April 23, 2013

Fear and Hate

Commenter Rohan Swee replies to the Washington Post editorial "Lawmakers stoking fear of immigrants:"
Fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR. I must say I am grateful to the MSM for giving me so much insight for the past couple of decades into my real psychological state. Instead of the easily stokable, twitching, bulging-eyed mass of fears that I now know myself to be, I would still labor under the self-delusion that I tend toward the phlegmatic and deliberative in my reactions. The thing I haven't quite figured out yet, though, is how people like me can be the most boring, unemotional, dull, grey, non-vibrant creatures in the universe, stunted by logic and reason, desperately in need of jazzing up by the presence of more exuberant types, and at the same time these seething volcanoes of primitive passions, barely able to make sense of the world in terms more complex and nuanced than kill or be killed. Help me out here, oh MSM sages.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_0kg8VlxkE

Northern Iraq. Homogeneously Kurdish and peaceful.

Southern Iraq, Sunni vs Shia diverse and still at war.

Anonymous said...

We have nothing to fear but fear itself. So, it's all about fear-mongering about 'fear'.

Embrace the queer and let go of the 'fear'.

Notice 'fear' is only attributed to conservatives when libs fear-monger all the time, like kkk at oberlin or george zimmerman as nazi killing black babies.

It's like 'hate' is only right-wing when libs and 'left' hate plenty.

When libs do it, it's not 'fear' and 'hate'.
When Jews blow stuff up, it's not terrorism.
When Mexicans illegally cross over, it's not 'illegal'.
When blacks rob and riot, they aren't even black but 'youth' or 'teens'.

Americhechen. said...

The media are like this, and blue city libs totally agree and feel morally superior to everyone else.

Just think. Muslim Chechens blow up Boston, and conservatives show great support and solidarity with blue city Bostonians, yet... blue city libs spit in conservative faces and accuse conservatives and patriots of 'hate' and 'fear'.

Sympathy for libs who hate cons is a total waste.
I say the hell with the likes of David Sirota, Chris Matthews, and Atlantic writers.
I just want more Chechens where they live.

Harry Baldwin said...

What's so funny about this is that it's the pro-immigration arguments that are based in sentiment, emotion and irrationality, while the anti-immigration arguments are based in cool reason, facts and statistics.

Anonymous said...

I'll say this though. The bomb bros were atypical of immigrants as 99.9999999999% of immigrants(even Muslims)don't do stuff like this.
So, to use this issue as heart of immigration debate is far-fetched.

The bigger problem for conservatives is the Democratic leanings of immigrants, the overwhelming non-whiteness(thus changing the national character), the mediocrity of Mexicans that burdens white tax payers, the resentful hostility of conquis, lowering of american wages, Jewish game of divide and rule over diverse goyim, the dangerousness of even more blacks in America(as if we don't have enough problems with blacks already here), etc.

The hostility of the controllers of the media should make things clear. The biggest threat to America are not oddball bombers from Chechnya but the globalist controllers of the media. We should be 'fear-mongering' about them. Jews, gays, anglo traitor libs, and conquis are infinitely more powerful and dangerous to us than two loser kids from chechnya.

Jews and libs in the media made it very clear. They hate and fear conservatives even more than conservatives fear Muslims. We are fighting the wrong enemy while Jews and libs are fighting the right enemy--their main enemy, white cons.

Lib hatred is aimed straight at its main enemy while con hatred is aimed at dubious/peripheral enemies in the name of protecting wonderful Jews(most of whom hate conservatives with Sirotan virulence) and blue city libs who really really hate and despise cons as 'less evolved' apes. (When whites in the past thought that blacks were less evolved, that was 'racist'. But it's okay for libs to say white cons are 'less evolved' because white cons don't support...'gay marriage'!!)

Conservatives are like Yohei in SEVEN SAMURAI. In one scene, Yohei says he tried to recruit samurai by offering them free food and sake. What did the samurai do? They ate their fill, then beat him up and left.

It's about time cons quit this unrequited love thing. Stop trying to win the love of people who find you ugly and dump all over you. Libs look upon cons as the Mason character looked upon Shelly Winters in LOLITA. As a fat cow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2ilHiMf1F8

Long live Chechnya.

Anonymous said...

http://amandapalmer.net/blog/20130421

Lib poem on dzhokar the joker.

Rotfl.

Ycmtsu.

You can't make...

Anonymous said...

Or it could be that the Cambridge police fear profiling people after the Henry Louis Gates arrest controversy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Louis_Gates_arrest_controversy

Anonymous said...

"When Jews blow stuff up, it's not terrorism."


How is it that that Sailer and his commenters never notice that Israel is demonized by the Left (including the Jewish Left), the MSM and the academic/corporate foreign policy establishment, and is vilified anytime it does anything to defend itself, no matter how justified? Earth to Paleocons: Israel is not popular with the Left (either the establishment Left or the academic/activist/hipster Left), and has not been popular with the Left for years.

