincentivised to report due to the massive (and unjust) financial penalty from increased insurance premiums. Car accidents being the plurality of PTSD cases, this would be a fertile ground on which to descend if you wanted to manufacture PTSD like your theory proposes is happening. But they disincentivise shrink intervention instead of incentivising. Under my theory, what they are currently doing would increase PTSD, and under my theory, this is why they are doing it.
Unlike Krueger, a blathering idiot who doesn’t ever know what he is talking about, nor never talks about anything he knows, I have experience with people with PTSD (not professionally, from personal life) — and Jimian advice, Jimian worldview, Jimian prioritising of strength, masculinity, laughing in the face of adventure would have helped them mightily.
It is not fruitful to try understand subversion on subversion’s terms. C S Lewis tried it with Screwtape Letters, and while it is entertaining light reading, the fruit is rotten, may Lewis rot in hell, reading his feminist screeds never helped anyone. Doesn’t really matter. We ought not to dwell on how (((psychology))) subverted our biology to introduce PTSD, all we have to do is resettle the jews, install the old software, and the problem will fast sort itself out.
No I am not. You are stretching my narrative to fit tall tales reported to you by people and books.
I am telling you, telling you repeatedly, that the books are hateful hostile lies from beginning to end, enemy lies intended to harm the patient, and that what is reported to you by people is distorted by self interest, desire to flatter the powerful, and psychiatrically induced delusion.
I am flat out unambiguously and plainly rejecting what is reported to you by people and books.
Enemy lies, enemy lies.
Look, I see in the workplace seemingly sane and normal people just not seeing female misconduct that gets right in their faces, and you think I should believe politically correct self reports by people who are, or claim to be, mentally disturbed?
Bullshit. Not what I see in front of my nose. What I see in front of my nose is that shrinks get inflicted on unwilling people by state and quasi state institutions at the slightest excuse.
If someone has some event that might supposedly cause PTSD, or there is some incident of unusual behavior, cops or hospital or whatever is going have a shrink jump on him despite his total lack of enthusiasm for seeing a shrink.
Who are you hearing this crap from? It is from the shrinks, who are forever lobbying to get the authorities to inflict them on people even more than they get inflicted on people already.
People who wander the streets all day screaming at demons and causing trouble never get to see a psychiatrist, because there is no money there, but someone middle class, someone with assets, is going to have a shrink sicced on him against his will at any excuse. They bust someone, expecting him to go with the public defender, but instead he hires a lawyer. Bingo, then they want a psychiatric evaluation. Where there are people with assets who are in some kind of trouble, a shrink will appear whether they like it or not.
Lady Macbeth’s nightmares are obviously intended to depict moral guilt. She is not “processing stress”, she’s processing sin. Those scenes are informed by the Christian view of psychology, has nothing to do with PTSD.
Psychiatry, especially in the 20th and 21st century, has a long history of violating primum non nocere.
Is that so? Let us count the psychiatric ways…
– Depression is holy, for we have no end of women complaining how hard their life is, feeling very sorry for themselves and expecting others to acknowledge their self-pity.
– PTSD is holy, for war is the most toxic of masculinity and obviously every man must be troubled by his toxic masculinity.
– ADD is holy, for a diagnosis gives much needed bonuses in school.
– Autism is holy, as for a man to acknowledge that he is a loser is the first step to disavowing his toxic masculinity.
– Antisocial personality disorders are holy, for they are rewarded with plenty female attention, shrinks primary among them.
– Transgenderism is obviously holy, and as with all of these labels, the point of its holiness is not happiness, it is status through victimhood. Psychiatry never heals any of its patients, because its patients revel in their victimhood and are systematically encouraged to do so.
The list goes on and on. Psychiatry can be boiled down to ‘you are a victim, we are all victims, here are some holy pills for your victimhood.’ It’s toxic, and the only way to deal with it is to shut them out like you’d shut out a vampire.
Charmin Ultra Gay is displaying every red flag of an academia zombie. Pretty soon he’ll be complaining about how unfair it is that holy psychology is not as fiscally rewarding as automotive maintenance. He is a rainbow lipstick faggot, just like Anonymous Fake, just like Carlylian Restorationist, and every other over educated, under experienced Trotskyite before him. Point and laugh as he desperately deploys scripted antisemitic memes to cover up his hand tip over PTSD.
