The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Linh Dinh ArchiveBlogview
Obscured American: Marty the Electrician, Plumber and Ex-Mortician
Marty in Friendly Lounge, 2016
Marty in Friendly Lounge, 2016
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Strings  Include Comments

Within the shadow of 920-year-old Norwich Cathedral squats the 767-year-old Adam and Eve Pub. Both are spooky, inevitably. A decade ago, I was minding my own business, nursing a pint of Old Peculier, when the mugs above my head started to rattle, the ashtray flew off the bar and Lord Sheffield whispered in me ear, “Spot me a whiskey, mate?” “Sam,” as the ghost is now known, was mortally wounded in 1549 by a butcher during Kett’s Rebellion. At 28, he croaked in the Adam and Eve.

In the US of A, it’s rare to find any building that wasn’t built last week, but there’s plenty of history here too, and even my shithole of a neighborhood bar, the Friendly Lounge, has its lore.

It’s owned by two brothers, and their father was the legendary Felix DiTullio, better known as Skinny Razor. He showed Little Nicky Scarfo how to slaughter. Many Mafia targets were last seen being ushered into the Friendly, never to reappear. Maybe they have a centuries-old well in their basement too, just like the Adam and Eve?

Now, the Friendly is a scandal-free establishment, with nothing more exciting to happen recently than the appearance of ex-Phillies Garry Maddox.

“He must have some broad in the neighborhood?” someone whispered.

“No, Garry ain’t that kind of guy.”

Maddox ordered an eight-dollar drink, left a ten-dollar tip.

A year after Lord Sheffield’s death, John Skelton’s “The Tunnyng of Elynour Rummyng” was published. No priss, the Diss native didn’t shy from an ale and piss splattered portrayal of contemporary life, and his Tunnyng gives us a rare glimpse of plebian carousing in 16th century England. (Another East Anglian, Robert Greene, born 1558, bequeaths knowing tales of hustlers, thieves and blackmail artists.) Check out these lines:

She breweth noppy ale,
And maketh therof port sale
To trauellars, to tynkers,
To sweters, to swynkers,
And all good ale drynkers,
That wyll nothynge spare,
But drynke tyll they stare
[...]
And as she was drynkynge,
She fyll in a wynkynge
Wyth a barlyhood,
She pyst where she stood;
Than began she to wepe,
And forthwyth fell on slepe.

Elynour Rummyng “lerned it of a Jewe” to thicken her ale with chicken shit, but that entire passage must be fantasy.

While others are disgusted, such good, solid types having such a great time makes me want to get pissed also. We’re only here to stare at each other and palaver. Let’s head to the Friendly, then, and b.s. with Marty.

Don the hunter died without saying goodbye, Felix is hobbling along after his foot operation, Tony got fired for allegedly stealing, Manon landed a better job, the sad Eagles just choked away another one and Marty, as you shall see, will be on the first stool as you walk in. At 74, the raspy-voiced man works even on Thanksgiving, and he downs a few each evening.

When Marty speaks of gravy, he means marinara sauce, by the way, and “managut” is a South Philly word.

I’ve repeatedly urged Marty to visit Sicily before he keels over. “Go next week, then come back and tell us about it. You’ll bawl like a baby, man, soon as you land!”

Once, Marty showed me on his cellphone a beaming, bare-breasted lady sitting on her living room carpet. “Would you leave this?”

Just a few days away from his New Jersey lay is out of the question for Marty.

I was born in 1942. I was raised in the 50’s, when all the girls were church mouses.

I’ve been coming to Friendly Lounge on my own since 1962. Prior to that, I’d come in with my dad on Saturday, because of the spare ribs. They had the best spare ribs in the city. Even the Chinese would come here to get them.

This place wasn’t a go-go bar per se. Around 1970 or so, we started getting dancers on Friday night. They would dance on top of the bar. There was also a little stage. One girl used to shoot ping pong balls out, and puffed a cigar.

I’ve done plumbing and electrical work for 50 years.

I had uncles who were in various trades, so I started hanging with them. One of my buddies, his father used to come in here. He was a master plumber, so that’s how I learned plumbing.

I work every day. I’m a one-man band. I do everything myself. I’ve never met anybody who can do it as good as me, and I can also do it quicker. I don’t want to get a call in the middle of night, “Hey, your guy who was here. The faucet is not working right.”

I’ve always had a voice like this. I can’t make obscene phone calls. I went from a little boy, to this voice.

I’ve been married five times. I’m just a guy that’s not happy. I got them home. I know they’re there. I’m back out at the bar, looking for another one.

You’ve got to remember, guys my age, we grew up at the beginning of free sex, drugs and rock and roll, and I tried to take advantage of it. We opened the door for free sex.

Ah, many, many women took on the attitude of guys, back in the day. They wanted to be out there and get laid also.

I’ve probably been with 130, 140. No exaggeration. That’s probably cutting it short.

I’m the very first person in the world to admit, if there’s anybody in the world who should have gotten AIDS, it should have been me.

As far as unplanned pregnancies? Everyone of them!

Yeah, I got three inches cut off, so now I’ve got an even nine.

I have seven children, by three women. I have 19 grandkids, and seven great grandkids. I’m in touch with my kids every day. I don’t want to hear from them, but one or the other will call. I’m good friends with them all.

Financially, none of my kids, none of my ex wives will ever say I was bad. I was a good provider, horrible husband, good boyfriend, and probably a better father to kids that weren’t mine. I was their father figure.

I’ve always had girlfriends. I just married one off last month, in Florida. I’ve got one in upstate New York. I’ve got one over in Jersey. I still do pretty good as far as pussy.

I don’t use Viagra, or Cialis, or any of that other shit. How do I do it? I stick it in.

I’m not like I was ten years ago. That’s why they’re safe across the country now.

Some guys get nothing because they try too hard. I’ve never, ever in my life chased the cherry. I let them come after me.

ORDER IT NOW

Back in the day, people like Marco, Joe Mazz and all the pretty boys would try. The girls would look at Marty and think to themselves, Why isn’t he trying? What has he got? I had a wife, at home. I got nothing. That turned girls on. I didn’t lie to them and say I was single. I told everyone I was married. The girls wanted the forbidden fruit, too.

I like very petite women, with long hair. Very skinny. I’m not a titty guy. Big boobs look good in swim suits and sweaters, and that’s not my playground. I’m a butt guy.

If they’ve got a little butt, they’re tiny and they’ve got long hair, they’ve got it going.

If they’re not my type, I don’t bother with them. I have no curiosity or interest at all.

I have this set of rules that I’ve followed all my life. I’m not a guy who walks around horny. Ninety percent of the time in my life, I had a wife at home. If I left the bar by myself and went home, I’ve got a piece of pussy at home. If a girl turned me on, I fuck the old lady thinking of the girl that turned me on. A dick has no conscience.

I’ve turned down more pussy than you can think. I have a set pattern. Every one of my wives, turn them around, other than the color of their hair, they all look the same from the back.

I’m very specific. Ask anybody who knows me. My first wife was Irish, black hair, 4 foot 9, very white skinned. Every one after has been under 5-3.

It’s not that I have a philosophy. It’s something that I’ve found that works for me, and when you find something that works, you tend to use it. I’m not saying it’s right, wrong or politically correct, but it works for me.

Each of my kids resents me for one thing or another. I’m not perfect, and I’ve never claimed to be. They’ve all got their issues with me, but as far as being their father, I’ve always been a very good provider, but I was always on the move.

I’ve always provided for my family. I’ve made a good living in the course of my lifetime. Money was so easy to make in the 60’s and 70’s, and rent was cheap. My first apartment was $75 a month, and Patty and I had a really nice apartment, at 6th and Wharton. This was in ’63, ’64.

I’ve done everything I wanted to do. I bought cars, boats, motorcycles. I’ve had about eight boats in my life. I lived in Florida for 27 years. There’s no sense living in Florida unless you’ve got a motorcycle and a boat.

I’ve lived in California. I’ve been to Canada, England, Mexico. Me and one of my wives, we were going to go to Rome for my 62nd birthday. I like biblical, religious stuff. I wanted to see the pyramids, the catacombs, stuff like that. But she died on me, and I didn’t go. I lost all interest.

I have a hard time speaking English, let alone various languages.

Timmy Cigar and I got into an argument with Adrian one night over the word “irregardless.” I never knew it was not a word, and I’ve been saying it all my life.

I lived in south Florida for 27 years. The only thing I know of any Hispanic language is “si.” That’s about it.

I’m a very one-dimensional person. I’m a creature of habits. I eat primarily Pat’s Steaks, after work. It’s not so much cheesesteak any more. It’s a pork sandwich with cheese on it.

When I want variety, I go to the Chinese restaurant at Broad and Federal, Mui Chung. I just call, they hear my voice and they know exactly what I want, and it’s ready by the time I get there.

I listen to all these people with the health food, and I’ve watched all the health food gurus, and the exercise gurus, died!

My teeth didn’t fall out. There is a perfect reason why I have false teeth. I had a bad motorcycle accident back in ‘74.

I had beautiful bottoms and fantastic implants, but my gums have shrunk over the years. Had to get rid of the implants. Now, I have big fuckin’ teeth.

When I go home with a chick, I pop my teeth out, I pop the eye out and I pull off the wig.

I’m not Italian, I’m Sicilian. The reason I’ve never been there is because there’s nobody I know. I’ve got family there, but I don’t know them.

To go back and see how the world was built, in old world traditions, that’s pretty amazing. I watch National Geographic every now and then, and I see how modern people are existing and dwelling in cities that are centuries-old, and how they’re adapting. I find that fascinating.

People today, their houses have a bathroom for each kid. I’m sure my Sicilian ancestors, there were probably four or five families, with three or four kids each, all sharing the same outhouse. Unless you’re extremely wealthy, there was no such thing as a 2,000-foot-square house. Only Americans need that much space.

South Philly was all Italian. You had your Irish on 2nd Street, and other types on 30th, but in between, it was all Italian. There were fights or disagreements between different factions of Italians, whether they be Sicilian or Calabrese, or whatever. That’s what made South Philly so interesting.

The way my mom prepared her pasta and meat dishes was totally different than other Italian sects would do it.

We always had a secure area here, in South Philly. We had our own market, on 9th Street. It was just a fantastic place to grow up.

The 9th Street Market started out around 1915. South Philadelphia around the turn of the century was primarily Jewish. The Italian influx didn’t really come until around 1915 to 1925.

When I was living with my parents, I grew up eating fresh vegetables, freshly killed meat. I never ate anything frozen other than ice cream.

ORDER IT NOW

Good Italian cooking is dying off. It’s not the same. You go to Villa di Roma when Kaiser and his kids ran it, it was good, it was fantastic. And there was Big Ralph’s and various Italian eateries. It doesn’t appear that it has changed, to new newcomers, but people who grew up here, they know the difference in the way things are made today from 50 years ago.

Today, they use convectional ovens, microwaves and not the old wooden ovens or the gas-fired appliances.

It’s the ingredients. A pot of gravy, I guarantee you, if you go to Villa di Roma, he still makes a pot of gravy the exact same way he did when he was twelve-years-old, but the ingredients have changed, therefore the results have changed. That’s why you don’t see too many old mom-and-pop Italian restaurants anymore.

With governmental regulations, you can’t have this, you can’t have that and expect it to taste like 50 years ago. I like deep red gravy. Most gravy today is pinkish. It’s not the restaurant owners that are cheating. It’s the FDA governmental regulations saying you can’t eat tomatoes raised in pig shit.

My mom and dad raised me strictly on Sicilian food. Until my mom died at 93 in 2000, she was making her own pasta, making her own gravy, every week. My mom would make gallons of gravy every Sunday morning, and she would put it in pails and refrigerate it, until the kids came over. “Come over and get your half gallon of gravy. Here, grab a couple pounds of ravioli, or meat balls, roasted pork, this, that, spaghetti, whatever it is that you like.” My mom used to make it all herself.

A couple weeks before she died, she was up at 3:30, 4 O’clock, Sunday morning, making gravy.

She’d roll out her dough, and by the time she went to church, then came back, it’d rise. She’d make managut. It’s a long shell, stuffed with cheese. My mom would bake it, then put gravy over it.

My grandfather came to visit us from Sicily. He stayed here for three or four weeks. My father must have cooked him breakfast, because I can remember daylight behind the old man.

The only regret I have in my life is that my father didn’t live long enough. He died when I was 19-years-old. My dad worked a lot. I didn’t know him as a man. I only knew him as a father.

You can go out and have a beer with your old man when you’re 23, 24 years old. You don’t have to sit around the couch and listen to him moan and groan about work.

My father was in the funeral business. We had a funeral home. I did that for many, many years, into my 40’s. I’d do my other work in the daytime, do bodies at night.

A funeral in Europe is a celebration of somebody’s life. It’s not that they have died or expired, or got killed, it’s a celebration of their life.

In Europe, they put the grandkids on the body of the deceased. It’s your granddaddy. Say goodbye. Give him a hug.

America, they sweep it under the rug. Oh, that’s bad, he died!

Only in America do they hide death. They make death into something evil, but it’s not. Everyone of us, unless you’re an astronaut, is going to die on this planet. You’re going to need a funeral director.

The rest of the world celebrate the deceased’s life at a funeral. They talk about all the good shit the guy did, what a nice guy he was, or what a prick he was.

I’m very jaded when it comes to death, but I’m very respectful.

Party while you can. You’ll throw a seven before you know it.

Linh Dinh’s Postcards from the End of America will be published by Seven Stories Press in January of 2017. Tracking our deteriorating socialscape, he maintains a photo blog.

 
• Category: Economics 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Linh Dinh considers many American lives, broken ones too.

    Maybe we should consider some sexual politics.

    When a woman loses a job, she gains a family.

    When a man loses a job, he loses a family.

    The main purpose of human life is to have a family.

    A woman can have a family without a job because a man will marry a woman without a job.

    A man cannot have a family without a job because a woman will not marry a man without a job.

    So, when a man takes a well-paying job from a woman, he is offering her a chance to have a family.
    But, when a woman takes a well-paying job from a man, she is robbing him of the chance to have a family.

    We are organisms, and the main purpose of organism is continue through reproduction of life and culture through the family.

    We talk of women’s right to work, but what about men’s right to family?

    How can men have families when so many choice jobs are taken by women?

    When a man takes a job from a woman, he doesn’t take away her chance to have a family. She may lose her job but can still have what is most important to life, a family.

    But when a woman takes a job from a man, she takes away his chance to have a family. She takes away the job and the chance to have a family.

    No wonder so many American males are dispirited and lost.

    This is why asexual individualist libertarian ideology of economics is all wrong.

    Jobs exist not because we love to work. Most work is boring. We work to have families.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.

    And the current situation prevents so many men from having families.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cletus Rothschild
    You've put this is a way that has eluded me for many years. And my situation can add to the confirmation of what you say: I lost my job as a result of work-related brain damage and because of my unemployment, my ex left me and I lost my family.
    , @jacques sheete
    Great post.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.
     
    The worst of it is that it's been planned that way, has been implemented for around a century, and is working as intended.

    One crackpot proponent of the idea was the Marxist Russian revolutionary Alexandra Kollantai who said, “The family – deprived of all its economic tasks, not holding responsibility for a new generation, no longer providing women with the basic source of their existence – ceases to be a family. It narrows and is transformed into a union of the marital pair.”

    The Bolsheviks expressed the idea that the abolition of the family held the key to women’s emancipation which was nothing more than a pretext to gain power (by seducing women with ideas of "liberation"). Importantly, with communal kitchens,laundries, and child "care" facilities the Bolsheviks sought to transfer household work into the public domain.


    “But even if housework disappears, you may argue, there are still the children to look after. But here too, the workers’ state will come to replace the family, society will gradually take upon itself all the tasks that before the revolution fell to the individual parents. Even before the revolution, the instruction of the child had ceased to be the duty of the parents.

    Alexandra Kollontai, Communism and the Family, Komunistka, No. 2, 1920, and in English in The Worker, 1920;
    Source: Selected Writings of Alexandra Kollontai, Allison & Busby, 1977;
    Translated: by Alix Holt.
    http://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1920/communism-family.htm

     

    , @Anon
    That the family is the core purpose of human life can be understood by physical and emotional facts.

    Why does anyone exist at all? Because someone had a job? Because someone read a book? Because someone played with a machine?

    No, it is because he or she has a father and mother.
    Now, a human life can be created by just any man and any woman having sex. The father can abandon the kid, and the mother can choose to be a 'single mother'. Or she can just put the kid up for adoption. But, this is terrible. This is why we need sexual morality, and why having children must be associated with values and meaning and commitment.

    Anyway, every human life exists only because he or she has a father and mother. That is the central physical fact of life. If you are against the family, then you can only be against your own existence. And it makes no sense to be pro-sex and anti-family since you're saying that fathers and mothers have no special responsibility to take care of their own kids. That is bad for everyone. Bad for the moral health of the parents, bad for the child's future, and bad for society that must carry the financial burden and bear the social costs. Only sex within family culture will ensure that father and mother will form a bond to be responsible for the very life they create.

    So, if one cherishes one's own existence, one has to be for Family Culture.

    But aside from the physical fact, there is the emotional fact.

    If you were to ask your father about what is most important in his life, his answer has to be his wife and kids. I mean what else would a decent man say? That his car matters more to him? Or his stereo? Or his TV set? Or his computer? Or his movie collection? Or his book collection? Or his tool set? Or his boat? Or his snow mobile? His gun collection? Now, all those things are nice to have, but any man who cherishes such stuff over his wife and kids would be an idiot or sociopath. Even a nice big house comes nowhere near wife and kids. I mean if a man had to save his wife & kids or his house, what would he choose? Sacrifice his family for some material possession? Only a sociopath would do that.
    A man can lose a car and get a new car. A man can lose a house and get a new house. But his wife and kids are irreplaceable.
    Unfortunately, there are sociopathic or shallow men who will sacrifice the well-being of their wife and kids for material goods or their insipid jollies. Some will even kill near ones for material gain. They are despicable.

    Anyway, a true man would say his wife(and his kids) are the most important 'things' in his life. It can't be anything else. Even if he has a great job, his wife and kids come first. There is something wrong with a man who abandons or even destroys his wife and kids because his job is more important to him. It's no big deal to move from job to job, but it's not okay to move from family to family. A man like Trump can afford to do so and provide for everyone, but such would be recipe for social hell for everyone else.

    Granted, divorces do happen, and man and woman can come to hate one another. But a man should always feel great bond and responsibility for his own kids. Fathers who lack this quality are scum.
    It's like the story told by Gerald Ford. He tracked down his father, and the man pulled out $20 bucks, handed it to his son, and walked away.
    There was a time when such behavior on the part of the father would have been seen as low. No longer. After all, such 'judgmentalism' would condemn too many Negro men who never stick around. Also, a lot of white men and Hispanic men act the same. Also, with single motherhood being the New Norm, it is deemed perfectly okay for the guy to just walk away and let the woman be a 'single mother' like Murphy Brown. And he is to be lauded if he did a lesbian a favor by getting her pregnant so that she could either raise the kid single or with 'two mommies'.

    But in a sane and moral world, a man and a woman should look for love and find someone they can settle down with. And a man should regard his wife more highly than anything else, and the woman should feel the same way about the man. And what they do in life should be considered in terms of "How is it good for the family?"
    As long as they are together, even if they lose everything(in a fire or earthquake) they can struggle together to make it again. And from such a bond comes the ideal environment for the kids, even in hard times. Even if the family loses everything, if the man and woman stick together and take care of the kid, the kid will grow up with proper values which are priceless.

    Our individualist-libertine values turned family itself into a place of competition where the man sees the woman as rival than partner. Instead of working together for the good of the family, the man thinks only in terms of my 'career'. This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don't go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night. The fathers hardly talk with their wives and hardly know the kids who only know school work and shallow pop culture. No wonder Japan is turning into shi*. Fathers are really married to the corporation, and the kids are really raised by TV and education system geared to turn them into test-takers.

    In the West, it's all about career, career, and career. And a lot of people think this is cool because the kind of jobs we see in movies tend to be privileged, special, and exciting. The fantasy of everyone having some super-cool job filled with interesting stuff. In fact, most jobs are drudgery, and this goes for white collar jobs too. Drone stuff, stuck-at-office stuff, paper-shuffling stuff, and etc. Any person who lives only for this 'career' is an idiot. Most jobs in manufacturing are drudgery. Most jobs in service are routine and dull. And most white collar jobs are few notches above clerk duty. So, where does the meaning of life come from? Family: spouse and kids. And family is important because culture, heritage, and identity can be passed through them. Imagine you're Jewish and you wanna pass down your Jewish identity and heritage to your kids. You better create a family setting because if you just hump some single ho and refuse to play the role of father and hardly see your kids, they are gonna grow up into Pop Culture junkie morons.

    Also, family culture makes people aware of the fact that they are born, grow up, grow older, and die. Life has beginning, growth, middle, decline, and death. No one can escape this. And being part of a family makes one realize this through grandparents and relatives. But our individualist-consumer culture fixes our eyes and ears on the illusory fountain-of-youth of pop culture that doles out fantasy of everlasting fun. Even as people grow older, they still listen to pop music catered to teens. And they watch movies and read books meant for kids. Consider all the adults hooked on Harry Potter. And those silly comic book movies. And celebrity culture always produces a new batch of young nubile whores and dumb studs. And TV shows even women reaching middle age doing little else but acting 'young' and jumping in and out of bed as sluts and skanks. It creates the false illusion that life is all about 'staying young forever' than accepting maturity and aging and passing down the torch to your children. Many men and women don't even have kids since they were too invested in fun. Or too invested in looking for fantasy ideal lover who is rare or doesn't exist. And even those who did have kids never grew up. Fathers abandoned the kids, and women are single-mothers without culture who expose their kids to pop culture that urges them to get ugly tattoos and piercings.

    I mean WHAT KIND OF PARENTS raised kids like these?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3996676/Clubbers-feared-trapped-California-warehouse-party-blaze-breaks-out.html

    One thing for sure, decent and supportive parenting isn't enough. Consider the Braddocks and Robinsons in THE GRADUATE. Braddocks raised Ben properly enough, sending him to good schools and all. And Robinsons seemed to have done okay with Elaine too.
    But even if Ben and Elaine are materially well off and well-educated, they have no center, no core value, because the ONLY CULTURE they know is genteel suburban materialism. There is no sense of ethnos, heritage, or culture.
    It is different with Michael Corleone who grew up under Vito Corleone who is about the family, culture, and values, even though he was exiled from Sicily at a young age.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fF7Hh8jQftw

    Material well-being is nice, but it offers no meaning in and of itself. It is like living in Ikea or Costco. I'm all for having nice material goods, but meaning comes from something else, but it seems so many Americans have lost that. And so have Europeans. No wonder they have no sense of anything. Even their notion of 'western values' is totally nuts. Apparently, 'western values' are all about allowing western races to be flooded by non-western-races in the hope that the newcomers will take to these 'values', such as 'gay marriage', rap music, and defining as one of 50 genders.

    If anything, the notion of 'western values' is dubious. After all, if 'western values' made the West such a success, why didn't it happen with Byzantium? It preserved Christendom. And it safeguarded classical culture when Rome fell in the West. So, if 'western values' are so great, why was the history of Byzantium one of decline, stasis, and collapse? And if 'western values' are so great, why did some western nations achieve so much more than other ones? After all, not every European nation achieved greatness. And which Western Values when we speak of 'western values'? Spain and Britain both had 'western values'. Why did Spain keep slipping while Britain continue to rise? Christianity, Communism, Fascism, Capitalism, Anarchism, and etc are all 'western values'. 'Western values' comprise Medivalism, Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, Great Awakening, the European Left, the European Right, Socialism, individualism, collectivism, realism, utopianism, etc. There are too many western ways and ideas to sum up into a single set of 'western values'. One might say all those different schools of thought amount to pluralism as the key component of 'western values', but plenty of western societies through history had little use for pluralism and were very repressive. Also, pluralism isn't necessarily a key to success. Indian civilization was pluralist with the fusion of all kinds of traditions and customs, but it stopped advancing at some point.

