Comments by "No Fate But What We Make" (@SonoftheAllfather) on "Gad Saad" channel.

We should actually value their opinions less as a whole, given that they live in a fantasy world. Their job is to act like they are something they are not, say things they don't truly believe, and make themselves seem believable. Romans used to treat actors no differently than prostitutes. They viewed it as a profession for wretches. Maybe they were on to something.
17
I thought about it like this: What PSU is doing is like if they focused on (and disciplined) the tactics of a skeptical boyfriend (who intruded into his girlfriend's phone and exposed her infidelity) instead of the higher crime (the girlfriend's infidelity). The real people who should be focused on and disciplined are the so-called "academics" who were all clearly exposed as frauds (and/or arguably persons who are in need of psychiatric help) by Boghossian et al's study. The tactic used by Boghossian et al was somewhat disingenuous, or one could even say immoral, in that is was technically an abuse of power. But what it exposed was a higher crime, and a much more egregious abuse of power. PSU is choosing to focus on the tactics used by Boghossian because they likely subscribe to the same postmodernist lunacy which inflicts these so-called "academics," who pass off complete drivel (written about heteronormativity and rape culture in a dog park) as scholarship. Shady tactics used to expose wrongdoings are commonly used. The police call that a "rouse" and it is considered completely legal and moral for gaining evidence of a crime in the criminal justice system (so long as the perpetrator is not entrapped). I'm not saying that makes it moral, but socially acceptable, or so it would seem.
12
It is imperative that we keep abreast of the enemy and understand their vile ideologies. As painful as it is to see, it is only a matter of time before the thinly veiled agenda that these Marxist psychopaths intend for the European race is completely exposed. These anti-White "academics" openly call for the destruction of the White race (see Noel Ignatiev). They only have a singular, weak and deceptive argument which they employ to refute claims they are calling for outright genocide: that the White race is a social construct. How convenient. You can't be guilty of destroying something that doesn't exist in the first place.
11
Mockery is useful against this insanity, but let's not pretend like it's going to change anyone's mind on the aggregate. They can't even confront the argument most of the time. It's all so tiring. It makes you realize why people in the past just threw these kinds of people in a pit.
8
I thought about it like this: What PSU is doing is like if they focused on (and disciplined) the tactics of a skeptical boyfriend (who intruded into his girlfriend's phone and exposed her infidelity) instead of the higher crime (the girlfriend's infidelity). The real people who should be focused on and disciplined are the "academics" who were all clearly exposed as frauds (and/or arguably persons who are in need of psychiatric help). The tactic used by Boghossian et al was somewhat disingenuous, or one could even say immoral, in that is was an abuse of power. But what it exposed was a much more egregious abuse of power. PSU is choosing to focus on the tactics used by Boghossian because they too are no doubt ideologically subverted by the same lunacy which inflicts these so-called "academics" (who pass off complete drivel (written about heteronormativity and rape culture in a dog park) as scholarship. Shady tactics used to expose wrongdoings are commonly used. The police call that a "rouse" and it is considered completely legal and moral for gaining evidence of a crime (so long as the perpetrator is not entrapped).
7
@TimBitts649 I would argue that the flaw in your logic is that intelligence is biological and innate. "Privilege" as defined by social Marxists is an unearned right, advantage, or immunity granted by society. Therefore, intelligence cannot be "privilege" in that no one granted intelligence arbitrarily. There is such a thing as education privilege, however. :)
7
@SweatyFatGuy I agree with you. I did a video that argues this.
6
Try going to university and being forced to read things like this instead of actually receiving a decent education. You feel robbed by these charlatans. They should all be cleansed from academe.
6
@peteredwards8737 Social justice is nothing more than a revolutionary Marxist dichotomous framework applied to various biological and social identities, and "repackaged," as you said, in cuddly utopian buzzwords. If implemented as the framework by which society is organized, it will require social engineering the likes of which have never been seen. More than likely, it will divide and destroy Western civilization, which is the entire goal of Marxism.
6
@misszlipster7565 Idiotic comment and an obvious straw man. He only said we shouldn't automatically value their opinions. He didn't say they were subhuman. Make sense please.