@jim
Most people never see the insides of a medical office, never speak to anyone.
We are obviously talking about two disjoint sets of people. I am not talking about people who have resources that can be leached off of, but people who have abilities that need to be degraded or destroyed. As the resident marxist, I of course primarily empathise with the much larger foundation of the pyramid, the soldiers that eat the gun or the folks that got a job without commute because they had a car accident and the PTSD from driving a car was affecting their work performance.
I thought that I knew a lot about PTSD, but this thread really brought some new perspectives.
@alf
(((Psychiatry))) is much better regarded as an enemy psyop, which from the very beginning it has been. But we must understand that the enemy works by taking something real, and inverting it, some say that this is because Satan, unlike God, cannot create. [not a christian, leave me alone]
Depression is holy, as long as you do not try to point out that a depression coming from external causes that one cannot do anything about is vanishingly rare — and that is precisely the kind of depression that is not holy.
Autism, again, not holy. If it were, aspie-friendly places would not be destroyed by bringing in screaming little “autistic children” to trigger (correct use) sensory overload in us. Codes of Conduct would not be demanding us to speak socially approved lies. If autism were holy, (((Katie Bouman))) would be praised for making tea and coffee for her autistic (((colleagues))) who actually wrote the code.
… and so on and so forth.
To think that victimhood is holy is to cargo-cult jewishness. No. It is holy to be very powerful and be performatively a victim. The former is essential, albeit harder, do not expect people to fawn over you just because you play the victim: you need to beat them up first.
@trigger nigger
> yap yap yap longhouse drivel
Well you tried to be internet friends because you thought I was shitting on someone you didn’t at the time like, and now you just act like a spurned sheila. Case in point why women and their d&c, unfunny, solipsistic drivel ought not to be welcome in male spaces.
Sudo go make a sandwich, bitch.
The proverbial ‘inside of the medical office’ is the official reality everywhere in latter days. Civilization is pathologized, and citizens are all now patients in the asylum.
Jim he is right that autism isn’t all that holy…
You may get some small privileges in fake and gay government schools but thats like small privileges in a prison when you aren’t really suited for prison… but id rather have not been a sperg. Cathedral doesn’t like spergs we notice things…
Its not like being a tranny or obnoxious fag where you can sue anyone who says anything remotely critical.
Disability is honored, subsidized, and empowered; but there is one disability that no one honors, and that is the socially disabled.
He is bragging, and PTSD is a social disease, induced by doctors and society. If you are expected to man up, and you expect yourself to man up, you are 100% immune to PTSD.
Some time ago a hospital sicked a shrink on me (I was in the hospital for the physical consequences, not the mental, and did not appreciate having shrinks inflicted on me) and I recollect how indignant and upset he was that I did not have PTSD in the slightest. You are supposed to have PTSD. It shows you are a good person.
If you did something which is according to your deeply held beliefs unspeakably wrong, you would expect that deed to haunt you, Lady Macbeth style. Almost no-one ever does things like that, and when they do, they get the demons, and it is low-key expected they do. PTSD is a product of our religion being insane and demanding people to do things, or allow things to happen, which according to the same religion are on that level of beyond bad. The experience has to be visceral.
When you’re getting PTSD, you basically fucked up so bad that you and possibly your whole civilisation are going to hell, and it is time to reassess. Which we are, so more and more people getting it is not surprising. It is like depression, but deeper and more comprehensive. An evolved healthy reaction to a super unhealthy stimulus.
I like the definition that other commentators have been offering in this blog, that it is a real reaction to a sick spiritual system.
Likely the nightmares and all that are completely real, but real in the way demonic possession is real. If you choose not to hang out with demons, not going to get demonically possessed.
That’s half of it. The other half is that if you done fucked up like Lady Macbeth did, you gonna have bad time. Her spiritual system was perfectly healthy.
But the mechanism is the same whether it’s PTSD or Lady Macbeth.
Lady Macbeth’s visions are PTSD. Why would you think they’re not?
IRL I haven’t really ever observed women with guilty consciences except for BPD girls.
For normie women the rationalization hamster absolves them of all responsibility. So called BPDs seem to lack the rationalization hamster.