    So, if we want to understand the power of the West, it makes more sense to speak of Western Methods than Western Values. Which methods that developed in certain parts of the West led to the advantages that led to great revolutions and domination of the world? Were these methods related to certain key values? Also worth asking is, why did Western nations that rose so high and so fast soon embark on a rapid course of suicide and self-immolation? Maybe there is a very dark side to this Western thing as well.

    Anyway, the dying West should shut up about its 'western values'. I mean why should the non-west adopt those 'values' that are leading to the destruction to the West? One thing for sure, the West didn't rise to its glory by following the 'western values' of the Current Year. On its rise to world dominance, the leading European nations had certain Methods of thinking, solving problems, organizing systems, incentivizing activities, and directing social forces. Those Methods are the key. And those Methods back then were not about celebrating homo decadence and welcoming masses of foreign invasion. If the non-west wants to learn the best of the West, learn the methods that were key during the West's rise to power, not the current 'values' that are leading the West to decadence and destruction.

    The current PC attacks the bad ole days, but the Methods of the bad ole days led to greatness and glory, whereas the Values of today are leading to degeneracy and demise. But we have idiots talking about 'western values' instead of 'western methods'. Methods are concrete. Values are gooey and mushy, ever so fluid and at the mercy of the latest trends in bogus 'social science'.
    Better to speak of Western Methods and, furthermore, Western Conditions. One of the conditions back then was all-white societies in Europe. Indeed, the great post-war boom after WWII happened when Europe was virtually all-white.
    But current PC makes us turn a blind eye to those Methods and Conditions and focuses on a wonky reinterpretation of 'western values', as if the glory of the West is due to worship of Diversity(when the West was saved by beating off Huns, Mongols, and Muslims) and homo decadence. In fact, despite the repressive aspects of Christianity, its one good impact on the West was its moral injunctions against excessive decadence and hedonism.

    People make jokes about FATHER KNOWS BEST and LEAVE IT TO BEAVER. Those are dismissed as relics of the bad ole 50s. So, what have we gotten in their stead? Father blows best? Father cucks best by having negro bull do mother? Father has best ass tattoo? Father let me get piercings all my face? Father listens to Miley Cyrus and watches Family Guy? Father took me to homo parade? Father says he wants to be a woman and wears a dress?

    Granted, the problem of FATHER KNOWS BEST and such shows was they had no sense of history and culture. They are all about nice pleasant life in the here and now as nuclear families keeping up with the Joneses. It is Braddock-ism of THE GRADUATE. And on that score, it was lacking in something essential. But what kind of alternatives do we have today? The bald headed loon on BREAKING BAD? The fat testicle-chinned blob of father FAMILY GUY? The degenerate on MARRIED WITH CHILDREN? We still so have clean-cut depictions of family life, but these are usually 'gay families' of the New Normal. Yeah, the only acceptable way to have a clean-cut traditional family is to have two 'daddies' bugger each other in the ass or two 'mommies' who stick cucumbers up each other poons.

    THE GODFATHER offered a meaningful vision of life because Vito Corleone had a sense of culture, family, and culture. Though not an educated man, he had good sense about his role as husband and father. And this is why Michael Corleone's life is meaningful in the way that so many lives are not meaningful in modern movies. Michael also gains a deep sense of where he came from. Even as he becomes American, he doesn't forget his roots.
    And DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. Even though Evgraf begins as a destructive radical, he comes to his senses somewhat and tries to reconnect his niece to the memory of his half-brother. He comes to realize the importance of family.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOpJKzIzUxw

    Family isn't everything, but it is the center from which all else begins to connect and matter. This is why 'gay marriage' is one of the most evil developments in the history of mankind. It turned family from a culturalization of nature into a lifestyle choice for decadents and deviants. It furthermore mocks the meaning of biology and morality with ludicrous notions of 'two daddies' and 'two mommies'. The people who did this deserve condemnation for all eternity. Their decadent and degenerate vileness is beyond forgiveness. That this has been normalized in US and EU means so much of Western Greatness is now associated and smeared with this decadent notion of 'western values' where the greatest good is worshiping a homo's penis inside the poopchute of another man. And we are supposed to honor this more if the penis happens to be black and the buttock white. Kong-dong-bung-ism is 'western values'.
    That so many Americans offered no resistance to this rot goes to show how totally venal the modern world has become... and what a sinister force globalism really is.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3k9KZOAmE

    Yet, in a twisted way, the recent development makes perverse sense because civilization was only possible by reversing the sense of rightness. The rise of decadence is a revenge of nature managed by technology to do least harm while doling out the pleasure.

    After all, what is right by civilization is the reversal of what is right by nature. By nature, it is right to steal. Animals take from one another all the time. There are no rules but 'gimme gimme'. If a bear can steal from another bear, it will. If wolves can steal from a bear, they will. If another pack of wolves can steal it, they will. And so on. And rape is right by nature. Horny males will hunt down and pork females. They feel heat and sexually conquer females. Or females in heat will beg for it. There's no morality. What is right by nature is what comes naturally by instincts and drives. It is a kind of primal Nietzcheanism where the stronger does as it wants without compunction or reservation or 'guilt'. Nature is about dominance. It is about satiating basic primal drives that lead to food and sex and continuation via offsprings.

    But in order to have civilization, all the things that were right by nature had to be reversed. So, taking stuff became 'stealing', a bad. So, humping out of heat became 'rape', a bad. So, killing for gain, so right in nature, became 'murder', a terrible thing.
    For civilization to work, humans had to be convinced that what is right by nature is wrong by culture. Of course, this didn't happen overnight. As humans evolved as social animals, they gradually developed the emotional qualities that became more receptive to notions of common good and proto-altruism than merely brazen self-interest. Indeed, these qualities can also be found in other social animals who sometimes suppress self-interest for team work and common good. Even so, animals have no moral code.
    In contrast, civilization codified laws and systems that emotionally convinced humans that it is WRONG to do and even feel certain things(or think certain ideas). The positive side of this was that it made for more stable and cooperative society. The negative side was that mankind has to suppress its natural instincts of virility and vitality. Even before the rise of Christianity, what Nietzsche condemned in Christian slave morality took place with civilization itself. Civilization cannot exist with everyone trying to be top dog. What is right by nature tells each human organism to do whatever to get 'what is mine'. To ensure that such doesn't happen, civilization must do something more than rule by fear to ensure people will behave. Such a civilization can only be like a prison full of criminals and killers who must be watched at all times. For civilization to work well, people must be convinced that it is WRONG to do certain things EVEN IF they could get away with it. And this was achieved not only by cultivation, education, and teaching of values but by eugenic processes. A civilization might harshly punish those who got out of line. The violators might be killed, exiled, or have their balls cut off. Over time, the wolfish types were weeded out more while the doggish types were spared to breed. So, humans, at least of some races, became more amenable to earnestly accepting civilizational ideals.
    This is why non-blacks take better to civilization than blacks do. Black hardly underwent this process since most of them evolved in non-civilization environments of chucking spears at hippos, running from hyenas, hollering at gorillas, and clubbing gophers for dinner. The wolfish blacks were not weeded out, so black genes tend to be wild. So, blacks are like natural-born-criminals. Even if you try to educate them and cultivate them, their inner souls feel like "gots to have me dat". There are few brakes in the Negro mind. Fewer inhibitions, few introspective faculties. Negro be looking at something and be feeling, "gots to have me". The wilder Negroes will just lunge for it cuz they got no patience. It's like Michael Brown had to have himself some cigar, shoo. He gonna grab himself some, sheeeeiiit. But some Negroes are more jazzy than rappy, and they, like Obama and other dudes, be looking for some slick genteel way to get what they want. But even they are all about 'gots to have me'. Jazziness is not about reflection and depth. It's about being slick and fast and tricky to get what one wants. It is gibbonic. If Michael Brown or Mike Tyson are gorillian and just grab stuff, the Obamas of the world be gibbonic and do all sorts of tricky acrobatics to get their banana. But what Michael Brown and Obama have in common is they both lack conscience, introspection, and genuine reflection. It's about 'gots to have me'. Michael Brown wanted cigars and even tried to grab the gun of an officer. Obama pulled the biggest negro con ever by going for president. Like the slickster in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION, he played white folks' psychology like a jazz keyboard. He knew what buttons to push. And he had great help from Jews who owned the media and most top institutions and eased the way for him as The One and the messiah for white prog folks who, being post-christian, wanted a new religion, and it was Obama as messenger of hope and faith and holy homo 'marriage'.

    Sadly, the chance of civilizing blacks is now impossible, and this goes for both US and EU. Even if whites had the moral advantage over blacks, it would be difficult to civilize blacks because blacks have yet to go through a weeding process that favors the doggish over the wolfish. Suppose for the next 500 yrs, we only allowed the mild Negroes to mate while forbidding wilder aggressives ones from mating. Over time, Negroes might become milder and kinder, more amenable to what is right by civilization. But blacks are still FOJ or Fresh Out of the Jungle. If anything, black evolution favored the wolfies over the doggies. Black women who best shook ass and tits were favored, and black guys who best danced, chucked spears, beat bongo drums, talked shi*, and slung their dongs were favored.

    Given this reality, it is difficult for whites to civilize blacks.
    Even so, if whites had moral advantage over blacks, the latter might make a bit more effort. Consider the past when whites did indeed have a moral advantage over blacks. Back then, white message to blacks were, "Look, imperialism and slavery weren't very nice on our part, but you blacks are jungle savages who were acting like naked apes in the dark continent forever. We took your black ass out of the wilderness and placed you in civilization. I know your ugabuga ways make you wanna holler and act crazy, BUT that is NOT Okay in our civilization of higher values and principles. Indeed, if we white folks acted like you Negroes, we wouldn't even have civilization. We'd be chucking spears at hippos in jungles too. So, make an effort not to act too apeish and wild and crazy."

    Now, a Negro hearing such talk might have been offended, but he would have also thought, "You know, dat white man be some punkass mofo, but maybe he right. After all, my ancestors in Africa run around naked, got no technology, be living next to monkeys and rhinos, and don't even have decent knife to cut watermelon with."
    So, at the very least, the Negro might feel that he has to be a credit to his race and prove his worth.

    Even with such pressure, it was difficult to civilize blacks because guys with the genetics of Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, and others are difficult to tame. All the more so since they are stronger than white man and can strike out and whup everybody. This is why so many teachers are scared half to death of black students.

    Anyway, if it was very difficult to civilize Negroes even when white man had the moral advantage over the Negro, imagine the difficulty of civilizing them when black folks have been handed the moral upperhand. Actually, blacks have been made holy via the MLK cult and Mandela myth. As such, secular whites and even Evangelical cucks look upon blacks as some holy race.

    This means it is now IMPOSSIBLE to solve the black problem that will just get worse and worse and worse. The race that is most problematic, difficult, aggressive, insane, pathological, murderous, rapacious, rape-driven, and vicious has been placed on the altar to sit judgement on everyone else by calling them 'racist' and 'white supremacist'.
    With whites stuck in the position of moral inferiority and weakness, it means they can never criticize black behavior no matter how bad it gets. And in 2015, it got totally rotten with BLM lunacy and even ghastly murders of cops. But MSM always justifies or excuses black foulness. And even Donald Trump never criticized black foulness. Hillary was egging them on. It is no wonder that some Democrats secretly think immigration is the only solution to the black problem. As much as they blather about holy blacks and MLK, their enthusiasm for Diversity via immigration --- mainly from Asia and Latin America --- seems to imply an unspoken policy of ANYONE BUT BLACK. But, unfortunately, a good number of immigrants also come from Africa that is exploding in population.

    Of course, EU may be messed up even more as black Africans can easily reach the EU where the policy is "we take in all negroes who make it to sea."
    EU also has instituted a policy of moral inferiority to blacks. For whatever reason --- imperialism, holocaust, racism, etc --- , white Europeans see themselves as moral inferiors to blacks and Muslims. So, whites have no right to judge those people or criticize them, and those who do will be dragged off to prison for 'hate speech'.

    These conditions will lead to major disaster. Tons of blacks entering is different from, say, tons of Asians entering. Too many Asians will also alter and destroy white Europe, but all Asians can easily be brought to civilized behavior since Asian genes evolved to be amenable to the civilizational process.
    In contrast, black genes are anti-civilizational since they evolved in jungles and steppes of Africa filled with angry elephants, lions, rhinos, buffalos, gorillas, and hippos who hate Negroes more than the most 'racist' redneck ever did.

    Too Many Asians will mean a different civilization in Europe. Too Many Africans will mean end of civilization.

    But what is EU doing? It is teaching white kids that Negroes are perfect angels, indeed the moral superiors of whites. White kids from a young age ware made to worship MLK, Mandela, and Obama. So, there is a quasi-spiritual worship of the craziest and most savage race on earth. But then, this savagery is also a turn-on. And this makes EU and US so schizo. On the one hand, the holy Negro is the higher spiritual figure, like those Morgan Freeman characters in Hollywood movies. But the Negro is also sought for his savage athleticism, wild colorfulness, the pounding round butt, and long dong.
    On the one hand, the Negro is the angel from whom whites needs to seek redemption. On the other hand, the Negro is the wild jungle liberator of white folks who'd been repressed by the tyranny of civilization. Negro is redeemer of soul and liberator of senses. The Negro has the mournful look and soulful bellowing voice about how he done have a dream, but he can also whup everyone, outrun everyone, dance faster, and hump longer. Don't progs see any contradiction in this? How can morally superior spiritual Negroes also be wild and crazy jungle Negroes of sports and rap? If Negroes are to be admired for their cool thuggery and jungle animal lust, just what is so high-and-mighty about Negro ethics and morality? It's all just a crazy prog fantasy.

    And we are seeing the result of this delusion in US and EU. Negroes are destroying more and more and more. And blacks in Africa keep breeding like rabbits, and more and more white wombs now produce black babies. This spells the doom of white civilization, but whites are brainwashed by PC and see themselves as moral inferiors of holy blacks when, in fact, blacks are the craziest bunch of natural lunatics the world has ever seen.

    White people think that because they had power over blacks and exploited them --- yes, whites did --- , that makes white evil and blacks noble.
    But there is problem in the logic. Suppose there is a decent Amish community. Its folks are mostly nice. Suppose there is a wild bandit tribe that goes around robbing and raising hell. Suppose this wild bandit tribe raids other wild bandit tribes and carries off prisoners to be sold as slaves.
    Now, it's obvious that the Amish are saner and better than the wild bandit folks.
    But suppose Amish come upon lots of land and need manpower. They get a bit greedy and decide to buy slaves from the wild bandit tribe. So, the wild bandit tribe offers to sell as slaves their captives who themselves are members of other wild bandit tribes. These slaves, being of bandit lineage, are naturally wild.
    Anyway, the Amish buy and use these wild bandit folks as slaves. Since the slaves have wild nature, the Amish must be tough with them and even whip em once awhile. Unless a clear message is sent to these wild fellers, they get out of hand and act nuts.

    Suppose Amish eventually figure that slavery is wrong and emancipate the wild bandit folks. And the Amish try to civilize them. But the Amish discover it is difficult since the wild bandit folks are naturally predisposed to holler too much like Toshiro Mifune in SEVEN SAMURAI.
    Still, the Amish try and get some results because the Moral Narrative favors the Amish. While the narrative addresses the wrongness of slavery, it say the wild bandit folks are of barbarian origin and need to be strictly controlled because, otherwise, they will start acting crazy. The narrative favors the Amish as the civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks.
    Also, suppose wild bandit folks are stronger than Amish, therefore dangerous.

    But suppose time passes, and Jews enter the Amish world and take over the narrative and change it. Jews say there are no racial differences between Amish and wild bandit folks. In other words, the Amish notion that wild bandit folks need to be supervised and elevated is just a 'racist' lie devised to maintain Amish supremacism over wild bandit folks who are racially no different from the Amish. So, the Amish must not only feel bad about slavery but about the whole notion of how the wild bandit folks need to make greater effort at civilization since they are more predisposed to be wild and crazy. According to the new narrative, the Amish were NEVER civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks but mere exploiters, oppressors, and haters.
    So, the wild bandit folks gain the moral advantage. They feel they have nothing to learn from Amish anymore. Since they are morally so high and mighty whereas Amish are guilty of everything, they blame Amish for all their problems. And since their natural predisposition is to be savage, wild, and crazy, they have no means of self-criticism or introspection to realize that maybe the Amish aren't all bad and they themselves are all good. And since they are stronger than the Amish, they begin to whup Amish butt all over the place. That, as we know, would be the beginning of the end.
    Isn't that like the problem that White America has with blacks?

    Thankfully, the black population of the US is less than 15%, but even that is high enough to cause so many problems all over. And with more coming from Africa, there's bound to be more troubles down the line, especially as all Negroes are told in the US that they are moral superiors, whereas whites, as moral inferiors, have no right to judge blacks over anything.
    As for all the black Africans moving to Europe where the young generation worship Mandela and Bob Marley and Seal and Kanye West and Lumumba and Long Dong Silver, how will that turn out? It's gonna be hellish downfall. The Muslim problem in Europe is child's play compared to the true hell that will come with the massive arrivals of black Africans who are FOJ or Fresh out of the Jungle.

    Anyway, if civilization was made possible by reversing what is right by nature, post-civilization now operates by reversing what is right by civilization, at least in some areas.

    Civilization had to decree as wrong what is right by nature. In nature, taking is right. All animals will take from other animals. There are no rules. The only 'right' in nature is what comes naturally. So, if a big bear can take a kill from a cougar, it will. And there is nothing the cougar can do about it.
    While civilization also had wars and pillaging, and etc, especially against enemies, those within the same civilization had to play the same rules. A kind of honor-among-thieves. Otherwise, civilization couldn't develop and progress.
    In time, honor-among-thieves wasn't enough for complex civilization. Such system was, after all, just a mutual pact among thieves committed to stealing... like the hoodlums in RESERVOIR DOGS. They didn't believe stealing was wrong; they just didn't steal from one another for mutual benefit and mutual fear. They had no higher principle.

    In contrast, complex civilization needs people who really believe it is wrong to steal even if they could get away with it. So, what is right by civilization is the opposite of what is right by nature. So, in a way, civilization is a kind of necessary perversion of nature. Its morality is kind of 'slave morality'. It chains the virile and vital animal in us. The fact that so many people love gangster movies, rappers, thug heroes, barbarian king stories, rough sports, and pirates of romance novels goes to show that, on some level, they all feel stifled by civilization's morality that forbade freedom to our nature. Something in us wants to root for Randall McMurphy who just goes for whatever he wants.

    Still, the reason why civilization had to suppress what is right by nature was obvious: if natural forces were allowed to run free, civilization fell apart, and all would be lost.

    At some point, however, Western mankind discovered that excessive suppression of nature actually held back civilizational progress. It prevented people from being adventurous and take risks. It also led to stagnant corruption whereupon those with the power cynically invoked morality and honor to suppress any voices as vices when, in fact, those voices needed to be heard and offered necessary criticism and possibilities.
    The West came upon a compromise whereby natural energies would be released on condition that they be sublimated toward higher goals, enterprises, and expressions. So, something like the Renaissance and later Enlightenment happened. There was more freedom for individuals, but the expressions and endeavors had to reach high, seek deeper meaning, serve the glory of God, expand the power of the domain by new discoveries in science or new voyages for land and resources. Homo artists could be creative, but they had to serve God or higher beauty than fantasize about massive orgies with leather dildos up their ass. If Robert Mapplethorpe had lived during the Renaissance, maybe he would have been Caravaggio.
    Still, the tension between civilization and nature was not an easy one.

    But then, after WWII, there was prolonged time of peace and prosperity with vast advances in technology, medicine, and everything else. For one thing, civilizations no longer needed to fear being overrun by barbarians. In the past, even the greatest civilizations could be conquered by barbarians such as Huns, Mongols, Vikings, Germanic barbarians, Berbers, and etc. But there was no such danger in modern times.
    Or vast numbers of people could be wiped out plagues and epidemics. Modern societies lost all such fears. Modern society could only be conquered by other modern societies.

    Also, with new means of transportation and boom in housing, so many people could own homes and live safely. Also, technology rid society of the negative consequences of wild natural behavior. Prior to such technology, wild natural behavior was checked either by social sanctions/punishment or by nature's revenge. If a woman fooled around, she would get pregnant and would have to take care of the kid. And the guy who got the girl pregnant might be forced into shotgun marriage. Also, there were sexual diseases for those who fooled around recklessly. So many died of syphilis.
    But modern society came up with all sorts of medicines and means to prevent pregnancy and disease even when people acted wildly natural like animals. Now, people could have sex like super-rabbits and never get pregnant or die of disease.

    Also, vast expansion of material goods and opportunities meant that everyone had a second chance. When educational material had been scarce, many couldn't go to college. So, when someone had a chance to go to school, he had to make sure to do it right cuz there might not be a second chance. His wilder nature told him to bum off, party, skip studies, and take it easy. But that would mean failure and no second chance. But with vast expanse of educational opportunities, one could mess up totally in high school but then be given another chance in community colleges.

    In the past, will to work mattered a lot. It determined whether one lived or died. If one didn't work on the farm and didn't produce enough food, it could mean a lean winter and starvation. So, even though the human nature wanted to slack off, take it easy(like the grasshopper vs the ant), and goof off, one had to follow what was right by civilization that what was right by nature since work culture is key to civilization. An animal that lives by what is right by nature is content to just take from other animals. In contrast, the human organism must do what is right by civilization and work to produce enough food for the long term even if he would prefer to take it easy.

    But mass food production by modern agriculture and market economics produced more food than could be consumed by Americans. Food became cheap, even for the poor. And the government provided free food to tens of millions of folks. That meant one could live like grasshoppers or wild apes and still have enough to eat, even to the point of having pot bellies and fat asses.

    In the past, violating the rules of civilization by doing what is right by nature meant the fall of civilization and the return of barbarism, even the reversion to savagery.

    But modern world made it possible to indulge in wild natural pleasures and still maintain civilization. Also, civilization created medicine and other means to reverse the negative effects of wild natural behavior. Also, indulgence in wild pleasures could boost economic production since vice industries could offer all sorts of pleasures in food, sex, entertainment, thrills, drugs, and etc.

    If a woman acted like a whore in the past, she might die of disease or end up pregnant and have to be a mother. Today, a modern woman can have sex with 100s of men a year and not be pregnant or die of disease. She could have antibiotics for VD. She could use the pill to prevent pregnancy. And even if she gets pregnant, she could use abortion to kill the kid.

    And no matter how lazy and worthless you are, you don't have to worry about starving in the US or EU. Indeed, the state will provide you with free housing, clothes, food, and etc even if you choose to be a wild crazy lunatic.

    Since everyone loves pleasure and since everyone can have pleasure without the dire consequences of the fall of civilization, we've undergone a new revolution in morality.

    Going from nature to civilization meant reversing what is right by nature into what is right by civilization. Mankind gained from civilization but has to sacrifice much of what was natural. Life in civilization became more secure but less fun. More ant-like but less grasshopper-like.

    But in with the rise of plenty and security in the late modern era, mankind can indulge in lots of pleasure. They can be 'natural' once again but without the 'revenge of nature'.
    One could fuc* like rabbits without breeding like rabbits. One could live like a grasshopper without freezing like a grasshopper.

    So, traditional morality and traditional normality are seen as suspect. They are seen as antiquated systems of behavior that are no longer relevant in the Age of Leisure.
    Indeed, the main reason for why people work so hard is for more leisure, not to raise a family. And since people are so addicted to fun, they don't want to say NO to anyone's else's fun, no matter how ridiculous it may be. So, if it's fun for homos to celebrate homo-ness and get 'married', who is to say NO to such fun?