6
@misszlipster7565 It was a straw man. He never advanced the argument that they aren't human. You implied that he did. Ironically, you just committed ANOTHER straw man; the OP never said they don't have a "say in society." He simply said he never understood why people give their social and political opinions extra credence, considering the nature of their profession is to dissimulate. You're either acutely biased and deliberately mischaracterizing the meaning of the original post, or you're too unintelligent to comprehend its obvious meaning.
6
@edenbreckhouse I don't see the point of making a comment like that. The man's intentions were likely honorable when he joined the military. You're not helping anything self-righteously shaming him from the comfortable position of hindsight.
6
@SweatyFatGuy The EU is a Soviet model. I share in your bafflement that more people can't see it. EU integrationists are some of the most evil Marxian globalists in the world.
5
@misszlipster7565 Also, stop liking your own comments. It is obvious and totally pathetic.
5
@SweatyFatGuy It takes only a brief investigation of these sub-ideologies to realize it is all linked to Marxism. Critical theory, conscientization, postmodernism, social justice, progressivism, privilege theory, third wave feminism...all considered "post-Marxist" ideologies.
4
@SweatyFatGuy I was the same, and stay anonymous. I don't like the sound of my voice either. That is usually something in your own head though. Styxhexenhammer has said the same thing before. He thought people would find his voice annoying.
4
@johnmcbride364 That is the tragedy of ideological subversion and demoralization (as noted by Yuri Bezmenov, who gave me one of my first redpill moments on Marxism): the brainwashing is irreversible. For me, I've known for almost a decade these people cannot be reasoned with. They don't listen to typical individualist arguments. They frame individualism and meritocracy themselves as white supremacist constructs. So really, what is the point? The only way to protect ourselves from this creeping Marxism is to collectivize and rip them out, root and stem.
3
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 Yeah, the girlfriend/phone analogy is not a perfect one. But it is an "ends justify the means" situation. I'm not saying the scholars intruded on anyone's privacy. I'm saying that intruding on someone's privacy is still an immoral act, but one that is lesser and justifies the means, which is to expose a more grossly immoral act (infidelity). I would agree with your point on falsifying data, if there was any actual data to be falsified in these postmodernist clown articles. Lol they are completely devoid of any evidence or data. They are entirely theoretical/ideological.
3
@xycxo8335 If only. It is much more sinister. It is intellectual terrorism, as Saad says. It is a twisted web of lies designed to topple the foundations of Western civilization through drastic social and political upheaval.
2
@johnmcbride364 I ended up doing my Master's thesis on how social Marxism has become a cult. I think I'm going to do a video where I just read it. Hahahaha. About 40% of my professors were open Marxists. The others were leftists who kowtowed to the Marxist agenda. They hated me so much, but only that one professor (the one I talked to in that video) was dumb enough to discriminate against me. We are in a one-party state, meaning I can record people without their knowledge. So after I recorded that conversation, I wrote a letter to the provost, a more reasonable person, and told her I have recorded audio proof that this professor was discriminating against me because of my social and political opinions, attempting to indoctrinate people and violating campus policy on academic freedom. I never heard anything about it after that, but that assignment was completely removed from my gradable work and I was given nothing but excellent grades in that class from that point forward. Regardless, that professor was an evil Marxist (I know, kind of redundant). She made everyone sign these obligatory pseudo-contractual documents stating that we would be social justice advocates, embrace multiculturalism, be a global citizen, etc. etc. She is in charge of issuing counseling accreditation at the university, and she has this intricate mandatory political litmus test that one must pass in order to receive her coronation. Basically, she requires anyone who receives her approval to have (or proclaim to have) social Marxist viewpoints, which is blatant ideological subversion and authoritarianism. A lot of teaching accreditation organizations issue similar mandatory litmus tests. Things are getting really bad in academia.
2
strontiumXnitrate I'm not sure whether to interpret the mass increase in general lunacy (coming from Marxist ideologues and their allied globalist intelligentsia) as a sign of desperation to maintain control (a death throe) or if it's a sign of their absolute confidence that their brainwashing efforts have been so successful that they can literally do and say anything without being called insane and evil. Some days I think it's desperation, other days I think it's a form of insolent presumptuousness. I think the only logical conclusion is that it's a blend of both. Your thoughts? P.S. I know that first sentence is probably a run-on, but I couldn't manage to find a way to break it apart.