No, I agree with you. You are saying that Joe Rogan guy and Lady Macbeth are having the same kind of reaction to very different religious systems.
He might legitimately feel that way, or maybe he is just saying the appropriate thing. If he does feel that way, I suspect he would feel differently if he had been taken out for drinks and been celebrated after he smashed the other guy to death with a rock. I doubt I would have any doubts or regrets if I killed a Mohammedan with a rock, because he had it fucking coming to him for being a demon worshipper.
Yes there is a slight subtlety to it. Maybe he means what he says, maybe he does feel guilt through societal pressure or whatever. Like he understands that it is expected of him to feel guilty about taking another man’s and acts accordingly?
But my monkey brain tells me I’d be pretty proud if I killed a man with a rock, and you can sell me a bridge if his monkey brain is any different.
It really has to do with your religious sentiments…
A lot of American soldiers think back and then default to their original shallow understanding of christianity and think in the back of their mind that they’ve committed horrible sins and will be horribly punished by God.
I’ve met a couple…
You’re thimking about it too cerebrally, Alf. This works at the limbic level. The guy has a deeply held unarticulated belief that what he did was very wrong. His feelings do not care about your facts, as it were.
Plus, he’s lying. If a man intending to kill you sneaks up on you from behind, you’re gonna be too busy dying to do anything about it. It is typical of PTSD sufferers to retell the story in a way that helps them cope. If he could jovially relay “I got spooked by a kid, operant conditioning kicked in, fucker had it coming lol”, he would be in a much better place, spiritually.
He is probably an NPC. A soldier at heart, not a warrior. The two of us can celebrate our base masculine desires and our successes on our own, because we can make it on our own and we operate around society, not within it. He needs that society, and so his monkey brain is telling him that he did bad society thing, make sad face, have bad dream. Our monkey brains would be saying, fuck yeah, me big ass-kicker, now go fuck and party, good to be ass-kicker; good to win. To him, society is what keeps him alive. To us, society is where we go to find our tools.
Issues relevant to the matter seem to be:
1) PTSD is claimed to be pervasive nowadays, and was claimed not to exist (i.e. no recognizable symptoms described) before WW1
2) Societal pressure – as either encoded or hijacked by the media of the day – can very deeply influence people.
These two issues can be reconciled into either one (or even into a combination) of two very different explanations: either PTSD has been willed into being by a priestly class intent on clipping the warrior class, or PTSD was always a thing but it was considered cowardly to admit to being anything but elated at having pillaged a village, with all that this entails.
Do Mexican cartel members feel horrible at night due to what they have to do on a daily basis? Do nignogs? I don’t know, but I sure know the easiest way to get wacked in that milieu is to admit to this, so we’ll never hear as much from them.
Still, given that I would see zero evolutionary advantage to a PTSD module in our brains, I tend toward thinking PTSD is largely willed into being nowadays, but am not too confident.
PTSD is an evolved, adaptive response to an extreme stimulus. It is a more complex and more comprehensive depression. Same as depression, many people are currently being paid to muddy the waters about why it occurs and why it may be a good thing. Depression allows (forces) one to reassess priorities; it will allow (force) you to quit being an international playboy and find God (see: Roosh). PTSD allows (forces) you to entirely rewire your personality, something that is otherwise not really possible past puberty. Yes, it’s painful.
To the extent that PTSD was not occuring before WW1, it is because it is socially constructed by the DoD to be totally different from e.g. the visions that Lady Macbeth has, and which everyone low-key expects people like her to get if they do what she’d done. We have an insane religion that from one corner of the mouth tells us to do things, and from the other corner tells us that those things are unspeakably awful, which is why we have more of it now, but being haunted by demons after committing a very bad deed is a human universal.
I understand PTSD to be different from just having a conscience in that people supposedly suffer from it even having fought like real gentlemen etc etc. In this sense, I don’t think “feeling bad about having been a gentlemam warrior” ever was a theme before WWI.
> supposedly … fought like real gentlemen
Yeah, like who?
Hm, KD above speaks of guys who got it simply by surviving an IED, no fighting at all. The orginal shell-shock implies trauma from being under fire, nothing to do with any doing on your own part.
A common element of all these different dynamics is the perception of control.