    Steven Pinker seems to believe that traditional morality, though once useful in the transition from nature to civilization, now stands in the way of the New Way where we can have a balance of Social Order(according to science and technology) and Pleasure(that give full release to all our natural fetishes and drives).

    But is this 'return to nature' a return to real nature? Doesn't real nature have consequences? That is how nature balances itself. It's like there is hubris and nemesis. It's like what Merlin says. Everything has its opposites.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jahLEB3DbKs

    But we now pretend that we can do whatever, and there won't be a reckoning since we are protected from it by all these safety nets. We feel that we can indulge in natural pleasures without worry since our science/technology will do the balancing act.
    So, we can hump like animals and have fun but be spared from dire effects by pills, gadgets, and procedures.

    The current economic theory offers the same assurances. After the Great Depression, the government supposedly placed a bunch of safety nets and cushions so that something like that can't happen ever again. In 2008, this was tested with the biggest financial earthquake since 1929. We were told the system weathered the stress and survived. The system can save whatever is Too Big to Fail. We need not worry. So, whatever crisis results from the Return of Nature --- greed, lust, hedonism, gluttony, megalomania, etc --- , we need not worry because the System is powerful and secure enough to weather and correct any problem and restore the balance and 'make american great again'. After all, even the HIV horror was contained in the long run with new drugs, and there is now even talk of a total cure for HIV.. which means homos can return to mass-ass-humping and need not worry since science will find a fix for whatever problem that comes along.

    So, on the one hand, the more science and technology advances, the more we become like animals. Gross and indulgent in our appetites for pleasure. It's a strange paradox. With better science and technology, we can totally indulge in animal pleasures --- like in BRAVE NEW WORLD and SLEEPER --- without fear of the breakdown of the system... like what happened to decadent Rome that crumbled and reverted to barbarianism.
    The more we advance scientifically, the more apelike we become. It's fitting that Michio Kaku talks of time travel but also of the value of rap, an apelike music. It is fitting that the most educated Liberal elites are into cuck culture of having their women do apelike Negroes. Intellectual obsessed with being 'more evolved' but having their women have sex with the less evolved. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY GOT IT WRONG. The Star Child should be the Star Ape.

    Indeed, consider the rising swinger culture. There was a time when such would have led to all sorts of diseases and unwanted pregnancies. But now, there is no such anxiety. Also, these people have come up with sophisticated systems of screening to ensure that they can enjoy the animal pleasure without sacrificing their bourgeois comfort. It's all been professionalized and systemized.

    But can this really go on? Will the system finally break? I think it will. Such decadence and indulgence means the West lost the moral resolve to say NO. Even though the West cannot be invaded by barbarians on horseback as in ancient and medieval times, the West has lost the moral compass and resolve to realize what is most central to its existence and survival. So, even though it has the material and military means to defend itself from invaders, it lacks moral courage since its concept of 'western values' has been corrupted by globalism. EU cannot stop the Soft Invasion of 'refugees' who tug at Western heartstrings. 'Western Values' are now all about hedonism + virtue-signaling; and Western people, whose only meaning comes from shallow pleasures, feel that they have NO RIGHT to say NO to newcomers who also want to share in the Pleasures. A decadent people who have it so easy lack the resolve to say NO to anyone else. And people who had it easy and inherited this ease don't really feel they own it; they lack the hunger. It's like those who worked to make their fortune cling to what they got, but those who grew up rich don't value the real worth of what they have. They take it for granted and even feel 'guilty' that they got it so easy.

    The young people who grew up in the West after WWII inherited a lot of good times from their parents, and they take it for granted. They don't see the true value of it since they didn't have to struggle for it. Since they were guaranteed everything by parents or society, they think this is a universal right that cannot be denied to anyone. They don't see the good things in their nation as the product of their ancestors' struggle.
    Also, they were raised with PC as replacement for Christianity, and PC teaches them that it's great to indulge in Negro culture and since Negroes are so cool, they must allow tons of African Negroes into their nations.

    And then, over time, the system will fall as Europe is turned Afrope.
    , @impossible
    i cant think of a single job taken by any woman from a man. city clerks office? thats ridiculous- my heritage and future isnt dependent on some lazy mans push paper work.

    the whole comment is ridiculous. the problem is not jobs its inflation of asset values. it costs too much to buy a house and the title is still insecure because of property taxes, foreclosures eviction and shutoffs. thats it- not jobs, not immigrants, not women.

    LAND AND REAL ESTATE

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/ldinh/obscured-american-marty-the-electrician-plumber-and-ex-mortician/#comment-1670635
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. I look forward each week to Linh’s vignettes. These introduce me to a wholly different way of life. Superficially these are portraits of losers, but that’s beside the point and wrong to boot. The chronicled people have lived their life their way and oftentimes showing startling resilience and fortitude.

    And an important point: what personality traits has enabled Linh to succeed so well as a Father Confessor?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anty Buck
    He reads faster than Steinbeck.
    , @jacques sheete
    Another great comment.

    The chronicled people have lived their life their way and oftentimes showing startling resilience and fortitude.
     
    They consistently have some pretty amazing insights and as well.

    All of LD's work has been well done and extremely interesting. Fascinating stuff.
    , @Friendly Internet user
    What personality traits does Linh Dinh possess to allow him to succeed so well?

    I've known Linh fairly well for a few years and Value his friendship, so I feel I may be able to answer this question.

    Linh is an honest, outgoing and very friendly person who goes out of his way to meet new people. He is extremely patient and possesses the rare SKILL of being able to listen to what other people say.

    People recognize these qualities and allow Linh to endear himself to them.

    Above all, Linh is brave enough to approach even the people who seem most deplorable to society and connect with them. Many of these people probably never view him suspiciously or assume he has ulterior motives to take advantage of them.

    Of course, I am just brushing the surface of Linhs personality as I have experienced, but I dothink these points illustrate why Linh is so successful in his role as an interviewer (or father confessor, as the case may be).
  3. Snipworthy, R-selected POS wigger.

    “I’ve always been a very good provider”

    I’d like to hear his wives’ and many kids’ side of the story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @unit472
    Perhaps but if you marry a working man and he pays the rent, puts food on the table and keeps the kids in clothes you can't complain because you aren't wealthy. Well you can complain but it will only make everyone unhappy.
    , @Truth
    Where exactly do you get "wigger" out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?
    , @CK
    "I’d like to hear his wives’ and many kids’ side of the story."
    Why?
    , @RadicalCenter
    We're supposed to believe that he provided well for SEVEN children?

    And by three different women, how admirable.

    Another dirtbag. Not interesting or thought-provoking, LD.
  4. Of such ephemera is every life made. Lacking only the ability to rise above the inchoate and, adding fat fingers to plastic keys, work the electronic magick that assigns thought to infinity. Roll on ‘Nacherly Speaking’ and the coming of vocal narrative that whole governmental agencies are paid to mine for pith in our sad world.

    The pen will prove to be less mighty than the sword.

    But at $8 bucks a pop one has to assume that dear old “Marty the fixture” either is a man of substance “downing a few each evening”, or else he don’t drink that fancy shit.

    “Linh Dinh’ (Lyndon?) might be in a better place to judge, but shouldn’t such ‘proven’ watering holes, the ones with real, as opposed to ersatz ‘kultur’, be rated by the distance to which they have subsided into the earth over time? Shouldn’t you, physically, have to go ‘down’ to enter a ‘dive’?

    I’d give this a solid B on the Hemingway scale.

    And I really liked the part about getting laid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    No, it is not 'Lyndon'.
    , @Old Marty
    @ Unka Buck …

    Old Marty is not a man of means, just a hard working dude who grew up the way I did, nothing pretentious nor nothing to be ashamed of. No one took notice that the $8.00 drink was ordered by Gary Maddox and NOT Old Marty…

    Old Marty enjoys 6 or 8 Budweiser 12 oz bottles a day @ $3.25 a pop… If I person who has been working pretty much every day of his life cant stop by the local watering hole and enjoy a few cold brews then something is totally wrong with life…
  5. @Dan Hayes
    I look forward each week to Linh's vignettes. These introduce me to a wholly different way of life. Superficially these are portraits of losers, but that's beside the point and wrong to boot. The chronicled people have lived their life their way and oftentimes showing startling resilience and fortitude.

    And an important point: what personality traits has enabled Linh to succeed so well as a Father Confessor?

    He reads faster than Steinbeck.

    Read More
  6. @Anon
    Linh Dinh considers many American lives, broken ones too.

    Maybe we should consider some sexual politics.

    When a woman loses a job, she gains a family.

    When a man loses a job, he loses a family.

    The main purpose of human life is to have a family.

    A woman can have a family without a job because a man will marry a woman without a job.

    A man cannot have a family without a job because a woman will not marry a man without a job.

    So, when a man takes a well-paying job from a woman, he is offering her a chance to have a family.
    But, when a woman takes a well-paying job from a man, she is robbing him of the chance to have a family.

    We are organisms, and the main purpose of organism is continue through reproduction of life and culture through the family.

    We talk of women's right to work, but what about men's right to family?

    How can men have families when so many choice jobs are taken by women?

    When a man takes a job from a woman, he doesn't take away her chance to have a family. She may lose her job but can still have what is most important to life, a family.

    But when a woman takes a job from a man, she takes away his chance to have a family. She takes away the job and the chance to have a family.

    No wonder so many American males are dispirited and lost.

    This is why asexual individualist libertarian ideology of economics is all wrong.

    Jobs exist not because we love to work. Most work is boring. We work to have families.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.

    And the current situation prevents so many men from having families.

    You’ve put this is a way that has eluded me for many years. And my situation can add to the confirmation of what you say: I lost my job as a result of work-related brain damage and because of my unemployment, my ex left me and I lost my family.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kurt van Ghoye
    That's fucked up.
    , @Che Guava
    Cletus,

    What happened to you at work?

    Sorry to hear of the results.
  7. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Snipworthy, R-selected POS wigger.

    "I’ve always been a very good provider"

    I'd like to hear his wives' and many kids' side of the story.

    Perhaps but if you marry a working man and he pays the rent, puts food on the table and keeps the kids in clothes you can’t complain because you aren’t wealthy. Well you can complain but it will only make everyone unhappy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kurt van Ghoye
    I can kinda see that. At the same time I think that men and women need to do more, much more. Make families great again is the general thrust. The way there passes through a goodly amount of shaming and moral pressure. We need to be willing to apply it in our own lives and to a lesser degree when judging others. I am going to do my part in my own fledgling family, by the grace of God.
  8. @Anon
    Linh Dinh considers many American lives, broken ones too.

    Maybe we should consider some sexual politics.

    When a woman loses a job, she gains a family.

    When a man loses a job, he loses a family.

    The main purpose of human life is to have a family.

    A woman can have a family without a job because a man will marry a woman without a job.

    A man cannot have a family without a job because a woman will not marry a man without a job.

    So, when a man takes a well-paying job from a woman, he is offering her a chance to have a family.
    But, when a woman takes a well-paying job from a man, she is robbing him of the chance to have a family.

    We are organisms, and the main purpose of organism is continue through reproduction of life and culture through the family.

    We talk of women's right to work, but what about men's right to family?

    How can men have families when so many choice jobs are taken by women?

    When a man takes a job from a woman, he doesn't take away her chance to have a family. She may lose her job but can still have what is most important to life, a family.

    But when a woman takes a job from a man, she takes away his chance to have a family. She takes away the job and the chance to have a family.

    No wonder so many American males are dispirited and lost.

    This is why asexual individualist libertarian ideology of economics is all wrong.

    Jobs exist not because we love to work. Most work is boring. We work to have families.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.

    And the current situation prevents so many men from having families.

    Great post.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.

    The worst of it is that it’s been planned that way, has been implemented for around a century, and is working as intended.

    One crackpot proponent of the idea was the Marxist Russian revolutionary Alexandra Kollantai who said, “The family – deprived of all its economic tasks, not holding responsibility for a new generation, no longer providing women with the basic source of their existence – ceases to be a family. It narrows and is transformed into a union of the marital pair.”

    The Bolsheviks expressed the idea that the abolition of the family held the key to women’s emancipation which was nothing more than a pretext to gain power (by seducing women with ideas of “liberation”). Importantly, with communal kitchens,laundries, and child “care” facilities the Bolsheviks sought to transfer household work into the public domain.

    “But even if housework disappears, you may argue, there are still the children to look after. But here too, the workers’ state will come to replace the family, society will gradually take upon itself all the tasks that before the revolution fell to the individual parents. Even before the revolution, the instruction of the child had ceased to be the duty of the parents.

    Alexandra Kollontai, Communism and the Family, Komunistka, No. 2, 1920, and in English in The Worker, 1920;
    Source: Selected Writings of Alexandra Kollontai, Allison & Busby, 1977;
    Translated: by Alix Holt.

    http://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1920/communism-family.htm

    Read More
  9. @Dan Hayes
    I look forward each week to Linh's vignettes. These introduce me to a wholly different way of life. Superficially these are portraits of losers, but that's beside the point and wrong to boot. The chronicled people have lived their life their way and oftentimes showing startling resilience and fortitude.

    And an important point: what personality traits has enabled Linh to succeed so well as a Father Confessor?

    Another great comment.

    The chronicled people have lived their life their way and oftentimes showing startling resilience and fortitude.

    They consistently have some pretty amazing insights and as well.

    All of LD’s work has been well done and extremely interesting. Fascinating stuff.

    Read More
  10. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Snipworthy, R-selected POS wigger.

    "I’ve always been a very good provider"

    I'd like to hear his wives' and many kids' side of the story.

    Where exactly do you get “wigger” out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    Where exactly do you get “wigger” out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?
     
    Wiggers don't want to be black. Wiggers are white on the outside and black on the inside. While the individual described did work for a living -- certainly not something to which any black aspires -- he is, for all other intents and purposes, a nigger. QED
    , @Kurt van Ghoye
    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black. Not that he is "fronting" black behavior. Pardon the confusion.
    , @woodNfish
    How many of his ex-wives and girlfriends had to go on the dole to support his little bastards? He finds 'em feels 'em, and fucks 'em, and we pay for it.
  11. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "MCPO USN"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Thanks, Linh, for that “snapshot” of a type of human I have detested since first encountering one at age, what? 16? A completely amoral zero — worthy of nothing but contempt. Confirmed, repeatedly, by every following word of your essay.

    Better luck choosing a real man next time, Linh.

    Read More
  12. What benefit is there to knowing the life details of this piece of shit?
    Good for a creative wrting class I suppose.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    Another Hillary voter are you?
    The working man is always a "piece of shit" to the superior "creative writing class".
    , @jacques sheete

    What benefit is there to knowing the life details of this piece of shit?
     
    I'm betting yer counting it a benefit that you can feel superior enough to deride him as a piece of shit.

    What benefit is there in posting a comment like that?
  13. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Snipworthy, R-selected POS wigger.

    "I’ve always been a very good provider"

    I'd like to hear his wives' and many kids' side of the story.

    “I’d like to hear his wives’ and many kids’ side of the story.”
    Why?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kurt van Ghoye
    Right. I guess I don't actually want to hear the story, but theoretically it should get an airing so that our protagonist can be held up to public opprobrium.
  14. @Dwright
    What benefit is there to knowing the life details of this piece of shit?
    Good for a creative wrting class I suppose.

    Another Hillary voter are you?
    The working man is always a “piece of shit” to the superior “creative writing class”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dwright
    So far off pal. I am a working man with a business who supported Trump.
    We don't support immoral tomcats who have values of gutter snipes, why do you?

    Working man , not my kind.
  15. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "MCPO USN"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Truth
    Where exactly do you get "wigger" out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?

    Where exactly do you get “wigger” out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?

    Wiggers don’t want to be black. Wiggers are white on the outside and black on the inside. While the individual described did work for a living — certainly not something to which any black aspires — he is, for all other intents and purposes, a nigger. QED

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    he is, for all other intents and purposes, a nigger. QED
     
    Oh yeah, that's right; he likes sex.
  16. @Cletus Rothschild
    You've put this is a way that has eluded me for many years. And my situation can add to the confirmation of what you say: I lost my job as a result of work-related brain damage and because of my unemployment, my ex left me and I lost my family.

    That’s fucked up.

    Read More
  17. @Truth
    Where exactly do you get "wigger" out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?

    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black. Not that he is “fronting” black behavior. Pardon the confusion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Triumph104
    Agree. Also, I clicked the article to see if he were black because he is an ex-mortician.

    Ta-Nehisi Coates' father has seven children by four women and Coates makes his father sound like an honorable man, even though the guy is just a community baby daddy. When Amiri Baraka died, the Washington Post conviently only mentioned the six children Baraka had with two wives, ignoring the two out-of-wedlock daughters from two different women.
    , @Truth
    I have to admit; I am a bit perplexed by some of you guys and your inability to make the simplest bridges between geopolitics and human nature.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYNMYP7DSXg
    , @Peter Akuleyev

    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black.
     
    No, he has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a Sicilian peasant. If blacks were the only dissolute race on the planet life would be simpler. There is a good reason why Southern Italy has been a shithole for centuries.
  18. @CK
    "I’d like to hear his wives’ and many kids’ side of the story."
    Why?

    Right. I guess I don’t actually want to hear the story, but theoretically it should get an airing so that our protagonist can be held up to public opprobrium.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    Or his wives could be.
    Non-intervention in issues where I have no dog in the fight is
    a healthy policy.
    Non-intervention when I know both the dogs is also a very healthy
    policy.
  19. @unit472
    Perhaps but if you marry a working man and he pays the rent, puts food on the table and keeps the kids in clothes you can't complain because you aren't wealthy. Well you can complain but it will only make everyone unhappy.

    I can kinda see that. At the same time I think that men and women need to do more, much more. Make families great again is the general thrust. The way there passes through a goodly amount of shaming and moral pressure. We need to be willing to apply it in our own lives and to a lesser degree when judging others. I am going to do my part in my own fledgling family, by the grace of God.

    Read More
    • Agree: Che Guava
    • Replies: @woodNfish

    The way there passes through a goodly amount of shaming and moral pressure.
     
    In order to feel shame you must have morals, and if you think leftists have morals then you have not been paying attention.
  20. @Cletus Rothschild
    You've put this is a way that has eluded me for many years. And my situation can add to the confirmation of what you say: I lost my job as a result of work-related brain damage and because of my unemployment, my ex left me and I lost my family.

    Cletus,

    What happened to you at work?

    Sorry to hear of the results.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cletus Rothschild
    Thanks Che.

    "What happened to you at work?"

    It's a very long story, but the bottom line is toxic encephalopathy from chemical injuries. Gross OSHA violations.
  21. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black. Not that he is "fronting" black behavior. Pardon the confusion.

    Agree. Also, I clicked the article to see if he were black because he is an ex-mortician.

    Ta-Nehisi Coates’ father has seven children by four women and Coates makes his father sound like an honorable man, even though the guy is just a community baby daddy. When Amiri Baraka died, the Washington Post conviently only mentioned the six children Baraka had with two wives, ignoring the two out-of-wedlock daughters from two different women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymouse
    I knew Amiri when he was Leroy Jones. And I knew his first wife Hetty Cohen (slightly). And I knew (slightly) Diane di Prima who had one of his children. Diane di Prima had lots of kids from different interesting guys. It was an interesting scene. Met Jones through Gil Sorrentino who published a poetry magazine. Leroy had a big apt in Chelsea and gave superior parties. Leroy was hanging around Diane so Hetty got it on with an Asian guy. Really pissed Leroy off.

    Until he went mad and Muslim, Leroy was an interesting poet and playwright. I remember seeing his Toilet, which worked well dramatically even though being quite minimal.

    My last contact with him was writing him from Austin Texas asking for a list of jazz L.P. recommendations. He sent me back the jazz section from a Goody's catalog with his selections checked. Gil Sorrentino's ex-wife was working at a record store and scored me about 20 albums at $1 a disk. Elsene was the bookkeeper for a boss who was cheating on his taxes. So they worked out a quid pro quo so she could sell albums for a buck. These were mostly Ornette Coleman albums. Really helped with my jazz music education.

    All of these people are dead except for Diane di Prima. Sic transit cursus temporum <-I just made that up

  22. @Unka Buck
    Of such ephemera is every life made. Lacking only the ability to rise above the inchoate and, adding fat fingers to plastic keys, work the electronic magick that assigns thought to infinity. Roll on 'Nacherly Speaking' and the coming of vocal narrative that whole governmental agencies are paid to mine for pith in our sad world.

    The pen will prove to be less mighty than the sword.

    But at $8 bucks a pop one has to assume that dear old "Marty the fixture" either is a man of substance "downing a few each evening", or else he don't drink that fancy shit.

    "Linh Dinh' (Lyndon?) might be in a better place to judge, but shouldn't such 'proven' watering holes, the ones with real, as opposed to ersatz 'kultur', be rated by the distance to which they have subsided into the earth over time? Shouldn't you, physically, have to go 'down' to enter a 'dive'?

    I'd give this a solid B on the Hemingway scale.

    And I really liked the part about getting laid.

    No, it is not ‘Lyndon’.

    Read More
  23. Hello Linh.

    Seriously sorry to hear about Don, condolences.

    Wish there were an instant travel portal so I could visit the Friendly Lounge, even without air travel, time zones would be a problem, but would be able to do it on the occasional weekend day.

    Marty’s mother’s cooking sounds delicious.

    I liked the quoted poem.

    And as she was drynkynge,
    She fyll in a wynkynge
    Wyth a barlyhood,
    She pyst where she stood;
    Than began she to wepe,
    And forthwyth fell on slepe.

    From my reading, similar scenes are not uncommon in parts of the UK (perhaps not so much in Wales and N.I.) of now.

    Though I have seen

    And as she was drynkynge,

    Than began she to wepe,

    that part often enough in regional cities here, more than once from the mama-san (yes, a few expressions from old US occupation slang are now standard Japanese).

    I enjoyed Marty’s tale.

    Regards and thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Linh Dinh
    Hi Che Guava,

    You ever come to Philly, I'll take you to Friendly and Jack's in Kensington. Jack's is so cheap, you can get buzzed on five bucks!

    Linh

  24. @CK
    Another Hillary voter are you?
    The working man is always a "piece of shit" to the superior "creative writing class".

    So far off pal. I am a working man with a business who supported Trump.
    We don’t support immoral tomcats who have values of gutter snipes, why do you?

    Working man , not my kind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    Apologies, read your comment wrong.
    , @Old Marty
    I’ve lived my life the way I seen fit, did what I wanted, when I wanted. What worked for me, may not work for others. This lifetime doesn’t own me a dime and at the same time I owe no anything either.

    For those sitting there behind a Computer and rushing to judgements on someone you’ve only read a few paragraphs of Humor infested dialog about, only shows how sad their own lives must be. Remember, In a glass house, don’t throw stones…

    In other words, I did it my way and on my own! When it comes time for the Old Rocking Chair, I’ll be able to look back at my life and laugh till I drop dead. I do not have to defend my life, I’ve already lived it…

    Enjoy life as you make it, Live it the way you feel is best, It is, what it is… (Old Marty)
  25. @Dwright
    What benefit is there to knowing the life details of this piece of shit?
    Good for a creative wrting class I suppose.

    What benefit is there to knowing the life details of this piece of shit?

    I’m betting yer counting it a benefit that you can feel superior enough to deride him as a piece of shit.

    What benefit is there in posting a comment like that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Marty
    @ jacques sheete…

    I am the subject of the Author, I’d like to thank you for noticing that this Interview was taken with-in a local bar while consuming Beers. The only statement that is and was misleading is about the “Cut off 3 inches” I can not remember exactly was said by another patron at the time, but I was just injecting a bit of humor and of course a laugh for the other guys at the Bar…

    For what it’s worth, Linn relayed “My Life” accurately but rather shallow, there is so much more to me and my values and lifestyle that was not included at the time of the interview, which is my fault because when this was started, I was just taking on Repair work, I since got involved in a “Total Rehab” and had promised the property owner a Christmas delivery. That being said, I missed several appointments with Linn so he could “Fill in” the in between years.
  26. @Che Guava
    Hello Linh.