Big Bill said...

We are being radicalized. The left is approaching Garrisonian levels of hatred and intolerance that make it impossible to continue peacefully.

This sort of ideological terrorism by Garrison turned the national "calamity" of slavery into the criminalization and demonization of everyone South of the Mason-Dixon line. No discussion was possible. See e.g. Herbert, p. 48 et seq.for a summary of the 30 year downward progression to the American Civil War.

Anonymous said...

Given the recent discussions about Chechens and how brutal they are, I think the story of Yevgeny Rodionov is appropriate.I think we all should take a moment and pay respects to a man who willing died rather than to submit to these savages.

On his 19th birthday, Rodionov was beheaded on the outskirts of the Chechen village Bamut. According to his killers, who later extorted money from his mother in exchange for knowledge of the location of his corpse, they beheaded him after he refused to renounce his Christian faith or remove the silver cross he wore around his neck. Ruslan Khaikhoroev later admitted the murder. In presence of foreign representative of OSCE he confessed: "Your [Yevgeny's mother] son had a choice to stay alive. He could have converted to Islam, but he did not agree to take cross off. He tried to escape". On May 23, after 100 days of imprisonment and tortures, Rodionov was again ordered to remove the cross he was wearing and accept Islam. After his final refusal, Rodionov was beheaded, when still alive.

Paul Mendez said...

Conservatives believe that liberals are many things -- stupid, naive, lazy, immature, irresponsible, hypocritical, arrogant, domineering, self-righteous, annoying, etc,

Liberals, on the other hand, believe that conservatives are just plain EVIL.

Anonymous said...

How likely is this bill being passed by both the Senate and House? It is a far left piece of crap and why the hell would any conservative vote for it?

Cail Corishev said...

So, to use this issue as heart of immigration debate is far-fetched.


That's true, but you use the tools you're given. The left has made immigration an emotional issue, with all sorts of stuff tied up into it: charitable impulses, pride at the accomplishments of one's own immigrant ancestors, the wish not to look racist, and so on. It's not an issue many people can look at with cold logic -- in fact, simply approaching it with cold logic makes you a hater.

So people are primed for an emotional appeal, such as pointing out that it only takes one mad bomber walking in on a tourist visa to ruin your life if he winds up in your neighborhood. It doesn't matter how long the odds are; we're talking about a populace that buys lottery tickets, after all.

That's not to say we shouldn't keep up the logical arguments for the sake of people who can appreciate them. But look how this one incident has slowed the pro-immigration train and made them rewrite their talking points in a way that all the reality-based arguments couldn't. Most people have to be seduced or scared, not educated.

Dennis Dale said...

I'll say this though. The bomb bros were atypical of immigrants as 99.9999999999% of immigrants(even Muslims)don't do stuff like this.
So, to use this issue as heart of immigration debate is far-fetched.


But the lesson of Boston is more general (and more enlightening, if one just looks): people bring cultural and genetic histories with them.
So it's not that we're going to e overwhelmed by terrorists, but that we can expect newcomers to behave here as they have behaved at home, especially where they concentrate in transplanted communities (colonies of an inverted imperialism, really), at least for a few generations (but not necessarily).

So no, it isn't about spectacular terrorist attacks (though we can expect a few more as a result of open borders--but do note how rarities like Newtown do not prompt lectures on Bayes' theorem from the Left) but, just for starters, Mexican mediocrity, African backwardness, Muslim misogyny, and on, all active in the war of all that is our diverse future.

Anonymous said...

Harry Baldwin said:What's so funny about this is that it's the pro-immigration arguments that are based in sentiment, emotion and irrationality, while the anti-immigration arguments are based in cool reason, facts and statistics.

Yes and no. True, there are plenty of statistical arguments against a policy mass immigration, but a comprehensive rebuttal must acknowledge the emotional and aesthetic impact of demographic replacement.

Discomfort with the now overbearing ubiquity of the foreign is a natural human reaction that requires neither apology nor explanation.

As a sovereign people, we have the right to regulate the presence of foreigners within our territory, full stop.

In and of itself, our collective displeasure is sufficient grounds for a reversal of current immigration policy.

-The Judean People's Front

dsgntd_plyr said...

off topic, but here's a story related to steve's observation that cities want to kick-out undesirables w/o being obvious: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2013/04/expensive-cities-are-even-worse-poor-you-think/5378/

JayMan said...

Slightly o/t, (but only slightly), check out how (some) liberals react to my advice to them:

More Words, Deeper Hole - Count the problematic assertions!

John Dillinger said...