For example, during the second war of internationalist aggression, escort pilots in the continental bombing campaign had, objectively, a much greater risk of being shot down than the bomber crewmen; yet rates of combat fatigue were more than double in latter, as compared with the former.
The reason is simple and obvious; irrespective of the dangers in reality he faced, the fighter jockey, mounted atop his steed, felt that *he had control over his destiny*. Whereas individual crewman on the bomber, each having narrower remits, concordantly felt oft like that had precious little influence over their chances, could merely pray their number did not come up.
Shell shock is of like kind with this; a screeching wode swinging his axe in your face is something you can viscerally grapple with; but what do you do about falling death streaking over from beyond the horizon, while you are stuck sitting there in a trench? It felt, so oft, like all one could do is simply pray their number did not come up. It is that feeling of powerlessness, a feeling of *lack of control*, that sows the seed; which the milieu he participates in may exacerbate, or denature.
IEDs and survivor’s guilt, just as so. The perception of caprice, arbitrary chance, that either you were powerless to change anything, or that you somehow *should* have had the power, but failed to.
Yes. And as you have hinted, it would be a curious question to ask what kinds of religious ideas are better at keeping people from feeling too bad about these types of situations. Maybe Islamic-style fatalism?
Having agency to address the problem makes a huge difference psychologically, even if the agency is not likely to make a whole lot of difference.
It is not fatalism that prevents old type Muslims from getting PTSD. It is a faith that says that killing and being killed is OK.
Good point re feeling in control. I know people eho are terrified of earthquakes for that very reason.
jim, but what about situations where there is no control or agency, like the IEDs and other things that KD talks about above? He says: “some shit just doesn’t compute, and the more you try to calculate, the worse it gets”. Seems to me that there might be belief systems that make some of these things compute.
Kyle Rittenhouse appears to have ptsd. He had control over his situation. Was he just demonized into accepting trauma? Or is his breakdown during recounting the incidents during his trial not indicative of ptsd?
Kyle Rittenhouse was traumatized not by his life being in danger, nor by killing people who needed killing, but by lack of social support for killing people who needed killing.
The cops who told him to go home when he attempted to get arrested, after he had told cops he killed people, in front of a crowd of hostile people telling the cops he had killed people, acted appropriately and correctly. But he had internalized that this is not how they would and should act.
>Kyle Rittenhouse appears to have ptsd. He had control over his situation. Was he just demonized into accepting trauma? Or is his breakdown during recounting the incidents during his trial not indicative of ptsd?
Kyle was filmed wearing a shirt saying AR15s > Skateboards. He clearly doesn’t have any issues with killing those who needed killing. I think Jim’s got the right of it with Kyle.
@tity
‘IEDs are just something that happens’ illustrates the dangers of the passive voice. Solipsistic modes of thought inhabiting a world where things just happen to happen with no agency.
There is agency with roadside bombs and the like. What they are is an epiphenomena of an ostensible fighting force that is precluded from ruling the people around them. The ideological preconceptions of demotist theocracy by design precludes that which is more orderly rulership, and naturally soldiers under a demotist regime are obliged to operate under the same preconceptions, and also without any unprincipled exceptions the theocrats themselves may use to stay in power. Leading to states of affairs where the poor bastards are much like those abused rodents in the old learned helplessness experiments; they simply shut down.
When the Western Roman Empire had to deal with piracy in the mediterranean, what they did what show up in force at any of the ports the pirates would dock at, kill everyone, and bring in settlers to repopulate the area.
In the event, the roman lake was pirate free for more than four centuries.
Distress (external stress one has no control of) vs eustress (stress one can overcome by levelling up and getting gud). It is sinful and evolutionarily deletrious to allow oneself to be under distress, to be in situations where other can do unto us and we cannot do unto them. There is no paradox.
Today’s PTSD is not much like actual shell shock, of course. It’s just a word that feminists use to signal their superior sensitivity and sacred victimhood.
E.g., “Whlle I was staggering around drunk in a back alley (my drinks had obviously been spiked behind my back), some man put his arm around my shoulders — without my consent! — and steered me to a taxi, which took me back to my shared squat. He had already paid for the ride, showing he was part of the patriarchy! Ever since then, I have had trouble sleeping and have been diagnosed at the women’s medical centre with post-traumatic stress disorder. Subscribe to my patreon.”