    Seriously sorry to hear about Don, condolences.

    Wish there were an instant travel portal so I could visit the Friendly Lounge, even without air travel, time zones would be a problem, but would be able to do it on the occasional weekend day.

    Marty's mother's cooking sounds delicious.

    I liked the quoted poem.


    And as she was drynkynge,
    She fyll in a wynkynge
    Wyth a barlyhood,
    She pyst where she stood;
    Than began she to wepe,
    And forthwyth fell on slepe.
     
    From my reading, similar scenes are not uncommon in parts of the UK (perhaps not so much in Wales and N.I.) of now.

    Though I have seen


    And as she was drynkynge,
    ...
    Than began she to wepe,
     
    that part often enough in regional cities here, more than once from the mama-san (yes, a few expressions from old US occupation slang are now standard Japanese).

    I enjoyed Marty's tale.

    Regards and thanks.

    Hi Che Guava,

    You ever come to Philly, I’ll take you to Friendly and Jack’s in Kensington. Jack’s is so cheap, you can get buzzed on five bucks!

    Linh

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    All the comments including criticisms of the piece or its subject have assumed Marty was telling the truth. How much do you believe of it?

    And what BTW are we to make of "I got three inches cut off"????!!
    , @Che Guava
    I don't see why the OP replied to your reply to me, but ...

    Hope I can go there some time, I would really like to visit the southeast, Appalachia, midwest, Las Vegas if work ever permits. Thanks for the invitation for Phily.

    Linh, do you know of Lucius Shepherd?

    He is a good current US SF writer, from what I have read, always settings are from the western side of Pennsylvania, through Virginia, one in Florida.

    Although I have only read some of his short stories and novellas, they are good to great. Don't know about the novels.

    You are more international jet-set than I, if you are in Tokyo, Mr. Unz is free to give you my e-mail address, only place where I have a social connection that is sounding like the Friendly Lounge, but nobody speaks much english, is fun. I am only to speaking Japanese there, but you would likely like it.
  27. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    managut = manicotti in Sicilian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "managut = manicotti in Sicilian" - I don't think so. It is American invention often seen in Italian mafia movies. The same goes for:

    "prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL)."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/nyregion/you-say-prosciutto-i-say-proshoot-and-purists-cringe.html

    "And Gregory Pell, an assistant professor at Hofstra University who teaches Italian, said that because of the way double consonants were spoken, such as the double "t" in manicotti, Americans might not clearly hear the last "ee" sound. When New Yorkers drop their endings, he said, "it's become a new word and its own version.""
  28. In most of the US, the houses went up too fast.

    An analogy from farming – you can create huge vegetables if you gives them lots of water. Enormous and bland. But there will not be enough flavor to sustain a meal. Likewise, there can never be enough culture when the houses go up too quick.

    Read More
  29. @Triumph104
    Agree. Also, I clicked the article to see if he were black because he is an ex-mortician.

    Ta-Nehisi Coates' father has seven children by four women and Coates makes his father sound like an honorable man, even though the guy is just a community baby daddy. When Amiri Baraka died, the Washington Post conviently only mentioned the six children Baraka had with two wives, ignoring the two out-of-wedlock daughters from two different women.

    I knew Amiri when he was Leroy Jones. And I knew his first wife Hetty Cohen (slightly). And I knew (slightly) Diane di Prima who had one of his children. Diane di Prima had lots of kids from different interesting guys. It was an interesting scene. Met Jones through Gil Sorrentino who published a poetry magazine. Leroy had a big apt in Chelsea and gave superior parties. Leroy was hanging around Diane so Hetty got it on with an Asian guy. Really pissed Leroy off.

    Until he went mad and Muslim, Leroy was an interesting poet and playwright. I remember seeing his Toilet, which worked well dramatically even though being quite minimal.

    My last contact with him was writing him from Austin Texas asking for a list of jazz L.P. recommendations. He sent me back the jazz section from a Goody’s catalog with his selections checked. Gil Sorrentino’s ex-wife was working at a record store and scored me about 20 albums at $1 a disk. Elsene was the bookkeeper for a boss who was cheating on his taxes. So they worked out a quid pro quo so she could sell albums for a buck. These were mostly Ornette Coleman albums. Really helped with my jazz music education.

    All of these people are dead except for Diane di Prima. Sic transit cursus temporum <-I just made that up

    Read More
    • Replies: @Triumph104
    Thank you, that was interesting. I had noticed Diane di Prima's assortment of children on her Wiki page.

    Hettie (Cohen) Jones is still alive. She had a book published this year. I didn't realize that the Kellie Jones who won a 2016 MacArthur genius grant was her daughter.

    http://www.lennyletter.com/culture/interviews/a560/an-afternoon-with-hettie-jones/
  30. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Where exactly do you get “wigger” out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?
     
    Wiggers don't want to be black. Wiggers are white on the outside and black on the inside. While the individual described did work for a living -- certainly not something to which any black aspires -- he is, for all other intents and purposes, a nigger. QED

    he is, for all other intents and purposes, a nigger. QED

    Oh yeah, that’s right; he likes sex.

    Read More
  31. @Anon
    managut = manicotti in Sicilian.

    “managut = manicotti in Sicilian” – I don’t think so. It is American invention often seen in Italian mafia movies. The same goes for:

    “prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL).”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/nyregion/you-say-prosciutto-i-say-proshoot-and-purists-cringe.html

    “And Gregory Pell, an assistant professor at Hofstra University who teaches Italian, said that because of the way double consonants were spoken, such as the double “t” in manicotti, Americans might not clearly hear the last “ee” sound. When New Yorkers drop their endings, he said, “it’s become a new word and its own version.””

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    Most foreign professors of standard Italian are not familiar with the numerous dialects. Almost all Italians have two languages--a dialect and the standard. Just so with English-speakers in Britain.

    One could cite many examples. "Ugatz", for example, is a good approximation soundwise for what in Neaopolitan is orthographically rendered "o cazzo".

    It appears in a famous Italian song, so-- "E Mari', e Mari' ugatz!"
    , @woodNfish
    Different dialects of the same language can pronounce the same word differently. This is also known as a colloquialism. It doesn't mean the subject of the word is different so I am going to assume that “managut = manicotti in Sicilian” is correct.
  32. @Linh Dinh
    Hi Che Guava,

    You ever come to Philly, I'll take you to Friendly and Jack's in Kensington. Jack's is so cheap, you can get buzzed on five bucks!

    Linh

    All the comments including criticisms of the piece or its subject have assumed Marty was telling the truth. How much do you believe of it?

    And what BTW are we to make of “I got three inches cut off”????!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Linh Dinh
    Jocular barroom braggadocio. He said he used to have a 12-incher.
    , @Old Marty
    @ jacques sheete...

    I am the subject of the Author, I'd like to thank you for noticing that this Interview was taken with-in a local bar while consuming Beers. The only statement that is and was misleading is about the "Cut off 3 inches" I can not remember exactly was said by another patron at the time, but I was just injecting a bit of humor and of course a laugh for the other guys at the Bar...

    For what it's worth, Linn relayed "My Life" accurately but rather shallow, there is so much more to me and my values and lifestyle that was not included at the time of the interview, which is my fault because when this was started, I was just taking on Repair work, I since got involved in a "Total Rehab" and had promised the property owner a Christmas delivery. That being said, I missed several appointments with Linn so he could "Fill in" the in between years.

    @ Unka Buck ...

    Old Marty is not a man of means, just a hard working dude who grew up the way I did, nothing pretentious nor nothing to be ashamed of. No one took notice that the $8.00 drink was ordered by Gary Maddox and NOT Old Marty...

    Old Marty enjoys 6 or 8 Budweiser 12 oz bottles a day @ $3.25 a pop... If I person who has been working pretty much every day of his life cant stop by the local watering hole and enjoy a few cold brews then something is totally wrong with life...

    @ Wizard of Oz....

    Sitting in a Bar filled with other patrons who have known me or my family for 50ish years, there is not much that can be said or alluded to while being over heard in an oral interview that would not be called out as Bullshit if it weren't the truth. Considering the fact that the interview was held in a small neighborhood Taproom in South Philly where every one knows mostly everyone else I'd have to state that "Old Marty" is pretty forthright and on point...

    @ The other people commenting in a negative way;

    I've lived my life the way I seen fit, did what I wanted, when I wanted. What worked for me, may not work for others. This lifetime doesn't own me a dime and at the same time I owe no anything either.

    For those sitting there behind a Computer and rushing to judgements on someone you've only read a few paragraphs of Humor infested dialog about, only shows how sad their own lives must be. Remember, In a glass house, don't throw stones...

    In other words, I did it my way and on my own! When it comes time for the Old Rocking Chair, I'll be able to look back at my life and laugh till I drop dead. I do not have to defend my life, I've already lived it...

    Enjoy life as you make it, Live it the way you feel is best, It is, what it is... (Old Marty)

    @ Linn... Thanks Buddy!
  33. @Dwright
    So far off pal. I am a working man with a business who supported Trump.
    We don't support immoral tomcats who have values of gutter snipes, why do you?

    Working man , not my kind.

    Apologies, read your comment wrong.

    Read More
  34. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Right. I guess I don't actually want to hear the story, but theoretically it should get an airing so that our protagonist can be held up to public opprobrium.

    Or his wives could be.
    Non-intervention in issues where I have no dog in the fight is
    a healthy policy.
    Non-intervention when I know both the dogs is also a very healthy
    policy.

    Read More
  35. @Wizard of Oz
    All the comments including criticisms of the piece or its subject have assumed Marty was telling the truth. How much do you believe of it?

    And what BTW are we to make of "I got three inches cut off"????!!

    Jocular barroom braggadocio. He said he used to have a 12-incher.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    Medically recorded average 5.75"
    Medically recorded largest erect 13.5"
    As Bessie Smith once said, "It ain't the meat, it's the motion."
    However given our druthers, most would prefer to drive a Peterbilt than
    being stuck with a VW bug.
    , @jacques sheete

    Jocular barroom braggadocio.
     
    Standard jocular barroom braggadocio.

    Part of the charm of these stories, at least for me, is that they remind me of my roots. When reading them I can pretty much see, hear and smell the situation. Unless a person was "there," he'd probably fail to notice that a lot of what goes on in these places is intended as humor, and everyone knows not to take it too seriously if seriously at all.

    People like Marty often exaggerate for humorous effect. It is often so exaggerated that only the most gullible even think of taking it at face value, and if someone does, it tickles the author of the hoax quite well. I know this partly because I was raised around people like that, am guilty of it myself and get a sprightly, impish delight out of "pulling the chain" of those who take themselves much too seriously.

    Although I quickly learned that in a professional sphere I had to unlearn that sort of self expression, I now live in a neighborhood full of uber-pretentious white collars and they are an endless source of humor for me especially since few even have a clue though they're for the most part convinced they have the answer to everything. And I was taught that concrete ideation was a characteristic of the insane.

    On second thought, maybe it is...

  36. @utu
    "managut = manicotti in Sicilian" - I don't think so. It is American invention often seen in Italian mafia movies. The same goes for:

    "prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL)."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/nyregion/you-say-prosciutto-i-say-proshoot-and-purists-cringe.html

    "And Gregory Pell, an assistant professor at Hofstra University who teaches Italian, said that because of the way double consonants were spoken, such as the double "t" in manicotti, Americans might not clearly hear the last "ee" sound. When New Yorkers drop their endings, he said, "it's become a new word and its own version.""

    Most foreign professors of standard Italian are not familiar with the numerous dialects. Almost all Italians have two languages–a dialect and the standard. Just so with English-speakers in Britain.

    One could cite many examples. “Ugatz”, for example, is a good approximation soundwise for what in Neaopolitan is orthographically rendered “o cazzo”.

    It appears in a famous Italian song, so– “E Mari’, e Mari’ ugatz!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Clipping the last vowel or syllable just make you sound tough. It is just a posturing in the hood among low educated guidos and then in the movies and back to popular culture.

    It's American phenomenon popularized by American movies. It did not originate in Sicily or Italy. However it is possible it got exported form the US back to Italy. Even a real mafia in Italy gets some silly ideas from Hollywood like holding guns sideways while shooting and building pink mansions like the one in Scarface.
  37. @Linh Dinh
    Jocular barroom braggadocio. He said he used to have a 12-incher.

    Medically recorded average 5.75″
    Medically recorded largest erect 13.5″
    As Bessie Smith once said, “It ain’t the meat, it’s the motion.”
    However given our druthers, most would prefer to drive a Peterbilt than
    being stuck with a VW bug.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    However given our druthers, most would prefer to drive a Peterbilt than
    being stuck with a VW bug.
     
    Not I; while VW bugs are too small, Petes are too slow to get going.

    A moderate size hot rod, built for performance, is where it's at! ;)
  38. @E. A. Costa
    Most foreign professors of standard Italian are not familiar with the numerous dialects. Almost all Italians have two languages--a dialect and the standard. Just so with English-speakers in Britain.

    One could cite many examples. "Ugatz", for example, is a good approximation soundwise for what in Neaopolitan is orthographically rendered "o cazzo".

    It appears in a famous Italian song, so-- "E Mari', e Mari' ugatz!"

    Clipping the last vowel or syllable just make you sound tough. It is just a posturing in the hood among low educated guidos and then in the movies and back to popular culture.

    It’s American phenomenon popularized by American movies. It did not originate in Sicily or Italy. However it is possible it got exported form the US back to Italy. Even a real mafia in Italy gets some silly ideas from Hollywood like holding guns sideways while shooting and building pink mansions like the one in Scarface.

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    You have no idea what you are talking about and neither does your expert apparently. There are dialects of Italian that clip the last syllables and these dialects are quite independent of any New World influence.

    One might give several examples but why bother? You will persist in whatever you wish to believe regardless of any philological facts.
    , @RSDB
    From your article:

    In fact, in some parts of Italy, the dropping of final vowels is common. Restaurantgoers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects, where speakers often do not speak their endings, Professor Albertini said.
     
    Sicilian, compared to standard Italian, is often referred to as a separate language. As a partial descendant of low-educated Campanian guidos, I can assure you that their pronunciation is not a falling from the pure standard of literary Italian, but a dialect of equal historical standing.

    Also, see below, where an actual linguist discusses the article:
    http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001481.html

    If your ancestors spoke Florentine or a similar dialect, very closely related to standard Italian, that would explain your point of view.

    Salute,
    RSDB
  39. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anon
    Linh Dinh considers many American lives, broken ones too.

    Maybe we should consider some sexual politics.

    When a woman loses a job, she gains a family.

    When a man loses a job, he loses a family.

    The main purpose of human life is to have a family.

    A woman can have a family without a job because a man will marry a woman without a job.

    A man cannot have a family without a job because a woman will not marry a man without a job.

    So, when a man takes a well-paying job from a woman, he is offering her a chance to have a family.
    But, when a woman takes a well-paying job from a man, she is robbing him of the chance to have a family.

    We are organisms, and the main purpose of organism is continue through reproduction of life and culture through the family.

    We talk of women's right to work, but what about men's right to family?

    How can men have families when so many choice jobs are taken by women?

    When a man takes a job from a woman, he doesn't take away her chance to have a family. She may lose her job but can still have what is most important to life, a family.

    But when a woman takes a job from a man, she takes away his chance to have a family. She takes away the job and the chance to have a family.

    No wonder so many American males are dispirited and lost.

    This is why asexual individualist libertarian ideology of economics is all wrong.

    Jobs exist not because we love to work. Most work is boring. We work to have families.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.

    And the current situation prevents so many men from having families.

    That the family is the core purpose of human life can be understood by physical and emotional facts.

    Why does anyone exist at all? Because someone had a job? Because someone read a book? Because someone played with a machine?

    No, it is because he or she has a father and mother.
    Now, a human life can be created by just any man and any woman having sex. The father can abandon the kid, and the mother can choose to be a ‘single mother’. Or she can just put the kid up for adoption. But, this is terrible. This is why we need sexual morality, and why having children must be associated with values and meaning and commitment.

    Anyway, every human life exists only because he or she has a father and mother. That is the central physical fact of life. If you are against the family, then you can only be against your own existence. And it makes no sense to be pro-sex and anti-family since you’re saying that fathers and mothers have no special responsibility to take care of their own kids. That is bad for everyone. Bad for the moral health of the parents, bad for the child’s future, and bad for society that must carry the financial burden and bear the social costs. Only sex within family culture will ensure that father and mother will form a bond to be responsible for the very life they create.

    So, if one cherishes one’s own existence, one has to be for Family Culture.

    But aside from the physical fact, there is the emotional fact.

    If you were to ask your father about what is most important in his life, his answer has to be his wife and kids. I mean what else would a decent man say? That his car matters more to him? Or his stereo? Or his TV set? Or his computer? Or his movie collection? Or his book collection? Or his tool set? Or his boat? Or his snow mobile? His gun collection? Now, all those things are nice to have, but any man who cherishes such stuff over his wife and kids would be an idiot or sociopath. Even a nice big house comes nowhere near wife and kids. I mean if a man had to save his wife & kids or his house, what would he choose? Sacrifice his family for some material possession? Only a sociopath would do that.
    A man can lose a car and get a new car. A man can lose a house and get a new house. But his wife and kids are irreplaceable.
    Unfortunately, there are sociopathic or shallow men who will sacrifice the well-being of their wife and kids for material goods or their insipid jollies. Some will even kill near ones for material gain. They are despicable.

    Anyway, a true man would say his wife(and his kids) are the most important ‘things’ in his life. It can’t be anything else. Even if he has a great job, his wife and kids come first. There is something wrong with a man who abandons or even destroys his wife and kids because his job is more important to him. It’s no big deal to move from job to job, but it’s not okay to move from family to family. A man like Trump can afford to do so and provide for everyone, but such would be recipe for social hell for everyone else.

    Granted, divorces do happen, and man and woman can come to hate one another. But a man should always feel great bond and responsibility for his own kids. Fathers who lack this quality are scum.
    It’s like the story told by Gerald Ford. He tracked down his father, and the man pulled out $20 bucks, handed it to his son, and walked away.
    There was a time when such behavior on the part of the father would have been seen as low. No longer. After all, such ‘judgmentalism’ would condemn too many Negro men who never stick around. Also, a lot of white men and Hispanic men act the same. Also, with single motherhood being the New Norm, it is deemed perfectly okay for the guy to just walk away and let the woman be a ‘single mother’ like Murphy Brown. And he is to be lauded if he did a lesbian a favor by getting her pregnant so that she could either raise the kid single or with ‘two mommies’.

    But in a sane and moral world, a man and a woman should look for love and find someone they can settle down with. And a man should regard his wife more highly than anything else, and the woman should feel the same way about the man. And what they do in life should be considered in terms of “How is it good for the family?”
    As long as they are together, even if they lose everything(in a fire or earthquake) they can struggle together to make it again. And from such a bond comes the ideal environment for the kids, even in hard times. Even if the family loses everything, if the man and woman stick together and take care of the kid, the kid will grow up with proper values which are priceless.

    [MORE]

    Our individualist-libertine values turned family itself into a place of competition where the man sees the woman as rival than partner. Instead of working together for the good of the family, the man thinks only in terms of my ‘career’. This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don’t go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night. The fathers hardly talk with their wives and hardly know the kids who only know school work and shallow pop culture. No wonder Japan is turning into shi*. Fathers are really married to the corporation, and the kids are really raised by TV and education system geared to turn them into test-takers.

    In the West, it’s all about career, career, and career. And a lot of people think this is cool because the kind of jobs we see in movies tend to be privileged, special, and exciting. The fantasy of everyone having some super-cool job filled with interesting stuff. In fact, most jobs are drudgery, and this goes for white collar jobs too. Drone stuff, stuck-at-office stuff, paper-shuffling stuff, and etc. Any person who lives only for this ‘career’ is an idiot. Most jobs in manufacturing are drudgery. Most jobs in service are routine and dull. And most white collar jobs are few notches above clerk duty. So, where does the meaning of life come from? Family: spouse and kids. And family is important because culture, heritage, and identity can be passed through them. Imagine you’re Jewish and you wanna pass down your Jewish identity and heritage to your kids. You better create a family setting because if you just hump some single ho and refuse to play the role of father and hardly see your kids, they are gonna grow up into Pop Culture junkie morons.

    Also, family culture makes people aware of the fact that they are born, grow up, grow older, and die. Life has beginning, growth, middle, decline, and death. No one can escape this. And being part of a family makes one realize this through grandparents and relatives. But our individualist-consumer culture fixes our eyes and ears on the illusory fountain-of-youth of pop culture that doles out fantasy of everlasting fun. Even as people grow older, they still listen to pop music catered to teens. And they watch movies and read books meant for kids. Consider all the adults hooked on Harry Potter. And those silly comic book movies. And celebrity culture always produces a new batch of young nubile whores and dumb studs. And TV shows even women reaching middle age doing little else but acting ‘young’ and jumping in and out of bed as sluts and skanks. It creates the false illusion that life is all about ‘staying young forever’ than accepting maturity and aging and passing down the torch to your children. Many men and women don’t even have kids since they were too invested in fun. Or too invested in looking for fantasy ideal lover who is rare or doesn’t exist. And even those who did have kids never grew up. Fathers abandoned the kids, and women are single-mothers without culture who expose their kids to pop culture that urges them to get ugly tattoos and piercings.

    I mean WHAT KIND OF PARENTS raised kids like these?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3996676/Clubbers-feared-trapped-California-warehouse-party-blaze-breaks-out.html

    One thing for sure, decent and supportive parenting isn’t enough. Consider the Braddocks and Robinsons in THE GRADUATE. Braddocks raised Ben properly enough, sending him to good schools and all. And Robinsons seemed to have done okay with Elaine too.
    But even if Ben and Elaine are materially well off and well-educated, they have no center, no core value, because the ONLY CULTURE they know is genteel suburban materialism. There is no sense of ethnos, heritage, or culture.
    It is different with Michael Corleone who grew up under Vito Corleone who is about the family, culture, and values, even though he was exiled from Sicily at a young age.

    Material well-being is nice, but it offers no meaning in and of itself. It is like living in Ikea or Costco. I’m all for having nice material goods, but meaning comes from something else, but it seems so many Americans have lost that. And so have Europeans. No wonder they have no sense of anything. Even their notion of ‘western values’ is totally nuts. Apparently, ‘western values’ are all about allowing western races to be flooded by non-western-races in the hope that the newcomers will take to these ‘values’, such as ‘gay marriage’, rap music, and defining as one of 50 genders.

    If anything, the notion of ‘western values’ is dubious. After all, if ‘western values’ made the West such a success, why didn’t it happen with Byzantium? It preserved Christendom. And it safeguarded classical culture when Rome fell in the West. So, if ‘western values’ are so great, why was the history of Byzantium one of decline, stasis, and collapse? And if ‘western values’ are so great, why did some western nations achieve so much more than other ones? After all, not every European nation achieved greatness. And which Western Values when we speak of ‘western values’? Spain and Britain both had ‘western values’. Why did Spain keep slipping while Britain continue to rise? Christianity, Communism, Fascism, Capitalism, Anarchism, and etc are all ‘western values’. ‘Western values’ comprise Medivalism, Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, Great Awakening, the European Left, the European Right, Socialism, individualism, collectivism, realism, utopianism, etc. There are too many western ways and ideas to sum up into a single set of ‘western values’. One might say all those different schools of thought amount to pluralism as the key component of ‘western values’, but plenty of western societies through history had little use for pluralism and were very repressive. Also, pluralism isn’t necessarily a key to success. Indian civilization was pluralist with the fusion of all kinds of traditions and customs, but it stopped advancing at some point.

    So, if we want to understand the power of the West, it makes more sense to speak of Western Methods than Western Values. Which methods that developed in certain parts of the West led to the advantages that led to great revolutions and domination of the world? Were these methods related to certain key values? Also worth asking is, why did Western nations that rose so high and so fast soon embark on a rapid course of suicide and self-immolation? Maybe there is a very dark side to this Western thing as well.