The only fear I saw last week was from a bunch of chicken-shit Bostonians hiding in their basements from a teenage jihadi with a pocket full of pressure cookers.

Anonymous said...

How is it that that Sailer and his commenters never notice that Israel is demonized by the Left (including the Jewish Left), the MSM and the academic/corporate foreign policy establishment, and is vilified anytime it does anything to defend itself, no matter how justified?

Evidence? "The Left" treats Israel with kid gloves, in point of fact.

Anonymous said...

"How is it that that Sailer and his commenters never notice that Israel is demonized by the Left (including the Jewish Left), the MSM and the academic/corporate foreign policy establishment, and is vilified anytime it does anything to defend itself, no matter how justified?

Evidence? "The Left" treats Israel with kid gloves, in point of fact."

The far left sides with the Palestinians. Take a look at some of Chomsky's writings.

Quote from Chomsky.

The following statement by Noam Chomsky indicates a different stand toward Israeli aggression than Prof. Chomsky has revealed in the past:

"The incursion and bombardment of Gaza is not about destroying Hamas. It is not about stopping rocket fire into Israel, it is not about achieving peace.

The Israeli decision to rain death and destruction on Gaza, to use lethal weapons of the modern battlefield on a largely defenseless civilian population, is the final phase in a decades-long campaign to ethnically-cleanse Palestinians.

Israel uses sophisticated attack jets and naval vessels to bomb densely-crowded refugee camps, schools, apartment blocks, mosques, and slums to attack a population that has no air force, no air defense, no navy, no heavy weapons, no artillery units, no mechanized armor, no command in control, no army… and calls it a war. It is not a war, it is murder.

“When Israelis in the occupied territories now claim that they have to defend themselves, they are defending themselves in the sense that any military occupier has to defend itself against the population they are crushing. You can't defend yourself when you're militarily occupying someone else's land. That's not defense. Call it what you like, it's not defense.”

There are different parts of the left. Dershowizt and Chomsky would disagree on Israel.

http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20121118003140399

Anonymous said...

Jesus tittyfucking christ Jayman, those comments were depressing. Entirely unsurprising, but depressing nonetheless.

It's disgusting how smugly certain these fools are of their Gould-esque social constructionist beliefs. Of course, since they're constantly told that anyone who thinks otherwise is probably a neo-Nazi, they have little reason to doubt themselves.

Anonymous said...

Evidence? "The Left" treats Israel with kid gloves, in point of fact."

The far left sides with the Palestinians. Take a look at some of Chomsky's writings.

Well, now you have retreated to the "far left" in your claim. Chomsky is so far left you won't be seeing him on any of the Democratic news channels or newspaper. But even Chomsky is of dubious value as evidence. He has heretofore been a Zionist, limiting his criticism to "the occupation" and in fact opposing the extension civil rights to Gentiles in all of Israel (the "One State" solution). He has functioned as a kind of left gatekeeper on criticism of Israel.

These comments of just a few months ago are quite critical but even your excerpt notes they represent a shift from Chomsky's prior attitudes. Hardly evidence of a consistent bias on "the left" against Israel.

Maybe if you found something that unequivocally condemned the concept of a "Jewish State"...

ben tillman said...

I'll say this though. The bomb bros were atypical of immigrants as 99.9999999999% of immigrants(even Muslims)don't do stuff like this.

You're innumerate and annoying. Only one in a trillion immigrants does stuff like this? Obviously not even close to correct.

ben tillman said...

How is it that that Sailer and his commenters never notice that Israel is demonized by the Left (including the Jewish Left), the MSM and the academic/corporate foreign policy establishment, and is vilified anytime it does anything to defend itself, no matter how justified?

Easy. You can't "notice" something that doesn't exist. The media, academia, and government all strongly support Israel.

Anonymous said...

Dillinger, did you expect anything else from baby blue Boston?

The people in Watertown get a pass; it's hard to be a tough guy when the jack-booted thugs are at your door.

Dennis Dale said...

The only fear I saw last week was from a bunch of chicken-shit Bostonians hiding in their basements from a teenage jihadi with a pocket full of pressure cookers

No, I'd say it was roving platoons of police in full SWAT gear, armored cars and helicopters, all keyed up and looking for a suicidal teenage jihadi armed not with "pocket full of pressure cookers" (how does this even work as comedy? they don't fit in your pocket and the prx cookers were bombs; I mean sh-t man, try a little) but possibly a gun and as many pipe bombs as he could carry.

Just as an incurious media keeps its priorities straight, worrying about how this affects Chechen/Muslim immigrants and Amnesty, so do others. This is really about sticking it to blue Boston (where no innocents dwell--let God sort 'em out!) Internet mockery is a story of BRAVERY of...

Mike Johnson said...

Robin Hanson has a good, topical post re: this.
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/10/dissing-fear.html