This topic has indeed been touched on before.
The most prosaic level is that of course the mindset of a labouring caste man is not adapted to life and death in war the way a man possessed of more warrior character would be. The warrior’s perspective is almost completely alien to the peasant’s (what do you mean you would not lose your nerve in a stressful situation? what do you mean this is not a stressful situation to you?). It is alien to many priestly types also – though better examples of the species may ideate it, by sufficient imaginative capacity.
A second level is that ‘PTSD’ is the social custom. You are *supposed* to have ‘PTSD’. You can turn on broadcast tv and watch a few episodes of M.A.S.H. to see what some priestly heebs living in the city think how war and warriors are supposed to work. People watch media and internalize the narrative, the life plan. They see how each part plays it’s role in the act, and they follow the script. They are not consciously thinking in terms like ‘i am going to go into an adrenaline pumping situation and thereafter psychologically self-sabotage’, but their limbic system is learning the score. When they find themselves in a situation, they intuitively follow their rolemodels for that situation.
A third level is that it is an epiphenomena of civilizational scale nihilism in general. Presently regnant underlords offer no good reasons for their soldiers to be doing anything they are doing – because they don’t have any good reasons. Aimless ennui, purposelessness, and listlessness are the rule, not the exception.
You’d expect a man who enrolls in the army to know what he signed up for.
I think the comments to the short show this as well. No one is saying ‘lol cringe’. Instead everyone is posting inspirational quotes on the timeless horror of war.
The US Army is, nominally, an all volunteer force. So yes, even if they are recruiting from all society, there is still some pre-selection effect at play.
At the same rate though, many of the foregoing are also joining up mainly for economic reasons, getting their internments in modern seminaries paid for by the GI bill and all that. They’re not ‘really’ expecting mortal combat; or to the extent they do expect it, it’s in a ‘ill deal with it if it happens’ way, not a ‘Conan! what is best in life!?’ way.
> know what he signed up for
It is not the killing and dying, but the murdering, and insane rules of engagement. How do you suppose it works. Was the guy, aged 17 or 22, supposed to disregard his teachers, all the patriotism instilled in him from cradle, the fact there are millions of vets,, some of them in his family, speaking of discharging their duty fondly, and say nah, there’s this guy on the Internet in the future in 2021, Prince Charming, and based on his poasts, I think the whole soldier thing is cringe and don’t do it!?
One doesn’t necessarily want to insult vets. Those guys are on our side, and being a soldier is a big part of their identity. If you look at for example Fuentes, there is some beginning of how that rhetoric can be wrought, but it is not easy. What would be the point to spit on the core identity of the guy who is basically a victim here? But make no mistake. There is an enormous PR machine behind misleading the public about what PTSD is, and much of the comment section is paid shills or people who regurgitate paid shills. Organic response looks like Winter Soldier or PTSD awareness campaigns by vets for vets & spouses.
It is mostly that the organs of their official religion, not the nominally Christian but the Harvard religion, constantly tell them that they have done evil deeds, and like most good men, feel terrible and guilty about the fact that they did evil.
Merely remembering life-threatening situations is adaptive. We are meant to remember danger because it helps us develop a plan for the future. We are meant to dream about danger because our dreams are a training dojo for real life. How we feel about these dreams and memories is another story.
When I was a child, I watched a man die in front of me, and my response was “good, he deserved it”, because he did deserve it, and it never bothered me much. My brother also watched him die, and was quite traumatized for a while, because he considered himself somewhat responsible, which he was not.
You get PTSD in society when you call war evil and warriors evil. Remembering war and violence is natural, but if you are remembering it with a guilty conscience, going to fuck you up.
We just tell our warriors that heroes frequently get killed, but on the way out they are doing their best to take as many enemy as possible with them, and our soldiers that when our enemies grasp women and children to act as human sandbags, the blood from those sandbags is on the heads of our enemies. No more PTSD.
There is also a whole lot of fake PTSD. I myself have come under pressure from a shrink who was sicced on me to display PTSD symptoms. You are supposed to get PTSD or else you are a bad person.
Are you conflating post-traumatic stress with post-traumatic stress *disorder*?