    Anyway, the dying West should shut up about its ‘western values’. I mean why should the non-west adopt those ‘values’ that are leading to the destruction to the West? One thing for sure, the West didn’t rise to its glory by following the ‘western values’ of the Current Year. On its rise to world dominance, the leading European nations had certain Methods of thinking, solving problems, organizing systems, incentivizing activities, and directing social forces. Those Methods are the key. And those Methods back then were not about celebrating homo decadence and welcoming masses of foreign invasion. If the non-west wants to learn the best of the West, learn the methods that were key during the West’s rise to power, not the current ‘values’ that are leading the West to decadence and destruction.

    The current PC attacks the bad ole days, but the Methods of the bad ole days led to greatness and glory, whereas the Values of today are leading to degeneracy and demise. But we have idiots talking about ‘western values’ instead of ‘western methods’. Methods are concrete. Values are gooey and mushy, ever so fluid and at the mercy of the latest trends in bogus ‘social science’.
    Better to speak of Western Methods and, furthermore, Western Conditions. One of the conditions back then was all-white societies in Europe. Indeed, the great post-war boom after WWII happened when Europe was virtually all-white.
    But current PC makes us turn a blind eye to those Methods and Conditions and focuses on a wonky reinterpretation of ‘western values’, as if the glory of the West is due to worship of Diversity(when the West was saved by beating off Huns, Mongols, and Muslims) and homo decadence. In fact, despite the repressive aspects of Christianity, its one good impact on the West was its moral injunctions against excessive decadence and hedonism.

    People make jokes about FATHER KNOWS BEST and LEAVE IT TO BEAVER. Those are dismissed as relics of the bad ole 50s. So, what have we gotten in their stead? Father blows best? Father cucks best by having negro bull do mother? Father has best ass tattoo? Father let me get piercings all my face? Father listens to Miley Cyrus and watches Family Guy? Father took me to homo parade? Father says he wants to be a woman and wears a dress?

    Granted, the problem of FATHER KNOWS BEST and such shows was they had no sense of history and culture. They are all about nice pleasant life in the here and now as nuclear families keeping up with the Joneses. It is Braddock-ism of THE GRADUATE. And on that score, it was lacking in something essential. But what kind of alternatives do we have today? The bald headed loon on BREAKING BAD? The fat testicle-chinned blob of father FAMILY GUY? The degenerate on MARRIED WITH CHILDREN? We still so have clean-cut depictions of family life, but these are usually ‘gay families’ of the New Normal. Yeah, the only acceptable way to have a clean-cut traditional family is to have two ‘daddies’ bugger each other in the ass or two ‘mommies’ who stick cucumbers up each other poons.

    THE GODFATHER offered a meaningful vision of life because Vito Corleone had a sense of culture, family, and culture. Though not an educated man, he had good sense about his role as husband and father. And this is why Michael Corleone’s life is meaningful in the way that so many lives are not meaningful in modern movies. Michael also gains a deep sense of where he came from. Even as he becomes American, he doesn’t forget his roots.
    And DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. Even though Evgraf begins as a destructive radical, he comes to his senses somewhat and tries to reconnect his niece to the memory of his half-brother. He comes to realize the importance of family.

    Family isn’t everything, but it is the center from which all else begins to connect and matter. This is why ‘gay marriage’ is one of the most evil developments in the history of mankind. It turned family from a culturalization of nature into a lifestyle choice for decadents and deviants. It furthermore mocks the meaning of biology and morality with ludicrous notions of ‘two daddies’ and ‘two mommies’. The people who did this deserve condemnation for all eternity. Their decadent and degenerate vileness is beyond forgiveness. That this has been normalized in US and EU means so much of Western Greatness is now associated and smeared with this decadent notion of ‘western values’ where the greatest good is worshiping a homo’s penis inside the poopchute of another man. And we are supposed to honor this more if the penis happens to be black and the buttock white. Kong-dong-bung-ism is ‘western values’.
    That so many Americans offered no resistance to this rot goes to show how totally venal the modern world has become… and what a sinister force globalism really is.

    Yet, in a twisted way, the recent development makes perverse sense because civilization was only possible by reversing the sense of rightness. The rise of decadence is a revenge of nature managed by technology to do least harm while doling out the pleasure.

    After all, what is right by civilization is the reversal of what is right by nature. By nature, it is right to steal. Animals take from one another all the time. There are no rules but ‘gimme gimme’. If a bear can steal from another bear, it will. If wolves can steal from a bear, they will. If another pack of wolves can steal it, they will. And so on. And rape is right by nature. Horny males will hunt down and pork females. They feel heat and sexually conquer females. Or females in heat will beg for it. There’s no morality. What is right by nature is what comes naturally by instincts and drives. It is a kind of primal Nietzcheanism where the stronger does as it wants without compunction or reservation or ‘guilt’. Nature is about dominance. It is about satiating basic primal drives that lead to food and sex and continuation via offsprings.

    But in order to have civilization, all the things that were right by nature had to be reversed. So, taking stuff became ‘stealing’, a bad. So, humping out of heat became ‘rape’, a bad. So, killing for gain, so right in nature, became ‘murder’, a terrible thing.
    For civilization to work, humans had to be convinced that what is right by nature is wrong by culture. Of course, this didn’t happen overnight. As humans evolved as social animals, they gradually developed the emotional qualities that became more receptive to notions of common good and proto-altruism than merely brazen self-interest. Indeed, these qualities can also be found in other social animals who sometimes suppress self-interest for team work and common good. Even so, animals have no moral code.
    In contrast, civilization codified laws and systems that emotionally convinced humans that it is WRONG to do and even feel certain things(or think certain ideas). The positive side of this was that it made for more stable and cooperative society. The negative side was that mankind has to suppress its natural instincts of virility and vitality. Even before the rise of Christianity, what Nietzsche condemned in Christian slave morality took place with civilization itself. Civilization cannot exist with everyone trying to be top dog. What is right by nature tells each human organism to do whatever to get ‘what is mine’. To ensure that such doesn’t happen, civilization must do something more than rule by fear to ensure people will behave. Such a civilization can only be like a prison full of criminals and killers who must be watched at all times. For civilization to work well, people must be convinced that it is WRONG to do certain things EVEN IF they could get away with it. And this was achieved not only by cultivation, education, and teaching of values but by eugenic processes. A civilization might harshly punish those who got out of line. The violators might be killed, exiled, or have their balls cut off. Over time, the wolfish types were weeded out more while the doggish types were spared to breed. So, humans, at least of some races, became more amenable to earnestly accepting civilizational ideals.
    This is why non-blacks take better to civilization than blacks do. Black hardly underwent this process since most of them evolved in non-civilization environments of chucking spears at hippos, running from hyenas, hollering at gorillas, and clubbing gophers for dinner. The wolfish blacks were not weeded out, so black genes tend to be wild. So, blacks are like natural-born-criminals. Even if you try to educate them and cultivate them, their inner souls feel like “gots to have me dat”. There are few brakes in the Negro mind. Fewer inhibitions, few introspective faculties. Negro be looking at something and be feeling, “gots to have me”. The wilder Negroes will just lunge for it cuz they got no patience. It’s like Michael Brown had to have himself some cigar, shoo. He gonna grab himself some, sheeeeiiit. But some Negroes are more jazzy than rappy, and they, like Obama and other dudes, be looking for some slick genteel way to get what they want. But even they are all about ‘gots to have me’. Jazziness is not about reflection and depth. It’s about being slick and fast and tricky to get what one wants. It is gibbonic. If Michael Brown or Mike Tyson are gorillian and just grab stuff, the Obamas of the world be gibbonic and do all sorts of tricky acrobatics to get their banana. But what Michael Brown and Obama have in common is they both lack conscience, introspection, and genuine reflection. It’s about ‘gots to have me’. Michael Brown wanted cigars and even tried to grab the gun of an officer. Obama pulled the biggest negro con ever by going for president. Like the slickster in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION, he played white folks’ psychology like a jazz keyboard. He knew what buttons to push. And he had great help from Jews who owned the media and most top institutions and eased the way for him as The One and the messiah for white prog folks who, being post-christian, wanted a new religion, and it was Obama as messenger of hope and faith and holy homo ‘marriage’.

    Sadly, the chance of civilizing blacks is now impossible, and this goes for both US and EU. Even if whites had the moral advantage over blacks, it would be difficult to civilize blacks because blacks have yet to go through a weeding process that favors the doggish over the wolfish. Suppose for the next 500 yrs, we only allowed the mild Negroes to mate while forbidding wilder aggressives ones from mating. Over time, Negroes might become milder and kinder, more amenable to what is right by civilization. But blacks are still FOJ or Fresh Out of the Jungle. If anything, black evolution favored the wolfies over the doggies. Black women who best shook ass and tits were favored, and black guys who best danced, chucked spears, beat bongo drums, talked shi*, and slung their dongs were favored.

    Given this reality, it is difficult for whites to civilize blacks.
    Even so, if whites had moral advantage over blacks, the latter might make a bit more effort. Consider the past when whites did indeed have a moral advantage over blacks. Back then, white message to blacks were, “Look, imperialism and slavery weren’t very nice on our part, but you blacks are jungle savages who were acting like naked apes in the dark continent forever. We took your black ass out of the wilderness and placed you in civilization. I know your ugabuga ways make you wanna holler and act crazy, BUT that is NOT Okay in our civilization of higher values and principles. Indeed, if we white folks acted like you Negroes, we wouldn’t even have civilization. We’d be chucking spears at hippos in jungles too. So, make an effort not to act too apeish and wild and crazy.”

    Now, a Negro hearing such talk might have been offended, but he would have also thought, “You know, dat white man be some punkass mofo, but maybe he right. After all, my ancestors in Africa run around naked, got no technology, be living next to monkeys and rhinos, and don’t even have decent knife to cut watermelon with.”
    So, at the very least, the Negro might feel that he has to be a credit to his race and prove his worth.

    Even with such pressure, it was difficult to civilize blacks because guys with the genetics of Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, and others are difficult to tame. All the more so since they are stronger than white man and can strike out and whup everybody. This is why so many teachers are scared half to death of black students.

    Anyway, if it was very difficult to civilize Negroes even when white man had the moral advantage over the Negro, imagine the difficulty of civilizing them when black folks have been handed the moral upperhand. Actually, blacks have been made holy via the MLK cult and Mandela myth. As such, secular whites and even Evangelical cucks look upon blacks as some holy race.

    This means it is now IMPOSSIBLE to solve the black problem that will just get worse and worse and worse. The race that is most problematic, difficult, aggressive, insane, pathological, murderous, rapacious, rape-driven, and vicious has been placed on the altar to sit judgement on everyone else by calling them ‘racist’ and ‘white supremacist’.
    With whites stuck in the position of moral inferiority and weakness, it means they can never criticize black behavior no matter how bad it gets. And in 2015, it got totally rotten with BLM lunacy and even ghastly murders of cops. But MSM always justifies or excuses black foulness. And even Donald Trump never criticized black foulness. Hillary was egging them on. It is no wonder that some Democrats secretly think immigration is the only solution to the black problem. As much as they blather about holy blacks and MLK, their enthusiasm for Diversity via immigration — mainly from Asia and Latin America — seems to imply an unspoken policy of ANYONE BUT BLACK. But, unfortunately, a good number of immigrants also come from Africa that is exploding in population.

    Of course, EU may be messed up even more as black Africans can easily reach the EU where the policy is “we take in all negroes who make it to sea.”
    EU also has instituted a policy of moral inferiority to blacks. For whatever reason — imperialism, holocaust, racism, etc — , white Europeans see themselves as moral inferiors to blacks and Muslims. So, whites have no right to judge those people or criticize them, and those who do will be dragged off to prison for ‘hate speech’.

    These conditions will lead to major disaster. Tons of blacks entering is different from, say, tons of Asians entering. Too many Asians will also alter and destroy white Europe, but all Asians can easily be brought to civilized behavior since Asian genes evolved to be amenable to the civilizational process.
    In contrast, black genes are anti-civilizational since they evolved in jungles and steppes of Africa filled with angry elephants, lions, rhinos, buffalos, gorillas, and hippos who hate Negroes more than the most ‘racist’ redneck ever did.

    Too Many Asians will mean a different civilization in Europe. Too Many Africans will mean end of civilization.

    But what is EU doing? It is teaching white kids that Negroes are perfect angels, indeed the moral superiors of whites. White kids from a young age ware made to worship MLK, Mandela, and Obama. So, there is a quasi-spiritual worship of the craziest and most savage race on earth. But then, this savagery is also a turn-on. And this makes EU and US so schizo. On the one hand, the holy Negro is the higher spiritual figure, like those Morgan Freeman characters in Hollywood movies. But the Negro is also sought for his savage athleticism, wild colorfulness, the pounding round butt, and long dong.
    On the one hand, the Negro is the angel from whom whites needs to seek redemption. On the other hand, the Negro is the wild jungle liberator of white folks who’d been repressed by the tyranny of civilization. Negro is redeemer of soul and liberator of senses. The Negro has the mournful look and soulful bellowing voice about how he done have a dream, but he can also whup everyone, outrun everyone, dance faster, and hump longer. Don’t progs see any contradiction in this? How can morally superior spiritual Negroes also be wild and crazy jungle Negroes of sports and rap? If Negroes are to be admired for their cool thuggery and jungle animal lust, just what is so high-and-mighty about Negro ethics and morality? It’s all just a crazy prog fantasy.

    And we are seeing the result of this delusion in US and EU. Negroes are destroying more and more and more. And blacks in Africa keep breeding like rabbits, and more and more white wombs now produce black babies. This spells the doom of white civilization, but whites are brainwashed by PC and see themselves as moral inferiors of holy blacks when, in fact, blacks are the craziest bunch of natural lunatics the world has ever seen.

    White people think that because they had power over blacks and exploited them — yes, whites did — , that makes white evil and blacks noble.
    But there is problem in the logic. Suppose there is a decent Amish community. Its folks are mostly nice. Suppose there is a wild bandit tribe that goes around robbing and raising hell. Suppose this wild bandit tribe raids other wild bandit tribes and carries off prisoners to be sold as slaves.
    Now, it’s obvious that the Amish are saner and better than the wild bandit folks.
    But suppose Amish come upon lots of land and need manpower. They get a bit greedy and decide to buy slaves from the wild bandit tribe. So, the wild bandit tribe offers to sell as slaves their captives who themselves are members of other wild bandit tribes. These slaves, being of bandit lineage, are naturally wild.
    Anyway, the Amish buy and use these wild bandit folks as slaves. Since the slaves have wild nature, the Amish must be tough with them and even whip em once awhile. Unless a clear message is sent to these wild fellers, they get out of hand and act nuts.

    Suppose Amish eventually figure that slavery is wrong and emancipate the wild bandit folks. And the Amish try to civilize them. But the Amish discover it is difficult since the wild bandit folks are naturally predisposed to holler too much like Toshiro Mifune in SEVEN SAMURAI.
    Still, the Amish try and get some results because the Moral Narrative favors the Amish. While the narrative addresses the wrongness of slavery, it say the wild bandit folks are of barbarian origin and need to be strictly controlled because, otherwise, they will start acting crazy. The narrative favors the Amish as the civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks.
    Also, suppose wild bandit folks are stronger than Amish, therefore dangerous.

    But suppose time passes, and Jews enter the Amish world and take over the narrative and change it. Jews say there are no racial differences between Amish and wild bandit folks. In other words, the Amish notion that wild bandit folks need to be supervised and elevated is just a ‘racist’ lie devised to maintain Amish supremacism over wild bandit folks who are racially no different from the Amish. So, the Amish must not only feel bad about slavery but about the whole notion of how the wild bandit folks need to make greater effort at civilization since they are more predisposed to be wild and crazy. According to the new narrative, the Amish were NEVER civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks but mere exploiters, oppressors, and haters.
    So, the wild bandit folks gain the moral advantage. They feel they have nothing to learn from Amish anymore. Since they are morally so high and mighty whereas Amish are guilty of everything, they blame Amish for all their problems. And since their natural predisposition is to be savage, wild, and crazy, they have no means of self-criticism or introspection to realize that maybe the Amish aren’t all bad and they themselves are all good. And since they are stronger than the Amish, they begin to whup Amish butt all over the place. That, as we know, would be the beginning of the end.
    Isn’t that like the problem that White America has with blacks?

    Thankfully, the black population of the US is less than 15%, but even that is high enough to cause so many problems all over. And with more coming from Africa, there’s bound to be more troubles down the line, especially as all Negroes are told in the US that they are moral superiors, whereas whites, as moral inferiors, have no right to judge blacks over anything.
    As for all the black Africans moving to Europe where the young generation worship Mandela and Bob Marley and Seal and Kanye West and Lumumba and Long Dong Silver, how will that turn out? It’s gonna be hellish downfall. The Muslim problem in Europe is child’s play compared to the true hell that will come with the massive arrivals of black Africans who are FOJ or Fresh out of the Jungle.

    Anyway, if civilization was made possible by reversing what is right by nature, post-civilization now operates by reversing what is right by civilization, at least in some areas.

    Civilization had to decree as wrong what is right by nature. In nature, taking is right. All animals will take from other animals. There are no rules. The only ‘right’ in nature is what comes naturally. So, if a big bear can take a kill from a cougar, it will. And there is nothing the cougar can do about it.
    While civilization also had wars and pillaging, and etc, especially against enemies, those within the same civilization had to play the same rules. A kind of honor-among-thieves. Otherwise, civilization couldn’t develop and progress.
    In time, honor-among-thieves wasn’t enough for complex civilization. Such system was, after all, just a mutual pact among thieves committed to stealing… like the hoodlums in RESERVOIR DOGS. They didn’t believe stealing was wrong; they just didn’t steal from one another for mutual benefit and mutual fear. They had no higher principle.

    In contrast, complex civilization needs people who really believe it is wrong to steal even if they could get away with it. So, what is right by civilization is the opposite of what is right by nature. So, in a way, civilization is a kind of necessary perversion of nature. Its morality is kind of ‘slave morality’. It chains the virile and vital animal in us. The fact that so many people love gangster movies, rappers, thug heroes, barbarian king stories, rough sports, and pirates of romance novels goes to show that, on some level, they all feel stifled by civilization’s morality that forbade freedom to our nature. Something in us wants to root for Randall McMurphy who just goes for whatever he wants.

    Still, the reason why civilization had to suppress what is right by nature was obvious: if natural forces were allowed to run free, civilization fell apart, and all would be lost.

    At some point, however, Western mankind discovered that excessive suppression of nature actually held back civilizational progress. It prevented people from being adventurous and take risks. It also led to stagnant corruption whereupon those with the power cynically invoked morality and honor to suppress any voices as vices when, in fact, those voices needed to be heard and offered necessary criticism and possibilities.
    The West came upon a compromise whereby natural energies would be released on condition that they be sublimated toward higher goals, enterprises, and expressions. So, something like the Renaissance and later Enlightenment happened. There was more freedom for individuals, but the expressions and endeavors had to reach high, seek deeper meaning, serve the glory of God, expand the power of the domain by new discoveries in science or new voyages for land and resources. Homo artists could be creative, but they had to serve God or higher beauty than fantasize about massive orgies with leather dildos up their ass. If Robert Mapplethorpe had lived during the Renaissance, maybe he would have been Caravaggio.
    Still, the tension between civilization and nature was not an easy one.

    But then, after WWII, there was prolonged time of peace and prosperity with vast advances in technology, medicine, and everything else. For one thing, civilizations no longer needed to fear being overrun by barbarians. In the past, even the greatest civilizations could be conquered by barbarians such as Huns, Mongols, Vikings, Germanic barbarians, Berbers, and etc. But there was no such danger in modern times.
    Or vast numbers of people could be wiped out plagues and epidemics. Modern societies lost all such fears. Modern society could only be conquered by other modern societies.

    Also, with new means of transportation and boom in housing, so many people could own homes and live safely. Also, technology rid society of the negative consequences of wild natural behavior. Prior to such technology, wild natural behavior was checked either by social sanctions/punishment or by nature’s revenge. If a woman fooled around, she would get pregnant and would have to take care of the kid. And the guy who got the girl pregnant might be forced into shotgun marriage. Also, there were sexual diseases for those who fooled around recklessly. So many died of syphilis.
    But modern society came up with all sorts of medicines and means to prevent pregnancy and disease even when people acted wildly natural like animals. Now, people could have sex like super-rabbits and never get pregnant or die of disease.

    Also, vast expansion of material goods and opportunities meant that everyone had a second chance. When educational material had been scarce, many couldn’t go to college. So, when someone had a chance to go to school, he had to make sure to do it right cuz there might not be a second chance. His wilder nature told him to bum off, party, skip studies, and take it easy. But that would mean failure and no second chance. But with vast expanse of educational opportunities, one could mess up totally in high school but then be given another chance in community colleges.

    In the past, will to work mattered a lot. It determined whether one lived or died. If one didn’t work on the farm and didn’t produce enough food, it could mean a lean winter and starvation. So, even though the human nature wanted to slack off, take it easy(like the grasshopper vs the ant), and goof off, one had to follow what was right by civilization that what was right by nature since work culture is key to civilization. An animal that lives by what is right by nature is content to just take from other animals. In contrast, the human organism must do what is right by civilization and work to produce enough food for the long term even if he would prefer to take it easy.

    But mass food production by modern agriculture and market economics produced more food than could be consumed by Americans. Food became cheap, even for the poor. And the government provided free food to tens of millions of folks. That meant one could live like grasshoppers or wild apes and still have enough to eat, even to the point of having pot bellies and fat asses.

    In the past, violating the rules of civilization by doing what is right by nature meant the fall of civilization and the return of barbarism, even the reversion to savagery.

    But modern world made it possible to indulge in wild natural pleasures and still maintain civilization. Also, civilization created medicine and other means to reverse the negative effects of wild natural behavior. Also, indulgence in wild pleasures could boost economic production since vice industries could offer all sorts of pleasures in food, sex, entertainment, thrills, drugs, and etc.

    If a woman acted like a whore in the past, she might die of disease or end up pregnant and have to be a mother. Today, a modern woman can have sex with 100s of men a year and not be pregnant or die of disease. She could have antibiotics for VD. She could use the pill to prevent pregnancy. And even if she gets pregnant, she could use abortion to kill the kid.

    And no matter how lazy and worthless you are, you don’t have to worry about starving in the US or EU. Indeed, the state will provide you with free housing, clothes, food, and etc even if you choose to be a wild crazy lunatic.

    Since everyone loves pleasure and since everyone can have pleasure without the dire consequences of the fall of civilization, we’ve undergone a new revolution in morality.

    Going from nature to civilization meant reversing what is right by nature into what is right by civilization. Mankind gained from civilization but has to sacrifice much of what was natural. Life in civilization became more secure but less fun. More ant-like but less grasshopper-like.

    But in with the rise of plenty and security in the late modern era, mankind can indulge in lots of pleasure. They can be ‘natural’ once again but without the ‘revenge of nature’.
    One could fuc* like rabbits without breeding like rabbits. One could live like a grasshopper without freezing like a grasshopper.

    So, traditional morality and traditional normality are seen as suspect. They are seen as antiquated systems of behavior that are no longer relevant in the Age of Leisure.
    Indeed, the main reason for why people work so hard is for more leisure, not to raise a family. And since people are so addicted to fun, they don’t want to say NO to anyone’s else’s fun, no matter how ridiculous it may be. So, if it’s fun for homos to celebrate homo-ness and get ‘married’, who is to say NO to such fun?

    Steven Pinker seems to believe that traditional morality, though once useful in the transition from nature to civilization, now stands in the way of the New Way where we can have a balance of Social Order(according to science and technology) and Pleasure(that give full release to all our natural fetishes and drives).