2
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 You could frame it as some benign and completely unbiased quality control study, but you know that's bullshit. Have you seen the way they reacted to their deliberately nonsensical articles being accepted? They were giddy with delight and laughing hysterically. They were trolling the journals, and I support that wholeheartedly. But the entire project was deliberately deceptive. I still think the ends justify the means, but to say it wasn't deceptive is denialism.
2
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 That is an interesting but perhaps overcomplicated way of looking at it. It seems a little like a two wrongs make a right fallacy and mental gymnastics. I look at it in much more simple terms. It was trickery/bait used to deceive those who are charlatans and obviously devoid of any moral ground upon which to stand, making the trickery/bait largely virtuous. It is very similar to the ethical concept of law enforcement using a ruse. It was a hoax which was humorous, but was also designed as an attack. It is a perfect example of when "the ends justify the means." The means were still a trick though, arguably an abuse of their power as published scholars, and arguably immoral. But the means were justified to produce a positive outcome.
2
Anyone here who hasn't looked up Alan Sokol, you should. He was trolling these critical theorist postmodernist idiots back in the late 90s. He got a postmodernist journal to publish an article that he wrote which was deliberately nonsensical called "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity." LOL
1
@QuantumConundrum: It kind of makes sense, given that postmodernism is not dedicated to the quest for truth, but to the exercise of power for social change. When you believe there is no objective reality, truth, logic, and reason, you cannot believe there is a correct method of academic and intellectual conveyance. After all, those things are just tools used by the traditional order to oppress people! :) So of course their writing is nothing more than mindless gibberish and their music and art is some ghastly abomination. It is what their ideology requires of them.
1
Evidenced by this invader holding political office in Sweden. Moreover, when I tapped this video, the ad was a "Muslim Singles" dating website.
1
A professor named Alan Sokol trolled a critical theorist postmodernist journal all the way back in the late 90s. He got them to publish an article that he wrote which was deliberately nonsensical called "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity." LOL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
1
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 You don't think being deceptive is basically immoral?
1
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 It was excellent and necessary, but a deception. I consider all deceptions to be immoral at their core. But I understand your reluctance to paint what they did as immoral, given the deep immorality of the persons/system they attacked. Their project as a whole was a positive despite the tactics they employed.
1
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 If the ends justify the means, many would argue that immoral acts are perfectly justified. Communists believe that mass murder is justified to establish a classless society, but their ideology is fundamental flawed and that has been proven time and time again It always just leads to more death and human misery. Ergo, the ends don't justify the means. Still, I believe killing is necessary in certain situations if the outcome is favorable. But many would say it is always immoral to take human life. Discussing this topic leads many to realize that morality is largely subjective, and therefore can be viewed as relativistic. But complete moral relativism can also be very destructive. A functional society must have a mostly agreed upon set of moral values.
1
@jengleheimerschmitt7941 Oh believe me...if I had it my way, these people would not only be fired, they would be sentenced to years of making big rocks into little rocks for their transgressions, namely subverting and demoralizing young minds with this toxic ideology. Some may view that as harsh...even immoral... but again...to me, the ends justify the means. ;)
1
@fritzjackson4336 Exactly. It's projection and denialism...it's something that children do when they're called out for doing something wrong: start the blame game. The problem with these modern mental midgets (say that three times fast) is that their pandering, grovelling useless excuses for parents never taught them that 1.) they can be objectively wrong and 2.) when they are objectively wrong, they should own it.
1
@nelsonx5326 who are you talking about?
1
@perfectifmelancholy The truth sucks sometimes.
1
@agentm83 The interesting thing is that white nationalists would only promote the same type of racial hyperconscientiousness and identitarianism in whites that all of the social Marxists are currently promoting in nonwhites. But even without white nationalists in the universities, at the end of the day, social Marxism is creating a radical version of the very thing it claims to fight against: white identitarianism and normalization of ethnic separatism. By pitting all nonwhites against whites, whites are racially awakening again.
1