You are supposed to experience trauma as stressful, and you have to process that stress. There is a limited window within which the stress can be processed, about a month, and if it is not processed well, it becomes disorderly. Pressuring the client to stop denying he is experiencing post-traumatic stress (that is not yet disorderly) is exactly the think I would expect a shrink to do.
Nuts.
I was there. I know exactly what happened.
I suffered absolutely no post traumatic stress, and the shrink that was sicced on me was indignant that I did not. He was pressuring me to have post traumatic stress, and post traumatic stress disorder, and anecdotally, they pressure everyone.
Their job is not to help the patient process traumatic stress, but to push people to wallow in it. Their job is to turn trauma into post traumatic stress disorder. They want people to have it. It is iatrogenic disease. I was right there, and your story about what the shrink was doing is just the lie that shrinks say to cover their crimes.
Their job is to turn trauma into post traumatic stress disorder.
Indeed it is, and you can see that in the protocol for “rape” “victims”. But you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I would really like to figure out how to do blockquotes
It’s just the HTML tag.
There is no baby.
Rough times are rough. Also water is wet. You are compelled to revisit rough times in your mind to make sure you don’t blunder into the same thing again. Revisiting rough times in your mind is no big deal. This is absolutely no big deal.
What is a big deal is being compelled to bemoan how terrible it all was. Rough times you survive are great. Observe that just about every story has the hero hitting some mighty rough times. A good story has no end of the hero encountering “traumatic stress”.
What is now called post traumatic stress used to be gentlemen telling each other of their exciting adventures and close shaves, when adventuring was honorable, brave, and something done by the better sort of people did. Since the priesthood despise that sort of people, you are now required to bemoan adventures.
Jim, you are a righteous machiavellian genius hero, and are getting indignant at a peasant headshrink trying on you the shit he was told to try on peasants, shit that is plausibly suitable for helping with peasant problems. There is no need to project your own machiavellian tendencies on the midwit doctor, or surmise the poor dears share your steely psyche.
I was not there, so I’ll admit in your particular case maybe that’s what happened.
What he was trying to do to me is harmful and hostile to the peasants. It would have been as bad for a peasant as for me, but more likely to be successful.
>Rough times are rough. Also water is wet. You are compelled to revisit rough times in your mind to make sure you don’t blunder into the same thing again. Revisiting rough times in your mind is no big deal. This is absolutely no big deal.
Nah, you’re being a callous idiot who is showing no ability to understand nuance. Sure, the majority of men, in your “average” war are going to be at the very least neutral about it, or even will desperately miss it once they come home. This piece, unfortunately behind a paywall, by a Vietnam vet in the 80s, is an excellent example of this. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFU4DrFUcAAiUdw?format=png&name=small
On the other hand, you had a whole generation of soldiers in WW1 who developed the best documented cases of PTSD up till that time who had no nexus of leftist social workers around them to prop up delusions in their head. If anything the doctors during WW1 were encouraged to ignore any mental symptoms the soldiers showed and get them back into combat as soon as possible, and there certainly was zero attempt to continue a sort of “PTSD make-work complex” after the war. So you’re talking out of your ass.
You have a valid point. But today, it is obvious that PTSD is overwhelmingly iatrogenic, and World War I was not a normal war.
World War I was an attack by the priesthoods of the respective countries upon the warriors of those countries, and they got PTSD because not able and not willing to take priesthood out and shoot them.
Violence and death is not psychologically disturbing for men. What is psychologically disturbing is helplessness caused by internal beliefs. Helplessness caused by external causes, or by one’s own errors that one has no difficulty recognizing as errors is rough, but I have been there often enough. It is not that rough and it is not psychologically disturbing. What is disturbing is internal causes that one cannot acknowledge.
The problem was not that they were being killed, but that they were being killed by treason within.
Just as men have breaking points in regards to failures/disasters in their career, their finances, their family and relationships, so do they have a breaking point in regards to combat. A man cannot go on and on and on through combat indefinitely without it eventually affecting him.
The reason PTSD is widespread today indeed has nothing to do with the above (in my opinion) real reason. The most common reason for it today is what Sebastian Junger has talked about, and it matches exactly what you’ve said. Namely, that warriors, when they come home to an effeminate and atomized home front, immediately feel totally disconnected and adrift, having lost the brotherhood of their military life. This of course, has nothing to do with the horrors of war and has everything to do with leftists destroying the social fabric.