    But is this ‘return to nature’ a return to real nature? Doesn’t real nature have consequences? That is how nature balances itself. It’s like there is hubris and nemesis. It’s like what Merlin says. Everything has its opposites.

    But we now pretend that we can do whatever, and there won’t be a reckoning since we are protected from it by all these safety nets. We feel that we can indulge in natural pleasures without worry since our science/technology will do the balancing act.
    So, we can hump like animals and have fun but be spared from dire effects by pills, gadgets, and procedures.

    The current economic theory offers the same assurances. After the Great Depression, the government supposedly placed a bunch of safety nets and cushions so that something like that can’t happen ever again. In 2008, this was tested with the biggest financial earthquake since 1929. We were told the system weathered the stress and survived. The system can save whatever is Too Big to Fail. We need not worry. So, whatever crisis results from the Return of Nature — greed, lust, hedonism, gluttony, megalomania, etc — , we need not worry because the System is powerful and secure enough to weather and correct any problem and restore the balance and ‘make american great again’. After all, even the HIV horror was contained in the long run with new drugs, and there is now even talk of a total cure for HIV.. which means homos can return to mass-ass-humping and need not worry since science will find a fix for whatever problem that comes along.

    So, on the one hand, the more science and technology advances, the more we become like animals. Gross and indulgent in our appetites for pleasure. It’s a strange paradox. With better science and technology, we can totally indulge in animal pleasures — like in BRAVE NEW WORLD and SLEEPER — without fear of the breakdown of the system… like what happened to decadent Rome that crumbled and reverted to barbarianism.
    The more we advance scientifically, the more apelike we become. It’s fitting that Michio Kaku talks of time travel but also of the value of rap, an apelike music. It is fitting that the most educated Liberal elites are into cuck culture of having their women do apelike Negroes. Intellectual obsessed with being ‘more evolved’ but having their women have sex with the less evolved. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY GOT IT WRONG. The Star Child should be the Star Ape.

    Indeed, consider the rising swinger culture. There was a time when such would have led to all sorts of diseases and unwanted pregnancies. But now, there is no such anxiety. Also, these people have come up with sophisticated systems of screening to ensure that they can enjoy the animal pleasure without sacrificing their bourgeois comfort. It’s all been professionalized and systemized.

    But can this really go on? Will the system finally break? I think it will. Such decadence and indulgence means the West lost the moral resolve to say NO. Even though the West cannot be invaded by barbarians on horseback as in ancient and medieval times, the West has lost the moral compass and resolve to realize what is most central to its existence and survival. So, even though it has the material and military means to defend itself from invaders, it lacks moral courage since its concept of ‘western values’ has been corrupted by globalism. EU cannot stop the Soft Invasion of ‘refugees’ who tug at Western heartstrings. ‘Western Values’ are now all about hedonism + virtue-signaling; and Western people, whose only meaning comes from shallow pleasures, feel that they have NO RIGHT to say NO to newcomers who also want to share in the Pleasures. A decadent people who have it so easy lack the resolve to say NO to anyone else. And people who had it easy and inherited this ease don’t really feel they own it; they lack the hunger. It’s like those who worked to make their fortune cling to what they got, but those who grew up rich don’t value the real worth of what they have. They take it for granted and even feel ‘guilty’ that they got it so easy.

    The young people who grew up in the West after WWII inherited a lot of good times from their parents, and they take it for granted. They don’t see the true value of it since they didn’t have to struggle for it. Since they were guaranteed everything by parents or society, they think this is a universal right that cannot be denied to anyone. They don’t see the good things in their nation as the product of their ancestors’ struggle.
    Also, they were raised with PC as replacement for Christianity, and PC teaches them that it’s great to indulge in Negro culture and since Negroes are so cool, they must allow tons of African Negroes into their nations.

    And then, over time, the system will fall as Europe is turned Afrope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    It went from RIGHT BY NATURE to RIGHT BY CULTURE(or CIVILIZATION) to RIGHT BY PLEASURE(or LEISURE).
    , @utu
    I liked it. Could you elaborate about the western methods? What methods were lacking in Byzantium?
    , @Che Guava
    Hello Priss.

    You make many good points in that rant, to many of which I'd like to reply, but will keep it brief.

    This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don’t go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night.
     
    That was the custom, in the run-up to the bubble economy, for over ten years after the bubble burst, and in a restrained way (the company pays for a couple of hours to say thanks on occasion) it continues at times, but is increasingly rare.

    Sure, some sectors (some finance, some real estate?, politicians for sure) retain the custom, but it is rare now.

    More to the point, there was a govt. ruling that married women had an automatic right to their husbands' pensions, the result was a huge spike in divorce from sixty-something men, I knew several who were affected, some clearly arseholes, many clearly not.

    Could say much more on that, let alone some of your other points, but will leave it there for now.

    Why don't you contact the site and restore an old user name and keep it fixed, or ask to use a new one?

    It is a little sad to see you always having to post as Anon or Anonymous now.
  40. @Anonymouse
    I knew Amiri when he was Leroy Jones. And I knew his first wife Hetty Cohen (slightly). And I knew (slightly) Diane di Prima who had one of his children. Diane di Prima had lots of kids from different interesting guys. It was an interesting scene. Met Jones through Gil Sorrentino who published a poetry magazine. Leroy had a big apt in Chelsea and gave superior parties. Leroy was hanging around Diane so Hetty got it on with an Asian guy. Really pissed Leroy off.

    Until he went mad and Muslim, Leroy was an interesting poet and playwright. I remember seeing his Toilet, which worked well dramatically even though being quite minimal.

    My last contact with him was writing him from Austin Texas asking for a list of jazz L.P. recommendations. He sent me back the jazz section from a Goody's catalog with his selections checked. Gil Sorrentino's ex-wife was working at a record store and scored me about 20 albums at $1 a disk. Elsene was the bookkeeper for a boss who was cheating on his taxes. So they worked out a quid pro quo so she could sell albums for a buck. These were mostly Ornette Coleman albums. Really helped with my jazz music education.

    All of these people are dead except for Diane di Prima. Sic transit cursus temporum <-I just made that up

    Thank you, that was interesting. I had noticed Diane di Prima’s assortment of children on her Wiki page.

    Hettie (Cohen) Jones is still alive. She had a book published this year. I didn’t realize that the Kellie Jones who won a 2016 MacArthur genius grant was her daughter.

    http://www.lennyletter.com/culture/interviews/a560/an-afternoon-with-hettie-jones/

    Read More
  41. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anon
    That the family is the core purpose of human life can be understood by physical and emotional facts.

    Why does anyone exist at all? Because someone had a job? Because someone read a book? Because someone played with a machine?

    No, it is because he or she has a father and mother.
    Now, a human life can be created by just any man and any woman having sex. The father can abandon the kid, and the mother can choose to be a 'single mother'. Or she can just put the kid up for adoption. But, this is terrible. This is why we need sexual morality, and why having children must be associated with values and meaning and commitment.

    Anyway, every human life exists only because he or she has a father and mother. That is the central physical fact of life. If you are against the family, then you can only be against your own existence. And it makes no sense to be pro-sex and anti-family since you're saying that fathers and mothers have no special responsibility to take care of their own kids. That is bad for everyone. Bad for the moral health of the parents, bad for the child's future, and bad for society that must carry the financial burden and bear the social costs. Only sex within family culture will ensure that father and mother will form a bond to be responsible for the very life they create.

    So, if one cherishes one's own existence, one has to be for Family Culture.

    But aside from the physical fact, there is the emotional fact.

    If you were to ask your father about what is most important in his life, his answer has to be his wife and kids. I mean what else would a decent man say? That his car matters more to him? Or his stereo? Or his TV set? Or his computer? Or his movie collection? Or his book collection? Or his tool set? Or his boat? Or his snow mobile? His gun collection? Now, all those things are nice to have, but any man who cherishes such stuff over his wife and kids would be an idiot or sociopath. Even a nice big house comes nowhere near wife and kids. I mean if a man had to save his wife & kids or his house, what would he choose? Sacrifice his family for some material possession? Only a sociopath would do that.
    A man can lose a car and get a new car. A man can lose a house and get a new house. But his wife and kids are irreplaceable.
    Unfortunately, there are sociopathic or shallow men who will sacrifice the well-being of their wife and kids for material goods or their insipid jollies. Some will even kill near ones for material gain. They are despicable.

    Anyway, a true man would say his wife(and his kids) are the most important 'things' in his life. It can't be anything else. Even if he has a great job, his wife and kids come first. There is something wrong with a man who abandons or even destroys his wife and kids because his job is more important to him. It's no big deal to move from job to job, but it's not okay to move from family to family. A man like Trump can afford to do so and provide for everyone, but such would be recipe for social hell for everyone else.

    Granted, divorces do happen, and man and woman can come to hate one another. But a man should always feel great bond and responsibility for his own kids. Fathers who lack this quality are scum.
    It's like the story told by Gerald Ford. He tracked down his father, and the man pulled out $20 bucks, handed it to his son, and walked away.
    There was a time when such behavior on the part of the father would have been seen as low. No longer. After all, such 'judgmentalism' would condemn too many Negro men who never stick around. Also, a lot of white men and Hispanic men act the same. Also, with single motherhood being the New Norm, it is deemed perfectly okay for the guy to just walk away and let the woman be a 'single mother' like Murphy Brown. And he is to be lauded if he did a lesbian a favor by getting her pregnant so that she could either raise the kid single or with 'two mommies'.

    But in a sane and moral world, a man and a woman should look for love and find someone they can settle down with. And a man should regard his wife more highly than anything else, and the woman should feel the same way about the man. And what they do in life should be considered in terms of "How is it good for the family?"
    As long as they are together, even if they lose everything(in a fire or earthquake) they can struggle together to make it again. And from such a bond comes the ideal environment for the kids, even in hard times. Even if the family loses everything, if the man and woman stick together and take care of the kid, the kid will grow up with proper values which are priceless.

    Our individualist-libertine values turned family itself into a place of competition where the man sees the woman as rival than partner. Instead of working together for the good of the family, the man thinks only in terms of my 'career'. This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don't go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night. The fathers hardly talk with their wives and hardly know the kids who only know school work and shallow pop culture. No wonder Japan is turning into shi*. Fathers are really married to the corporation, and the kids are really raised by TV and education system geared to turn them into test-takers.

    In the West, it's all about career, career, and career. And a lot of people think this is cool because the kind of jobs we see in movies tend to be privileged, special, and exciting. The fantasy of everyone having some super-cool job filled with interesting stuff. In fact, most jobs are drudgery, and this goes for white collar jobs too. Drone stuff, stuck-at-office stuff, paper-shuffling stuff, and etc. Any person who lives only for this 'career' is an idiot. Most jobs in manufacturing are drudgery. Most jobs in service are routine and dull. And most white collar jobs are few notches above clerk duty. So, where does the meaning of life come from? Family: spouse and kids. And family is important because culture, heritage, and identity can be passed through them. Imagine you're Jewish and you wanna pass down your Jewish identity and heritage to your kids. You better create a family setting because if you just hump some single ho and refuse to play the role of father and hardly see your kids, they are gonna grow up into Pop Culture junkie morons.

    Also, family culture makes people aware of the fact that they are born, grow up, grow older, and die. Life has beginning, growth, middle, decline, and death. No one can escape this. And being part of a family makes one realize this through grandparents and relatives. But our individualist-consumer culture fixes our eyes and ears on the illusory fountain-of-youth of pop culture that doles out fantasy of everlasting fun. Even as people grow older, they still listen to pop music catered to teens. And they watch movies and read books meant for kids. Consider all the adults hooked on Harry Potter. And those silly comic book movies. And celebrity culture always produces a new batch of young nubile whores and dumb studs. And TV shows even women reaching middle age doing little else but acting 'young' and jumping in and out of bed as sluts and skanks. It creates the false illusion that life is all about 'staying young forever' than accepting maturity and aging and passing down the torch to your children. Many men and women don't even have kids since they were too invested in fun. Or too invested in looking for fantasy ideal lover who is rare or doesn't exist. And even those who did have kids never grew up. Fathers abandoned the kids, and women are single-mothers without culture who expose their kids to pop culture that urges them to get ugly tattoos and piercings.

    I mean WHAT KIND OF PARENTS raised kids like these?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3996676/Clubbers-feared-trapped-California-warehouse-party-blaze-breaks-out.html

    One thing for sure, decent and supportive parenting isn't enough. Consider the Braddocks and Robinsons in THE GRADUATE. Braddocks raised Ben properly enough, sending him to good schools and all. And Robinsons seemed to have done okay with Elaine too.
    But even if Ben and Elaine are materially well off and well-educated, they have no center, no core value, because the ONLY CULTURE they know is genteel suburban materialism. There is no sense of ethnos, heritage, or culture.
    It is different with Michael Corleone who grew up under Vito Corleone who is about the family, culture, and values, even though he was exiled from Sicily at a young age.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fF7Hh8jQftw

    Material well-being is nice, but it offers no meaning in and of itself. It is like living in Ikea or Costco. I'm all for having nice material goods, but meaning comes from something else, but it seems so many Americans have lost that. And so have Europeans. No wonder they have no sense of anything. Even their notion of 'western values' is totally nuts. Apparently, 'western values' are all about allowing western races to be flooded by non-western-races in the hope that the newcomers will take to these 'values', such as 'gay marriage', rap music, and defining as one of 50 genders.

    If anything, the notion of 'western values' is dubious. After all, if 'western values' made the West such a success, why didn't it happen with Byzantium? It preserved Christendom. And it safeguarded classical culture when Rome fell in the West. So, if 'western values' are so great, why was the history of Byzantium one of decline, stasis, and collapse? And if 'western values' are so great, why did some western nations achieve so much more than other ones? After all, not every European nation achieved greatness. And which Western Values when we speak of 'western values'? Spain and Britain both had 'western values'. Why did Spain keep slipping while Britain continue to rise? Christianity, Communism, Fascism, Capitalism, Anarchism, and etc are all 'western values'. 'Western values' comprise Medivalism, Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, Great Awakening, the European Left, the European Right, Socialism, individualism, collectivism, realism, utopianism, etc. There are too many western ways and ideas to sum up into a single set of 'western values'. One might say all those different schools of thought amount to pluralism as the key component of 'western values', but plenty of western societies through history had little use for pluralism and were very repressive. Also, pluralism isn't necessarily a key to success. Indian civilization was pluralist with the fusion of all kinds of traditions and customs, but it stopped advancing at some point.

    So, if we want to understand the power of the West, it makes more sense to speak of Western Methods than Western Values. Which methods that developed in certain parts of the West led to the advantages that led to great revolutions and domination of the world? Were these methods related to certain key values? Also worth asking is, why did Western nations that rose so high and so fast soon embark on a rapid course of suicide and self-immolation? Maybe there is a very dark side to this Western thing as well.

    Anyway, the dying West should shut up about its 'western values'. I mean why should the non-west adopt those 'values' that are leading to the destruction to the West? One thing for sure, the West didn't rise to its glory by following the 'western values' of the Current Year. On its rise to world dominance, the leading European nations had certain Methods of thinking, solving problems, organizing systems, incentivizing activities, and directing social forces. Those Methods are the key. And those Methods back then were not about celebrating homo decadence and welcoming masses of foreign invasion. If the non-west wants to learn the best of the West, learn the methods that were key during the West's rise to power, not the current 'values' that are leading the West to decadence and destruction.

    The current PC attacks the bad ole days, but the Methods of the bad ole days led to greatness and glory, whereas the Values of today are leading to degeneracy and demise. But we have idiots talking about 'western values' instead of 'western methods'. Methods are concrete. Values are gooey and mushy, ever so fluid and at the mercy of the latest trends in bogus 'social science'.
    Better to speak of Western Methods and, furthermore, Western Conditions. One of the conditions back then was all-white societies in Europe. Indeed, the great post-war boom after WWII happened when Europe was virtually all-white.
    But current PC makes us turn a blind eye to those Methods and Conditions and focuses on a wonky reinterpretation of 'western values', as if the glory of the West is due to worship of Diversity(when the West was saved by beating off Huns, Mongols, and Muslims) and homo decadence. In fact, despite the repressive aspects of Christianity, its one good impact on the West was its moral injunctions against excessive decadence and hedonism.

    People make jokes about FATHER KNOWS BEST and LEAVE IT TO BEAVER. Those are dismissed as relics of the bad ole 50s. So, what have we gotten in their stead? Father blows best? Father cucks best by having negro bull do mother? Father has best ass tattoo? Father let me get piercings all my face? Father listens to Miley Cyrus and watches Family Guy? Father took me to homo parade? Father says he wants to be a woman and wears a dress?

    Granted, the problem of FATHER KNOWS BEST and such shows was they had no sense of history and culture. They are all about nice pleasant life in the here and now as nuclear families keeping up with the Joneses. It is Braddock-ism of THE GRADUATE. And on that score, it was lacking in something essential. But what kind of alternatives do we have today? The bald headed loon on BREAKING BAD? The fat testicle-chinned blob of father FAMILY GUY? The degenerate on MARRIED WITH CHILDREN? We still so have clean-cut depictions of family life, but these are usually 'gay families' of the New Normal. Yeah, the only acceptable way to have a clean-cut traditional family is to have two 'daddies' bugger each other in the ass or two 'mommies' who stick cucumbers up each other poons.

    THE GODFATHER offered a meaningful vision of life because Vito Corleone had a sense of culture, family, and culture. Though not an educated man, he had good sense about his role as husband and father. And this is why Michael Corleone's life is meaningful in the way that so many lives are not meaningful in modern movies. Michael also gains a deep sense of where he came from. Even as he becomes American, he doesn't forget his roots.
    And DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. Even though Evgraf begins as a destructive radical, he comes to his senses somewhat and tries to reconnect his niece to the memory of his half-brother. He comes to realize the importance of family.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOpJKzIzUxw

    Family isn't everything, but it is the center from which all else begins to connect and matter. This is why 'gay marriage' is one of the most evil developments in the history of mankind. It turned family from a culturalization of nature into a lifestyle choice for decadents and deviants. It furthermore mocks the meaning of biology and morality with ludicrous notions of 'two daddies' and 'two mommies'. The people who did this deserve condemnation for all eternity. Their decadent and degenerate vileness is beyond forgiveness. That this has been normalized in US and EU means so much of Western Greatness is now associated and smeared with this decadent notion of 'western values' where the greatest good is worshiping a homo's penis inside the poopchute of another man. And we are supposed to honor this more if the penis happens to be black and the buttock white. Kong-dong-bung-ism is 'western values'.
    That so many Americans offered no resistance to this rot goes to show how totally venal the modern world has become... and what a sinister force globalism really is.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3k9KZOAmE

    Yet, in a twisted way, the recent development makes perverse sense because civilization was only possible by reversing the sense of rightness. The rise of decadence is a revenge of nature managed by technology to do least harm while doling out the pleasure.

    After all, what is right by civilization is the reversal of what is right by nature. By nature, it is right to steal. Animals take from one another all the time. There are no rules but 'gimme gimme'. If a bear can steal from another bear, it will. If wolves can steal from a bear, they will. If another pack of wolves can steal it, they will. And so on. And rape is right by nature. Horny males will hunt down and pork females. They feel heat and sexually conquer females. Or females in heat will beg for it. There's no morality. What is right by nature is what comes naturally by instincts and drives. It is a kind of primal Nietzcheanism where the stronger does as it wants without compunction or reservation or 'guilt'. Nature is about dominance. It is about satiating basic primal drives that lead to food and sex and continuation via offsprings.

    But in order to have civilization, all the things that were right by nature had to be reversed. So, taking stuff became 'stealing', a bad. So, humping out of heat became 'rape', a bad. So, killing for gain, so right in nature, became 'murder', a terrible thing.
    For civilization to work, humans had to be convinced that what is right by nature is wrong by culture. Of course, this didn't happen overnight. As humans evolved as social animals, they gradually developed the emotional qualities that became more receptive to notions of common good and proto-altruism than merely brazen self-interest. Indeed, these qualities can also be found in other social animals who sometimes suppress self-interest for team work and common good. Even so, animals have no moral code.
    In contrast, civilization codified laws and systems that emotionally convinced humans that it is WRONG to do and even feel certain things(or think certain ideas). The positive side of this was that it made for more stable and cooperative society. The negative side was that mankind has to suppress its natural instincts of virility and vitality. Even before the rise of Christianity, what Nietzsche condemned in Christian slave morality took place with civilization itself. Civilization cannot exist with everyone trying to be top dog. What is right by nature tells each human organism to do whatever to get 'what is mine'. To ensure that such doesn't happen, civilization must do something more than rule by fear to ensure people will behave. Such a civilization can only be like a prison full of criminals and killers who must be watched at all times. For civilization to work well, people must be convinced that it is WRONG to do certain things EVEN IF they could get away with it. And this was achieved not only by cultivation, education, and teaching of values but by eugenic processes. A civilization might harshly punish those who got out of line. The violators might be killed, exiled, or have their balls cut off. Over time, the wolfish types were weeded out more while the doggish types were spared to breed. So, humans, at least of some races, became more amenable to earnestly accepting civilizational ideals.
    This is why non-blacks take better to civilization than blacks do. Black hardly underwent this process since most of them evolved in non-civilization environments of chucking spears at hippos, running from hyenas, hollering at gorillas, and clubbing gophers for dinner. The wolfish blacks were not weeded out, so black genes tend to be wild. So, blacks are like natural-born-criminals. Even if you try to educate them and cultivate them, their inner souls feel like "gots to have me dat". There are few brakes in the Negro mind. Fewer inhibitions, few introspective faculties. Negro be looking at something and be feeling, "gots to have me". The wilder Negroes will just lunge for it cuz they got no patience. It's like Michael Brown had to have himself some cigar, shoo. He gonna grab himself some, sheeeeiiit. But some Negroes are more jazzy than rappy, and they, like Obama and other dudes, be looking for some slick genteel way to get what they want. But even they are all about 'gots to have me'. Jazziness is not about reflection and depth. It's about being slick and fast and tricky to get what one wants. It is gibbonic. If Michael Brown or Mike Tyson are gorillian and just grab stuff, the Obamas of the world be gibbonic and do all sorts of tricky acrobatics to get their banana. But what Michael Brown and Obama have in common is they both lack conscience, introspection, and genuine reflection. It's about 'gots to have me'. Michael Brown wanted cigars and even tried to grab the gun of an officer. Obama pulled the biggest negro con ever by going for president. Like the slickster in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION, he played white folks' psychology like a jazz keyboard. He knew what buttons to push. And he had great help from Jews who owned the media and most top institutions and eased the way for him as The One and the messiah for white prog folks who, being post-christian, wanted a new religion, and it was Obama as messenger of hope and faith and holy homo 'marriage'.

    Sadly, the chance of civilizing blacks is now impossible, and this goes for both US and EU. Even if whites had the moral advantage over blacks, it would be difficult to civilize blacks because blacks have yet to go through a weeding process that favors the doggish over the wolfish. Suppose for the next 500 yrs, we only allowed the mild Negroes to mate while forbidding wilder aggressives ones from mating. Over time, Negroes might become milder and kinder, more amenable to what is right by civilization. But blacks are still FOJ or Fresh Out of the Jungle. If anything, black evolution favored the wolfies over the doggies. Black women who best shook ass and tits were favored, and black guys who best danced, chucked spears, beat bongo drums, talked shi*, and slung their dongs were favored.

    Given this reality, it is difficult for whites to civilize blacks.
    Even so, if whites had moral advantage over blacks, the latter might make a bit more effort. Consider the past when whites did indeed have a moral advantage over blacks. Back then, white message to blacks were, "Look, imperialism and slavery weren't very nice on our part, but you blacks are jungle savages who were acting like naked apes in the dark continent forever. We took your black ass out of the wilderness and placed you in civilization. I know your ugabuga ways make you wanna holler and act crazy, BUT that is NOT Okay in our civilization of higher values and principles. Indeed, if we white folks acted like you Negroes, we wouldn't even have civilization. We'd be chucking spears at hippos in jungles too. So, make an effort not to act too apeish and wild and crazy."