Not going to argue this, jim has it covered. But I will link to an interesting essay by Borges about WW1 and Guillaume Apollinaire that Pseudo-Chrysostom posted: https://blog.reaction.la/faith/satanic-symbolism-at-the-vatican/#comment-2798053
Great point. I imagine that every warrior instinctively feels he should be rewarded for his valor in battle. But you come home and hey whats that, nobody gives an actual shit, and moreso, none of the victories and built brotherhoods in battle translate to any status at home.
Have to give it to leftists, they play well into this I think. Similar to workers’ unions, more benefits for veterans has often been their thing.
Put in other words, it is not war that has changed, but the peace that has changed.
I thought I knew a lot about PTSD, being autistic and this being one of my special interests. But boy, is the rabbit hole deeper than I ever imagine.
Jim’s point about iatrogeny is, though in my opinion flawed, nevertheless at least partially correct, as in the *Duluth model*, I think in the sense that they take something real, it being PTSD or depression or diabetes, and weaponise it against the population, against family, against the person, and the whole system that is supposed to cure or alleviate the problem in fact exacerbates it 10x in order to exploit the fallout, politically and financially.
@ The Cominator
The point that the good old white boys are scared of hell because of taking lives, that is perhaps the blackest of pills that I had to swallow, it is so simple and yet so obviously true. I always thought that the grunts knew to differentiate killing in war, but it is obvious, now that you mentioned it, that this is not the case, that it cannot be the case.
From my family to all of you, every last one of you big brained, smart mouthed, keyboard jockey motherfuckers:
Merry Christmas. Try to take a few moments and ponder what is good, what is worth fighting for, killing for, dying for, building towards. Dark times ahead, lads. I want to say a particular thanks to Jim, St. John, Aidan, HerbR, and Wulfgar. You guys are a strange and wonderful bunch. TC, Pooch, Starman, the dearly departed, and lurkers around; Merry Christmas, faggots. Wish you all could stop by, swill some vodka, and be happy. Here’s hoping for a tomorrow together, whenever that may be.
Merry Christmas gentlemen!
Merry Christmas!
Marry Christmas Fed!
May you have a wonderful Christmas with your friends and family.
Listen here, you little shit… Merry Christmas bruv
Merry Christmas to you and all men of good will.
Merry Christmas!
Merry christmas 🌲
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas.
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas!
He has risen indeed.
https://youtu.be/f9mw78px_DI
Biden gets owned on phone call. Google “did Biden say let’s go Brandon” and enjoy the weak attempts at spin. I know this is a very minor thing, but it is tiny cracks that topple empires.
Not minor at all! Getting pranked is low status, and high status is getting away with stuff. It’s just like that one guy shouting “Pepe!†during that Hillary speech.
There’s a lot of pranking going on out there too. Straight outta Glasnost.
In the Holy Nativity of our Lord by Richard Crashaw
Christmas by George Herbert
Christ’s Nativity by Henry Vaughan
On the Morning of Christ’s Nativity by John Milton
[…] At https://blog.reaction.la/party-politics/end-of-pretence-of-democracy-rescheduled-to-2024/ HerbR provides a good list of definitions of leftism: […]
Pseudo-Chrysostom said:
Oh come on. Et tu pc? Maybe I read your comment wrong and you are not jumping on the autism bandwagon, but I’ve spent a good deal of time typing the following comment so I’ma submit anyway.
Here’s a good way to test whether something exists or not: can you reliably recognize and exclude entryists? If you can’t separate the real from the fake, the concept does not cut reality at the joints.
In the case of autism, you can’t. If a person claims autism, he is autistic, end of story. And these days, many men claim autism, women claim autism, everybody fucking claims autism.
So let’s take a look at my circle of nine friends.
One used to talk exclusively about trains. Awkwardly derailed (heh) conversations to insert trains. Later did the same with politics. He has learned to constrain himself somewhat. Clearly, autistic.
Another is incapable of carrying a normal conversation. You can tell he’s in his head. Sometimes when you shake hands with him he’ll change his hand in a fist just before you grab it. Obviously, autistic.