    Now, a Negro hearing such talk might have been offended, but he would have also thought, "You know, dat white man be some punkass mofo, but maybe he right. After all, my ancestors in Africa run around naked, got no technology, be living next to monkeys and rhinos, and don't even have decent knife to cut watermelon with."
    So, at the very least, the Negro might feel that he has to be a credit to his race and prove his worth.

    Even with such pressure, it was difficult to civilize blacks because guys with the genetics of Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, and others are difficult to tame. All the more so since they are stronger than white man and can strike out and whup everybody. This is why so many teachers are scared half to death of black students.

    Anyway, if it was very difficult to civilize Negroes even when white man had the moral advantage over the Negro, imagine the difficulty of civilizing them when black folks have been handed the moral upperhand. Actually, blacks have been made holy via the MLK cult and Mandela myth. As such, secular whites and even Evangelical cucks look upon blacks as some holy race.

    This means it is now IMPOSSIBLE to solve the black problem that will just get worse and worse and worse. The race that is most problematic, difficult, aggressive, insane, pathological, murderous, rapacious, rape-driven, and vicious has been placed on the altar to sit judgement on everyone else by calling them 'racist' and 'white supremacist'.
    With whites stuck in the position of moral inferiority and weakness, it means they can never criticize black behavior no matter how bad it gets. And in 2015, it got totally rotten with BLM lunacy and even ghastly murders of cops. But MSM always justifies or excuses black foulness. And even Donald Trump never criticized black foulness. Hillary was egging them on. It is no wonder that some Democrats secretly think immigration is the only solution to the black problem. As much as they blather about holy blacks and MLK, their enthusiasm for Diversity via immigration --- mainly from Asia and Latin America --- seems to imply an unspoken policy of ANYONE BUT BLACK. But, unfortunately, a good number of immigrants also come from Africa that is exploding in population.

    Of course, EU may be messed up even more as black Africans can easily reach the EU where the policy is "we take in all negroes who make it to sea."
    EU also has instituted a policy of moral inferiority to blacks. For whatever reason --- imperialism, holocaust, racism, etc --- , white Europeans see themselves as moral inferiors to blacks and Muslims. So, whites have no right to judge those people or criticize them, and those who do will be dragged off to prison for 'hate speech'.

    These conditions will lead to major disaster. Tons of blacks entering is different from, say, tons of Asians entering. Too many Asians will also alter and destroy white Europe, but all Asians can easily be brought to civilized behavior since Asian genes evolved to be amenable to the civilizational process.
    In contrast, black genes are anti-civilizational since they evolved in jungles and steppes of Africa filled with angry elephants, lions, rhinos, buffalos, gorillas, and hippos who hate Negroes more than the most 'racist' redneck ever did.

    Too Many Asians will mean a different civilization in Europe. Too Many Africans will mean end of civilization.

    But what is EU doing? It is teaching white kids that Negroes are perfect angels, indeed the moral superiors of whites. White kids from a young age ware made to worship MLK, Mandela, and Obama. So, there is a quasi-spiritual worship of the craziest and most savage race on earth. But then, this savagery is also a turn-on. And this makes EU and US so schizo. On the one hand, the holy Negro is the higher spiritual figure, like those Morgan Freeman characters in Hollywood movies. But the Negro is also sought for his savage athleticism, wild colorfulness, the pounding round butt, and long dong.
    On the one hand, the Negro is the angel from whom whites needs to seek redemption. On the other hand, the Negro is the wild jungle liberator of white folks who'd been repressed by the tyranny of civilization. Negro is redeemer of soul and liberator of senses. The Negro has the mournful look and soulful bellowing voice about how he done have a dream, but he can also whup everyone, outrun everyone, dance faster, and hump longer. Don't progs see any contradiction in this? How can morally superior spiritual Negroes also be wild and crazy jungle Negroes of sports and rap? If Negroes are to be admired for their cool thuggery and jungle animal lust, just what is so high-and-mighty about Negro ethics and morality? It's all just a crazy prog fantasy.

    And we are seeing the result of this delusion in US and EU. Negroes are destroying more and more and more. And blacks in Africa keep breeding like rabbits, and more and more white wombs now produce black babies. This spells the doom of white civilization, but whites are brainwashed by PC and see themselves as moral inferiors of holy blacks when, in fact, blacks are the craziest bunch of natural lunatics the world has ever seen.

    White people think that because they had power over blacks and exploited them --- yes, whites did --- , that makes white evil and blacks noble.
    But there is problem in the logic. Suppose there is a decent Amish community. Its folks are mostly nice. Suppose there is a wild bandit tribe that goes around robbing and raising hell. Suppose this wild bandit tribe raids other wild bandit tribes and carries off prisoners to be sold as slaves.
    Now, it's obvious that the Amish are saner and better than the wild bandit folks.
    But suppose Amish come upon lots of land and need manpower. They get a bit greedy and decide to buy slaves from the wild bandit tribe. So, the wild bandit tribe offers to sell as slaves their captives who themselves are members of other wild bandit tribes. These slaves, being of bandit lineage, are naturally wild.
    Anyway, the Amish buy and use these wild bandit folks as slaves. Since the slaves have wild nature, the Amish must be tough with them and even whip em once awhile. Unless a clear message is sent to these wild fellers, they get out of hand and act nuts.

    Suppose Amish eventually figure that slavery is wrong and emancipate the wild bandit folks. And the Amish try to civilize them. But the Amish discover it is difficult since the wild bandit folks are naturally predisposed to holler too much like Toshiro Mifune in SEVEN SAMURAI.
    Still, the Amish try and get some results because the Moral Narrative favors the Amish. While the narrative addresses the wrongness of slavery, it say the wild bandit folks are of barbarian origin and need to be strictly controlled because, otherwise, they will start acting crazy. The narrative favors the Amish as the civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks.
    Also, suppose wild bandit folks are stronger than Amish, therefore dangerous.

    But suppose time passes, and Jews enter the Amish world and take over the narrative and change it. Jews say there are no racial differences between Amish and wild bandit folks. In other words, the Amish notion that wild bandit folks need to be supervised and elevated is just a 'racist' lie devised to maintain Amish supremacism over wild bandit folks who are racially no different from the Amish. So, the Amish must not only feel bad about slavery but about the whole notion of how the wild bandit folks need to make greater effort at civilization since they are more predisposed to be wild and crazy. According to the new narrative, the Amish were NEVER civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks but mere exploiters, oppressors, and haters.
    So, the wild bandit folks gain the moral advantage. They feel they have nothing to learn from Amish anymore. Since they are morally so high and mighty whereas Amish are guilty of everything, they blame Amish for all their problems. And since their natural predisposition is to be savage, wild, and crazy, they have no means of self-criticism or introspection to realize that maybe the Amish aren't all bad and they themselves are all good. And since they are stronger than the Amish, they begin to whup Amish butt all over the place. That, as we know, would be the beginning of the end.
    Isn't that like the problem that White America has with blacks?

    Thankfully, the black population of the US is less than 15%, but even that is high enough to cause so many problems all over. And with more coming from Africa, there's bound to be more troubles down the line, especially as all Negroes are told in the US that they are moral superiors, whereas whites, as moral inferiors, have no right to judge blacks over anything.
    As for all the black Africans moving to Europe where the young generation worship Mandela and Bob Marley and Seal and Kanye West and Lumumba and Long Dong Silver, how will that turn out? It's gonna be hellish downfall. The Muslim problem in Europe is child's play compared to the true hell that will come with the massive arrivals of black Africans who are FOJ or Fresh out of the Jungle.

    Anyway, if civilization was made possible by reversing what is right by nature, post-civilization now operates by reversing what is right by civilization, at least in some areas.

    Civilization had to decree as wrong what is right by nature. In nature, taking is right. All animals will take from other animals. There are no rules. The only 'right' in nature is what comes naturally. So, if a big bear can take a kill from a cougar, it will. And there is nothing the cougar can do about it.
    While civilization also had wars and pillaging, and etc, especially against enemies, those within the same civilization had to play the same rules. A kind of honor-among-thieves. Otherwise, civilization couldn't develop and progress.
    In time, honor-among-thieves wasn't enough for complex civilization. Such system was, after all, just a mutual pact among thieves committed to stealing... like the hoodlums in RESERVOIR DOGS. They didn't believe stealing was wrong; they just didn't steal from one another for mutual benefit and mutual fear. They had no higher principle.

    In contrast, complex civilization needs people who really believe it is wrong to steal even if they could get away with it. So, what is right by civilization is the opposite of what is right by nature. So, in a way, civilization is a kind of necessary perversion of nature. Its morality is kind of 'slave morality'. It chains the virile and vital animal in us. The fact that so many people love gangster movies, rappers, thug heroes, barbarian king stories, rough sports, and pirates of romance novels goes to show that, on some level, they all feel stifled by civilization's morality that forbade freedom to our nature. Something in us wants to root for Randall McMurphy who just goes for whatever he wants.

    Still, the reason why civilization had to suppress what is right by nature was obvious: if natural forces were allowed to run free, civilization fell apart, and all would be lost.

    At some point, however, Western mankind discovered that excessive suppression of nature actually held back civilizational progress. It prevented people from being adventurous and take risks. It also led to stagnant corruption whereupon those with the power cynically invoked morality and honor to suppress any voices as vices when, in fact, those voices needed to be heard and offered necessary criticism and possibilities.
    The West came upon a compromise whereby natural energies would be released on condition that they be sublimated toward higher goals, enterprises, and expressions. So, something like the Renaissance and later Enlightenment happened. There was more freedom for individuals, but the expressions and endeavors had to reach high, seek deeper meaning, serve the glory of God, expand the power of the domain by new discoveries in science or new voyages for land and resources. Homo artists could be creative, but they had to serve God or higher beauty than fantasize about massive orgies with leather dildos up their ass. If Robert Mapplethorpe had lived during the Renaissance, maybe he would have been Caravaggio.
    Still, the tension between civilization and nature was not an easy one.

    But then, after WWII, there was prolonged time of peace and prosperity with vast advances in technology, medicine, and everything else. For one thing, civilizations no longer needed to fear being overrun by barbarians. In the past, even the greatest civilizations could be conquered by barbarians such as Huns, Mongols, Vikings, Germanic barbarians, Berbers, and etc. But there was no such danger in modern times.
    Or vast numbers of people could be wiped out plagues and epidemics. Modern societies lost all such fears. Modern society could only be conquered by other modern societies.

    Also, with new means of transportation and boom in housing, so many people could own homes and live safely. Also, technology rid society of the negative consequences of wild natural behavior. Prior to such technology, wild natural behavior was checked either by social sanctions/punishment or by nature's revenge. If a woman fooled around, she would get pregnant and would have to take care of the kid. And the guy who got the girl pregnant might be forced into shotgun marriage. Also, there were sexual diseases for those who fooled around recklessly. So many died of syphilis.
    But modern society came up with all sorts of medicines and means to prevent pregnancy and disease even when people acted wildly natural like animals. Now, people could have sex like super-rabbits and never get pregnant or die of disease.

    Also, vast expansion of material goods and opportunities meant that everyone had a second chance. When educational material had been scarce, many couldn't go to college. So, when someone had a chance to go to school, he had to make sure to do it right cuz there might not be a second chance. His wilder nature told him to bum off, party, skip studies, and take it easy. But that would mean failure and no second chance. But with vast expanse of educational opportunities, one could mess up totally in high school but then be given another chance in community colleges.

    In the past, will to work mattered a lot. It determined whether one lived or died. If one didn't work on the farm and didn't produce enough food, it could mean a lean winter and starvation. So, even though the human nature wanted to slack off, take it easy(like the grasshopper vs the ant), and goof off, one had to follow what was right by civilization that what was right by nature since work culture is key to civilization. An animal that lives by what is right by nature is content to just take from other animals. In contrast, the human organism must do what is right by civilization and work to produce enough food for the long term even if he would prefer to take it easy.

    But mass food production by modern agriculture and market economics produced more food than could be consumed by Americans. Food became cheap, even for the poor. And the government provided free food to tens of millions of folks. That meant one could live like grasshoppers or wild apes and still have enough to eat, even to the point of having pot bellies and fat asses.

    In the past, violating the rules of civilization by doing what is right by nature meant the fall of civilization and the return of barbarism, even the reversion to savagery.

    But modern world made it possible to indulge in wild natural pleasures and still maintain civilization. Also, civilization created medicine and other means to reverse the negative effects of wild natural behavior. Also, indulgence in wild pleasures could boost economic production since vice industries could offer all sorts of pleasures in food, sex, entertainment, thrills, drugs, and etc.

    If a woman acted like a whore in the past, she might die of disease or end up pregnant and have to be a mother. Today, a modern woman can have sex with 100s of men a year and not be pregnant or die of disease. She could have antibiotics for VD. She could use the pill to prevent pregnancy. And even if she gets pregnant, she could use abortion to kill the kid.

    And no matter how lazy and worthless you are, you don't have to worry about starving in the US or EU. Indeed, the state will provide you with free housing, clothes, food, and etc even if you choose to be a wild crazy lunatic.

    Since everyone loves pleasure and since everyone can have pleasure without the dire consequences of the fall of civilization, we've undergone a new revolution in morality.

    Going from nature to civilization meant reversing what is right by nature into what is right by civilization. Mankind gained from civilization but has to sacrifice much of what was natural. Life in civilization became more secure but less fun. More ant-like but less grasshopper-like.

    But in with the rise of plenty and security in the late modern era, mankind can indulge in lots of pleasure. They can be 'natural' once again but without the 'revenge of nature'.
    One could fuc* like rabbits without breeding like rabbits. One could live like a grasshopper without freezing like a grasshopper.

    So, traditional morality and traditional normality are seen as suspect. They are seen as antiquated systems of behavior that are no longer relevant in the Age of Leisure.
    Indeed, the main reason for why people work so hard is for more leisure, not to raise a family. And since people are so addicted to fun, they don't want to say NO to anyone's else's fun, no matter how ridiculous it may be. So, if it's fun for homos to celebrate homo-ness and get 'married', who is to say NO to such fun?

    Steven Pinker seems to believe that traditional morality, though once useful in the transition from nature to civilization, now stands in the way of the New Way where we can have a balance of Social Order(according to science and technology) and Pleasure(that give full release to all our natural fetishes and drives).

    But is this 'return to nature' a return to real nature? Doesn't real nature have consequences? That is how nature balances itself. It's like there is hubris and nemesis. It's like what Merlin says. Everything has its opposites.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jahLEB3DbKs

    But we now pretend that we can do whatever, and there won't be a reckoning since we are protected from it by all these safety nets. We feel that we can indulge in natural pleasures without worry since our science/technology will do the balancing act.
    So, we can hump like animals and have fun but be spared from dire effects by pills, gadgets, and procedures.

    The current economic theory offers the same assurances. After the Great Depression, the government supposedly placed a bunch of safety nets and cushions so that something like that can't happen ever again. In 2008, this was tested with the biggest financial earthquake since 1929. We were told the system weathered the stress and survived. The system can save whatever is Too Big to Fail. We need not worry. So, whatever crisis results from the Return of Nature --- greed, lust, hedonism, gluttony, megalomania, etc --- , we need not worry because the System is powerful and secure enough to weather and correct any problem and restore the balance and 'make american great again'. After all, even the HIV horror was contained in the long run with new drugs, and there is now even talk of a total cure for HIV.. which means homos can return to mass-ass-humping and need not worry since science will find a fix for whatever problem that comes along.

    So, on the one hand, the more science and technology advances, the more we become like animals. Gross and indulgent in our appetites for pleasure. It's a strange paradox. With better science and technology, we can totally indulge in animal pleasures --- like in BRAVE NEW WORLD and SLEEPER --- without fear of the breakdown of the system... like what happened to decadent Rome that crumbled and reverted to barbarianism.
    The more we advance scientifically, the more apelike we become. It's fitting that Michio Kaku talks of time travel but also of the value of rap, an apelike music. It is fitting that the most educated Liberal elites are into cuck culture of having their women do apelike Negroes. Intellectual obsessed with being 'more evolved' but having their women have sex with the less evolved. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY GOT IT WRONG. The Star Child should be the Star Ape.

    Indeed, consider the rising swinger culture. There was a time when such would have led to all sorts of diseases and unwanted pregnancies. But now, there is no such anxiety. Also, these people have come up with sophisticated systems of screening to ensure that they can enjoy the animal pleasure without sacrificing their bourgeois comfort. It's all been professionalized and systemized.

    But can this really go on? Will the system finally break? I think it will. Such decadence and indulgence means the West lost the moral resolve to say NO. Even though the West cannot be invaded by barbarians on horseback as in ancient and medieval times, the West has lost the moral compass and resolve to realize what is most central to its existence and survival. So, even though it has the material and military means to defend itself from invaders, it lacks moral courage since its concept of 'western values' has been corrupted by globalism. EU cannot stop the Soft Invasion of 'refugees' who tug at Western heartstrings. 'Western Values' are now all about hedonism + virtue-signaling; and Western people, whose only meaning comes from shallow pleasures, feel that they have NO RIGHT to say NO to newcomers who also want to share in the Pleasures. A decadent people who have it so easy lack the resolve to say NO to anyone else. And people who had it easy and inherited this ease don't really feel they own it; they lack the hunger. It's like those who worked to make their fortune cling to what they got, but those who grew up rich don't value the real worth of what they have. They take it for granted and even feel 'guilty' that they got it so easy.

    The young people who grew up in the West after WWII inherited a lot of good times from their parents, and they take it for granted. They don't see the true value of it since they didn't have to struggle for it. Since they were guaranteed everything by parents or society, they think this is a universal right that cannot be denied to anyone. They don't see the good things in their nation as the product of their ancestors' struggle.
    Also, they were raised with PC as replacement for Christianity, and PC teaches them that it's great to indulge in Negro culture and since Negroes are so cool, they must allow tons of African Negroes into their nations.

    And then, over time, the system will fall as Europe is turned Afrope.

    It went from RIGHT BY NATURE to RIGHT BY CULTURE(or CIVILIZATION) to RIGHT BY PLEASURE(or LEISURE).

    Read More
  42. @Che Guava
    Cletus,

    What happened to you at work?

    Sorry to hear of the results.

    Thanks Che.

    “What happened to you at work?”

    It’s a very long story, but the bottom line is toxic encephalopathy from chemical injuries. Gross OSHA violations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Cletus,

    I only understand the 'encephalos', and '... pathy' elements, the combination seems very wide. Words you are posting are lucid. I will also take you at your word, that the harm is real.

    ... but encephalopathy is a vague term.

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn't think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical, it will return to me by tomorrow evening.

    Irony, it was supposed to be a model safe workplace in those ways.

    Spare a thought for most of the homeless discarded older men of Japan.

    They used to have tent villages in many parks, also well organised, crime-free, and clean, by their own will.

    Just about none of those tent villages remain.

    Now, just about all are staying in hotels, paid for by the govt., partly organised by the Yakuza, to work on the cleanup of fallout from the Fukushima number 1 plant, and, at worst, actually work in the vicinity. Nobody can go into the containment vessels of the two worst-affected now, perhaps for a few seconds with a lead suit.

    A little drunk and going off on tangents, sorry to hear of your experience, as I say, you are lucid, more than many other posters here.

    OTOH, my other comments above are not without general relevance.

    Viva Cletus!



      
  43. @Anon
    That the family is the core purpose of human life can be understood by physical and emotional facts.

    Why does anyone exist at all? Because someone had a job? Because someone read a book? Because someone played with a machine?

    No, it is because he or she has a father and mother.
    Now, a human life can be created by just any man and any woman having sex. The father can abandon the kid, and the mother can choose to be a 'single mother'. Or she can just put the kid up for adoption. But, this is terrible. This is why we need sexual morality, and why having children must be associated with values and meaning and commitment.

    Anyway, every human life exists only because he or she has a father and mother. That is the central physical fact of life. If you are against the family, then you can only be against your own existence. And it makes no sense to be pro-sex and anti-family since you're saying that fathers and mothers have no special responsibility to take care of their own kids. That is bad for everyone. Bad for the moral health of the parents, bad for the child's future, and bad for society that must carry the financial burden and bear the social costs. Only sex within family culture will ensure that father and mother will form a bond to be responsible for the very life they create.

    So, if one cherishes one's own existence, one has to be for Family Culture.

    But aside from the physical fact, there is the emotional fact.

    If you were to ask your father about what is most important in his life, his answer has to be his wife and kids. I mean what else would a decent man say? That his car matters more to him? Or his stereo? Or his TV set? Or his computer? Or his movie collection? Or his book collection? Or his tool set? Or his boat? Or his snow mobile? His gun collection? Now, all those things are nice to have, but any man who cherishes such stuff over his wife and kids would be an idiot or sociopath. Even a nice big house comes nowhere near wife and kids. I mean if a man had to save his wife & kids or his house, what would he choose? Sacrifice his family for some material possession? Only a sociopath would do that.
    A man can lose a car and get a new car. A man can lose a house and get a new house. But his wife and kids are irreplaceable.
    Unfortunately, there are sociopathic or shallow men who will sacrifice the well-being of their wife and kids for material goods or their insipid jollies. Some will even kill near ones for material gain. They are despicable.

    Anyway, a true man would say his wife(and his kids) are the most important 'things' in his life. It can't be anything else. Even if he has a great job, his wife and kids come first. There is something wrong with a man who abandons or even destroys his wife and kids because his job is more important to him. It's no big deal to move from job to job, but it's not okay to move from family to family. A man like Trump can afford to do so and provide for everyone, but such would be recipe for social hell for everyone else.

    Granted, divorces do happen, and man and woman can come to hate one another. But a man should always feel great bond and responsibility for his own kids. Fathers who lack this quality are scum.
    It's like the story told by Gerald Ford. He tracked down his father, and the man pulled out $20 bucks, handed it to his son, and walked away.
    There was a time when such behavior on the part of the father would have been seen as low. No longer. After all, such 'judgmentalism' would condemn too many Negro men who never stick around. Also, a lot of white men and Hispanic men act the same. Also, with single motherhood being the New Norm, it is deemed perfectly okay for the guy to just walk away and let the woman be a 'single mother' like Murphy Brown. And he is to be lauded if he did a lesbian a favor by getting her pregnant so that she could either raise the kid single or with 'two mommies'.

    But in a sane and moral world, a man and a woman should look for love and find someone they can settle down with. And a man should regard his wife more highly than anything else, and the woman should feel the same way about the man. And what they do in life should be considered in terms of "How is it good for the family?"
    As long as they are together, even if they lose everything(in a fire or earthquake) they can struggle together to make it again. And from such a bond comes the ideal environment for the kids, even in hard times. Even if the family loses everything, if the man and woman stick together and take care of the kid, the kid will grow up with proper values which are priceless.

    Our individualist-libertine values turned family itself into a place of competition where the man sees the woman as rival than partner. Instead of working together for the good of the family, the man thinks only in terms of my 'career'. This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don't go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night. The fathers hardly talk with their wives and hardly know the kids who only know school work and shallow pop culture. No wonder Japan is turning into shi*. Fathers are really married to the corporation, and the kids are really raised by TV and education system geared to turn them into test-takers.

    In the West, it's all about career, career, and career. And a lot of people think this is cool because the kind of jobs we see in movies tend to be privileged, special, and exciting. The fantasy of everyone having some super-cool job filled with interesting stuff. In fact, most jobs are drudgery, and this goes for white collar jobs too. Drone stuff, stuck-at-office stuff, paper-shuffling stuff, and etc. Any person who lives only for this 'career' is an idiot. Most jobs in manufacturing are drudgery. Most jobs in service are routine and dull. And most white collar jobs are few notches above clerk duty. So, where does the meaning of life come from? Family: spouse and kids. And family is important because culture, heritage, and identity can be passed through them. Imagine you're Jewish and you wanna pass down your Jewish identity and heritage to your kids. You better create a family setting because if you just hump some single ho and refuse to play the role of father and hardly see your kids, they are gonna grow up into Pop Culture junkie morons.