And then there’s me. I derive my entire worldview from strangers on the internet and make no excuses for it. Also, I like sorting and labeling stuff. Undoubtedly, autistic.
This gives us a 33% autism rate in my circle alone. What does that tell us about autism? It tells us, to my mind, that it is astrology. You can find it whenever, wherever you want to.
Here’s an alternate hypothesis. What if, hear me out, pretty much all men are autistic, because a preoccupation with objects over people is what allows us to make ourselves valuable.
What if the reason you feel awkward with the cashier is because you don’t like being there, and she doesn’t like being there, and it shows?
What if the reason you feel awkward with the colleagues at work is because it is a fake and gay work environment and you merely recognize it’s fakeness and gayness?
I’m pretty sure there used to be a time where you were judged on just being a good person, not on how well you could pretend you are still in high school acting like a social butterfly.
But not today. Today when a two-year old boy does not give the stranger at least five seconds of eye-contact when she yells his name, he is autistic and if you make a wrong move child services will be on the alert.
It’s a ridiculous inversion in which communication managers are good people and programmers are bad people.
You have a long term girlfriend in clownworld supposedly and aren’t a celebrity, superwealthy and you don’t seem plausibly scary like Jim sounds like hes plausibly very scary IRL (not that I know of, I’m pretty sure you aren’t scary).
Good sign you aren’t autistic.
This seems like a thread im not party too, so your statement at the beginning is probably right.
I simply make the observation that those bad at being popular… tend to be unpopular.
Humanoids are interactive species – that is to say, social – and so dys-ability in interacting with other humanoids is extremely crippling. Depending on the scope, even worse than loss of a limb, in terms of life prospects relative to the median.
Theoretically, this should be no less deserving of subsidization with status in accordance with the officially unofficial religion of subsidizing all that is dysfunctional with status; but this doesn’t really apply to unsociables all that much, because one, unsociables are unpopular, and two, because of one, they aren’t really relevant as useful totems for a power seeker, either.
To given an illustration, one of the serendipitous happenstances of fate is, that though sub-saharan bantus are generally incompetent, impulsive, and possessed of vanishingly short time horizons, many subjects thereof have can have a natural degree of gregariousness that those who don’t know any better can find entertaining, which endears them to them; this, in fact, is and has been one of the most significant factors underlaying their usefulness as totems for certain factions of power-seekers over the years, and the influence of this factor in pivotal periods of transition can’t be underestimated.
Autism is like porn or art; it stands out as itself, but it exists on a spectrum. It can be very desirable in certain circumstances, to certain parties, but can also be cumbersome and inconsequential.
My first contact with ’tism was in a homeschooling group. Just the most awful combination of undesirable traits in a kid: nails cut to the quick, neck and head gear to protect him from himself, terrible bone structure and asymmetry, no intelligible speech. So, being young, I assumed that that’s what autism meant. It was quite shocking when I found out, years later, that many people in my life considered me autistic. An ex was convinced that my tendency to predict sentiment and response based on intuition and close attention to facial musculature indicated that I was on the spectrum. There are other things that lend credence to the diagnosis. But I can’t into math, I only remember birthdays if they coincide with historically relevant dates, and (I believe) my IQ is 120. So who knows.
Like in our discussion on psychopathy, the political nature of the use of the label has rendered the term worthless as an objective descriptor. Every dude that posts here is autistic, and autists tend to clump. I don’t really trust men that aren’t sperglords or gigachads, they seem mercurial and sodomish.
Jim’s Blog: the dwelling place of turbo-autist psychopathtriarchs.
There are at least three, and possibly more, different characteristic strains that are each and all denotated under the label of ‘autism’, which is one of the problems with use of the term in popular discourse.
There the ‘downy’ kind of autism, that you observed in your schooling; we are not talking about savants here, or even idiot savants, just strait up idiots.
Another is the sense of ‘autism’ that simply equivocates the term with normal male-brain thinking, the dim self-awareness of such by some bodies giving rise to the tendentious terminology of ‘extreme male-brain theory’.
And yet another sense is ‘internet autism’, the term autist being a word folk have adopted for the denotation of a recognizable kind of annoying, disruptive, and or low quality spergmatic behavior that is a perennial menace to discussion fora.