    Also, family culture makes people aware of the fact that they are born, grow up, grow older, and die. Life has beginning, growth, middle, decline, and death. No one can escape this. And being part of a family makes one realize this through grandparents and relatives. But our individualist-consumer culture fixes our eyes and ears on the illusory fountain-of-youth of pop culture that doles out fantasy of everlasting fun. Even as people grow older, they still listen to pop music catered to teens. And they watch movies and read books meant for kids. Consider all the adults hooked on Harry Potter. And those silly comic book movies. And celebrity culture always produces a new batch of young nubile whores and dumb studs. And TV shows even women reaching middle age doing little else but acting 'young' and jumping in and out of bed as sluts and skanks. It creates the false illusion that life is all about 'staying young forever' than accepting maturity and aging and passing down the torch to your children. Many men and women don't even have kids since they were too invested in fun. Or too invested in looking for fantasy ideal lover who is rare or doesn't exist. And even those who did have kids never grew up. Fathers abandoned the kids, and women are single-mothers without culture who expose their kids to pop culture that urges them to get ugly tattoos and piercings.

    I mean WHAT KIND OF PARENTS raised kids like these?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3996676/Clubbers-feared-trapped-California-warehouse-party-blaze-breaks-out.html

    One thing for sure, decent and supportive parenting isn't enough. Consider the Braddocks and Robinsons in THE GRADUATE. Braddocks raised Ben properly enough, sending him to good schools and all. And Robinsons seemed to have done okay with Elaine too.
    But even if Ben and Elaine are materially well off and well-educated, they have no center, no core value, because the ONLY CULTURE they know is genteel suburban materialism. There is no sense of ethnos, heritage, or culture.
    It is different with Michael Corleone who grew up under Vito Corleone who is about the family, culture, and values, even though he was exiled from Sicily at a young age.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fF7Hh8jQftw

    Material well-being is nice, but it offers no meaning in and of itself. It is like living in Ikea or Costco. I'm all for having nice material goods, but meaning comes from something else, but it seems so many Americans have lost that. And so have Europeans. No wonder they have no sense of anything. Even their notion of 'western values' is totally nuts. Apparently, 'western values' are all about allowing western races to be flooded by non-western-races in the hope that the newcomers will take to these 'values', such as 'gay marriage', rap music, and defining as one of 50 genders.

    If anything, the notion of 'western values' is dubious. After all, if 'western values' made the West such a success, why didn't it happen with Byzantium? It preserved Christendom. And it safeguarded classical culture when Rome fell in the West. So, if 'western values' are so great, why was the history of Byzantium one of decline, stasis, and collapse? And if 'western values' are so great, why did some western nations achieve so much more than other ones? After all, not every European nation achieved greatness. And which Western Values when we speak of 'western values'? Spain and Britain both had 'western values'. Why did Spain keep slipping while Britain continue to rise? Christianity, Communism, Fascism, Capitalism, Anarchism, and etc are all 'western values'. 'Western values' comprise Medivalism, Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, Great Awakening, the European Left, the European Right, Socialism, individualism, collectivism, realism, utopianism, etc. There are too many western ways and ideas to sum up into a single set of 'western values'. One might say all those different schools of thought amount to pluralism as the key component of 'western values', but plenty of western societies through history had little use for pluralism and were very repressive. Also, pluralism isn't necessarily a key to success. Indian civilization was pluralist with the fusion of all kinds of traditions and customs, but it stopped advancing at some point.

    So, if we want to understand the power of the West, it makes more sense to speak of Western Methods than Western Values. Which methods that developed in certain parts of the West led to the advantages that led to great revolutions and domination of the world? Were these methods related to certain key values? Also worth asking is, why did Western nations that rose so high and so fast soon embark on a rapid course of suicide and self-immolation? Maybe there is a very dark side to this Western thing as well.

    Anyway, the dying West should shut up about its 'western values'. I mean why should the non-west adopt those 'values' that are leading to the destruction to the West? One thing for sure, the West didn't rise to its glory by following the 'western values' of the Current Year. On its rise to world dominance, the leading European nations had certain Methods of thinking, solving problems, organizing systems, incentivizing activities, and directing social forces. Those Methods are the key. And those Methods back then were not about celebrating homo decadence and welcoming masses of foreign invasion. If the non-west wants to learn the best of the West, learn the methods that were key during the West's rise to power, not the current 'values' that are leading the West to decadence and destruction.

    The current PC attacks the bad ole days, but the Methods of the bad ole days led to greatness and glory, whereas the Values of today are leading to degeneracy and demise. But we have idiots talking about 'western values' instead of 'western methods'. Methods are concrete. Values are gooey and mushy, ever so fluid and at the mercy of the latest trends in bogus 'social science'.
    Better to speak of Western Methods and, furthermore, Western Conditions. One of the conditions back then was all-white societies in Europe. Indeed, the great post-war boom after WWII happened when Europe was virtually all-white.
    But current PC makes us turn a blind eye to those Methods and Conditions and focuses on a wonky reinterpretation of 'western values', as if the glory of the West is due to worship of Diversity(when the West was saved by beating off Huns, Mongols, and Muslims) and homo decadence. In fact, despite the repressive aspects of Christianity, its one good impact on the West was its moral injunctions against excessive decadence and hedonism.

    People make jokes about FATHER KNOWS BEST and LEAVE IT TO BEAVER. Those are dismissed as relics of the bad ole 50s. So, what have we gotten in their stead? Father blows best? Father cucks best by having negro bull do mother? Father has best ass tattoo? Father let me get piercings all my face? Father listens to Miley Cyrus and watches Family Guy? Father took me to homo parade? Father says he wants to be a woman and wears a dress?

    Granted, the problem of FATHER KNOWS BEST and such shows was they had no sense of history and culture. They are all about nice pleasant life in the here and now as nuclear families keeping up with the Joneses. It is Braddock-ism of THE GRADUATE. And on that score, it was lacking in something essential. But what kind of alternatives do we have today? The bald headed loon on BREAKING BAD? The fat testicle-chinned blob of father FAMILY GUY? The degenerate on MARRIED WITH CHILDREN? We still so have clean-cut depictions of family life, but these are usually 'gay families' of the New Normal. Yeah, the only acceptable way to have a clean-cut traditional family is to have two 'daddies' bugger each other in the ass or two 'mommies' who stick cucumbers up each other poons.

    THE GODFATHER offered a meaningful vision of life because Vito Corleone had a sense of culture, family, and culture. Though not an educated man, he had good sense about his role as husband and father. And this is why Michael Corleone's life is meaningful in the way that so many lives are not meaningful in modern movies. Michael also gains a deep sense of where he came from. Even as he becomes American, he doesn't forget his roots.
    And DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. Even though Evgraf begins as a destructive radical, he comes to his senses somewhat and tries to reconnect his niece to the memory of his half-brother. He comes to realize the importance of family.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOpJKzIzUxw

    Family isn't everything, but it is the center from which all else begins to connect and matter. This is why 'gay marriage' is one of the most evil developments in the history of mankind. It turned family from a culturalization of nature into a lifestyle choice for decadents and deviants. It furthermore mocks the meaning of biology and morality with ludicrous notions of 'two daddies' and 'two mommies'. The people who did this deserve condemnation for all eternity. Their decadent and degenerate vileness is beyond forgiveness. That this has been normalized in US and EU means so much of Western Greatness is now associated and smeared with this decadent notion of 'western values' where the greatest good is worshiping a homo's penis inside the poopchute of another man. And we are supposed to honor this more if the penis happens to be black and the buttock white. Kong-dong-bung-ism is 'western values'.
    That so many Americans offered no resistance to this rot goes to show how totally venal the modern world has become... and what a sinister force globalism really is.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3k9KZOAmE

    Yet, in a twisted way, the recent development makes perverse sense because civilization was only possible by reversing the sense of rightness. The rise of decadence is a revenge of nature managed by technology to do least harm while doling out the pleasure.

    After all, what is right by civilization is the reversal of what is right by nature. By nature, it is right to steal. Animals take from one another all the time. There are no rules but 'gimme gimme'. If a bear can steal from another bear, it will. If wolves can steal from a bear, they will. If another pack of wolves can steal it, they will. And so on. And rape is right by nature. Horny males will hunt down and pork females. They feel heat and sexually conquer females. Or females in heat will beg for it. There's no morality. What is right by nature is what comes naturally by instincts and drives. It is a kind of primal Nietzcheanism where the stronger does as it wants without compunction or reservation or 'guilt'. Nature is about dominance. It is about satiating basic primal drives that lead to food and sex and continuation via offsprings.

    But in order to have civilization, all the things that were right by nature had to be reversed. So, taking stuff became 'stealing', a bad. So, humping out of heat became 'rape', a bad. So, killing for gain, so right in nature, became 'murder', a terrible thing.
    For civilization to work, humans had to be convinced that what is right by nature is wrong by culture. Of course, this didn't happen overnight. As humans evolved as social animals, they gradually developed the emotional qualities that became more receptive to notions of common good and proto-altruism than merely brazen self-interest. Indeed, these qualities can also be found in other social animals who sometimes suppress self-interest for team work and common good. Even so, animals have no moral code.
    In contrast, civilization codified laws and systems that emotionally convinced humans that it is WRONG to do and even feel certain things(or think certain ideas). The positive side of this was that it made for more stable and cooperative society. The negative side was that mankind has to suppress its natural instincts of virility and vitality. Even before the rise of Christianity, what Nietzsche condemned in Christian slave morality took place with civilization itself. Civilization cannot exist with everyone trying to be top dog. What is right by nature tells each human organism to do whatever to get 'what is mine'. To ensure that such doesn't happen, civilization must do something more than rule by fear to ensure people will behave. Such a civilization can only be like a prison full of criminals and killers who must be watched at all times. For civilization to work well, people must be convinced that it is WRONG to do certain things EVEN IF they could get away with it. And this was achieved not only by cultivation, education, and teaching of values but by eugenic processes. A civilization might harshly punish those who got out of line. The violators might be killed, exiled, or have their balls cut off. Over time, the wolfish types were weeded out more while the doggish types were spared to breed. So, humans, at least of some races, became more amenable to earnestly accepting civilizational ideals.
    This is why non-blacks take better to civilization than blacks do. Black hardly underwent this process since most of them evolved in non-civilization environments of chucking spears at hippos, running from hyenas, hollering at gorillas, and clubbing gophers for dinner. The wolfish blacks were not weeded out, so black genes tend to be wild. So, blacks are like natural-born-criminals. Even if you try to educate them and cultivate them, their inner souls feel like "gots to have me dat". There are few brakes in the Negro mind. Fewer inhibitions, few introspective faculties. Negro be looking at something and be feeling, "gots to have me". The wilder Negroes will just lunge for it cuz they got no patience. It's like Michael Brown had to have himself some cigar, shoo. He gonna grab himself some, sheeeeiiit. But some Negroes are more jazzy than rappy, and they, like Obama and other dudes, be looking for some slick genteel way to get what they want. But even they are all about 'gots to have me'. Jazziness is not about reflection and depth. It's about being slick and fast and tricky to get what one wants. It is gibbonic. If Michael Brown or Mike Tyson are gorillian and just grab stuff, the Obamas of the world be gibbonic and do all sorts of tricky acrobatics to get their banana. But what Michael Brown and Obama have in common is they both lack conscience, introspection, and genuine reflection. It's about 'gots to have me'. Michael Brown wanted cigars and even tried to grab the gun of an officer. Obama pulled the biggest negro con ever by going for president. Like the slickster in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION, he played white folks' psychology like a jazz keyboard. He knew what buttons to push. And he had great help from Jews who owned the media and most top institutions and eased the way for him as The One and the messiah for white prog folks who, being post-christian, wanted a new religion, and it was Obama as messenger of hope and faith and holy homo 'marriage'.

    Sadly, the chance of civilizing blacks is now impossible, and this goes for both US and EU. Even if whites had the moral advantage over blacks, it would be difficult to civilize blacks because blacks have yet to go through a weeding process that favors the doggish over the wolfish. Suppose for the next 500 yrs, we only allowed the mild Negroes to mate while forbidding wilder aggressives ones from mating. Over time, Negroes might become milder and kinder, more amenable to what is right by civilization. But blacks are still FOJ or Fresh Out of the Jungle. If anything, black evolution favored the wolfies over the doggies. Black women who best shook ass and tits were favored, and black guys who best danced, chucked spears, beat bongo drums, talked shi*, and slung their dongs were favored.

    Given this reality, it is difficult for whites to civilize blacks.
    Even so, if whites had moral advantage over blacks, the latter might make a bit more effort. Consider the past when whites did indeed have a moral advantage over blacks. Back then, white message to blacks were, "Look, imperialism and slavery weren't very nice on our part, but you blacks are jungle savages who were acting like naked apes in the dark continent forever. We took your black ass out of the wilderness and placed you in civilization. I know your ugabuga ways make you wanna holler and act crazy, BUT that is NOT Okay in our civilization of higher values and principles. Indeed, if we white folks acted like you Negroes, we wouldn't even have civilization. We'd be chucking spears at hippos in jungles too. So, make an effort not to act too apeish and wild and crazy."

    Now, a Negro hearing such talk might have been offended, but he would have also thought, "You know, dat white man be some punkass mofo, but maybe he right. After all, my ancestors in Africa run around naked, got no technology, be living next to monkeys and rhinos, and don't even have decent knife to cut watermelon with."
    So, at the very least, the Negro might feel that he has to be a credit to his race and prove his worth.

    Even with such pressure, it was difficult to civilize blacks because guys with the genetics of Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, and others are difficult to tame. All the more so since they are stronger than white man and can strike out and whup everybody. This is why so many teachers are scared half to death of black students.

    Anyway, if it was very difficult to civilize Negroes even when white man had the moral advantage over the Negro, imagine the difficulty of civilizing them when black folks have been handed the moral upperhand. Actually, blacks have been made holy via the MLK cult and Mandela myth. As such, secular whites and even Evangelical cucks look upon blacks as some holy race.

    This means it is now IMPOSSIBLE to solve the black problem that will just get worse and worse and worse. The race that is most problematic, difficult, aggressive, insane, pathological, murderous, rapacious, rape-driven, and vicious has been placed on the altar to sit judgement on everyone else by calling them 'racist' and 'white supremacist'.
    With whites stuck in the position of moral inferiority and weakness, it means they can never criticize black behavior no matter how bad it gets. And in 2015, it got totally rotten with BLM lunacy and even ghastly murders of cops. But MSM always justifies or excuses black foulness. And even Donald Trump never criticized black foulness. Hillary was egging them on. It is no wonder that some Democrats secretly think immigration is the only solution to the black problem. As much as they blather about holy blacks and MLK, their enthusiasm for Diversity via immigration --- mainly from Asia and Latin America --- seems to imply an unspoken policy of ANYONE BUT BLACK. But, unfortunately, a good number of immigrants also come from Africa that is exploding in population.

    Of course, EU may be messed up even more as black Africans can easily reach the EU where the policy is "we take in all negroes who make it to sea."
    EU also has instituted a policy of moral inferiority to blacks. For whatever reason --- imperialism, holocaust, racism, etc --- , white Europeans see themselves as moral inferiors to blacks and Muslims. So, whites have no right to judge those people or criticize them, and those who do will be dragged off to prison for 'hate speech'.

    These conditions will lead to major disaster. Tons of blacks entering is different from, say, tons of Asians entering. Too many Asians will also alter and destroy white Europe, but all Asians can easily be brought to civilized behavior since Asian genes evolved to be amenable to the civilizational process.
    In contrast, black genes are anti-civilizational since they evolved in jungles and steppes of Africa filled with angry elephants, lions, rhinos, buffalos, gorillas, and hippos who hate Negroes more than the most 'racist' redneck ever did.

    Too Many Asians will mean a different civilization in Europe. Too Many Africans will mean end of civilization.

    But what is EU doing? It is teaching white kids that Negroes are perfect angels, indeed the moral superiors of whites. White kids from a young age ware made to worship MLK, Mandela, and Obama. So, there is a quasi-spiritual worship of the craziest and most savage race on earth. But then, this savagery is also a turn-on. And this makes EU and US so schizo. On the one hand, the holy Negro is the higher spiritual figure, like those Morgan Freeman characters in Hollywood movies. But the Negro is also sought for his savage athleticism, wild colorfulness, the pounding round butt, and long dong.
    On the one hand, the Negro is the angel from whom whites needs to seek redemption. On the other hand, the Negro is the wild jungle liberator of white folks who'd been repressed by the tyranny of civilization. Negro is redeemer of soul and liberator of senses. The Negro has the mournful look and soulful bellowing voice about how he done have a dream, but he can also whup everyone, outrun everyone, dance faster, and hump longer. Don't progs see any contradiction in this? How can morally superior spiritual Negroes also be wild and crazy jungle Negroes of sports and rap? If Negroes are to be admired for their cool thuggery and jungle animal lust, just what is so high-and-mighty about Negro ethics and morality? It's all just a crazy prog fantasy.

    And we are seeing the result of this delusion in US and EU. Negroes are destroying more and more and more. And blacks in Africa keep breeding like rabbits, and more and more white wombs now produce black babies. This spells the doom of white civilization, but whites are brainwashed by PC and see themselves as moral inferiors of holy blacks when, in fact, blacks are the craziest bunch of natural lunatics the world has ever seen.

    White people think that because they had power over blacks and exploited them --- yes, whites did --- , that makes white evil and blacks noble.
    But there is problem in the logic. Suppose there is a decent Amish community. Its folks are mostly nice. Suppose there is a wild bandit tribe that goes around robbing and raising hell. Suppose this wild bandit tribe raids other wild bandit tribes and carries off prisoners to be sold as slaves.
    Now, it's obvious that the Amish are saner and better than the wild bandit folks.
    But suppose Amish come upon lots of land and need manpower. They get a bit greedy and decide to buy slaves from the wild bandit tribe. So, the wild bandit tribe offers to sell as slaves their captives who themselves are members of other wild bandit tribes. These slaves, being of bandit lineage, are naturally wild.
    Anyway, the Amish buy and use these wild bandit folks as slaves. Since the slaves have wild nature, the Amish must be tough with them and even whip em once awhile. Unless a clear message is sent to these wild fellers, they get out of hand and act nuts.

    Suppose Amish eventually figure that slavery is wrong and emancipate the wild bandit folks. And the Amish try to civilize them. But the Amish discover it is difficult since the wild bandit folks are naturally predisposed to holler too much like Toshiro Mifune in SEVEN SAMURAI.
    Still, the Amish try and get some results because the Moral Narrative favors the Amish. While the narrative addresses the wrongness of slavery, it say the wild bandit folks are of barbarian origin and need to be strictly controlled because, otherwise, they will start acting crazy. The narrative favors the Amish as the civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks.
    Also, suppose wild bandit folks are stronger than Amish, therefore dangerous.

    But suppose time passes, and Jews enter the Amish world and take over the narrative and change it. Jews say there are no racial differences between Amish and wild bandit folks. In other words, the Amish notion that wild bandit folks need to be supervised and elevated is just a 'racist' lie devised to maintain Amish supremacism over wild bandit folks who are racially no different from the Amish. So, the Amish must not only feel bad about slavery but about the whole notion of how the wild bandit folks need to make greater effort at civilization since they are more predisposed to be wild and crazy. According to the new narrative, the Amish were NEVER civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks but mere exploiters, oppressors, and haters.
    So, the wild bandit folks gain the moral advantage. They feel they have nothing to learn from Amish anymore. Since they are morally so high and mighty whereas Amish are guilty of everything, they blame Amish for all their problems. And since their natural predisposition is to be savage, wild, and crazy, they have no means of self-criticism or introspection to realize that maybe the Amish aren't all bad and they themselves are all good. And since they are stronger than the Amish, they begin to whup Amish butt all over the place. That, as we know, would be the beginning of the end.
    Isn't that like the problem that White America has with blacks?

    Thankfully, the black population of the US is less than 15%, but even that is high enough to cause so many problems all over. And with more coming from Africa, there's bound to be more troubles down the line, especially as all Negroes are told in the US that they are moral superiors, whereas whites, as moral inferiors, have no right to judge blacks over anything.
    As for all the black Africans moving to Europe where the young generation worship Mandela and Bob Marley and Seal and Kanye West and Lumumba and Long Dong Silver, how will that turn out? It's gonna be hellish downfall. The Muslim problem in Europe is child's play compared to the true hell that will come with the massive arrivals of black Africans who are FOJ or Fresh out of the Jungle.

    Anyway, if civilization was made possible by reversing what is right by nature, post-civilization now operates by reversing what is right by civilization, at least in some areas.

    Civilization had to decree as wrong what is right by nature. In nature, taking is right. All animals will take from other animals. There are no rules. The only 'right' in nature is what comes naturally. So, if a big bear can take a kill from a cougar, it will. And there is nothing the cougar can do about it.
    While civilization also had wars and pillaging, and etc, especially against enemies, those within the same civilization had to play the same rules. A kind of honor-among-thieves. Otherwise, civilization couldn't develop and progress.
    In time, honor-among-thieves wasn't enough for complex civilization. Such system was, after all, just a mutual pact among thieves committed to stealing... like the hoodlums in RESERVOIR DOGS. They didn't believe stealing was wrong; they just didn't steal from one another for mutual benefit and mutual fear. They had no higher principle.

    In contrast, complex civilization needs people who really believe it is wrong to steal even if they could get away with it. So, what is right by civilization is the opposite of what is right by nature. So, in a way, civilization is a kind of necessary perversion of nature. Its morality is kind of 'slave morality'. It chains the virile and vital animal in us. The fact that so many people love gangster movies, rappers, thug heroes, barbarian king stories, rough sports, and pirates of romance novels goes to show that, on some level, they all feel stifled by civilization's morality that forbade freedom to our nature. Something in us wants to root for Randall McMurphy who just goes for whatever he wants.

    Still, the reason why civilization had to suppress what is right by nature was obvious: if natural forces were allowed to run free, civilization fell apart, and all would be lost.

    At some point, however, Western mankind discovered that excessive suppression of nature actually held back civilizational progress. It prevented people from being adventurous and take risks. It also led to stagnant corruption whereupon those with the power cynically invoked morality and honor to suppress any voices as vices when, in fact, those voices needed to be heard and offered necessary criticism and possibilities.
    The West came upon a compromise whereby natural energies would be released on condition that they be sublimated toward higher goals, enterprises, and expressions. So, something like the Renaissance and later Enlightenment happened. There was more freedom for individuals, but the expressions and endeavors had to reach high, seek deeper meaning, serve the glory of God, expand the power of the domain by new discoveries in science or new voyages for land and resources. Homo artists could be creative, but they had to serve God or higher beauty than fantasize about massive orgies with leather dildos up their ass. If Robert Mapplethorpe had lived during the Renaissance, maybe he would have been Caravaggio.
    Still, the tension between civilization and nature was not an easy one.

    But then, after WWII, there was prolonged time of peace and prosperity with vast advances in technology, medicine, and everything else. For one thing, civilizations no longer needed to fear being overrun by barbarians. In the past, even the greatest civilizations could be conquered by barbarians such as Huns, Mongols, Vikings, Germanic barbarians, Berbers, and etc. But there was no such danger in modern times.
    Or vast numbers of people could be wiped out plagues and epidemics. Modern societies lost all such fears. Modern society could only be conquered by other modern societies.

    Also, with new means of transportation and boom in housing, so many people could own homes and live safely. Also, technology rid society of the negative consequences of wild natural behavior. Prior to such technology, wild natural behavior was checked either by social sanctions/punishment or by nature's revenge. If a woman fooled around, she would get pregnant and would have to take care of the kid. And the guy who got the girl pregnant might be forced into shotgun marriage. Also, there were sexual diseases for those who fooled around recklessly. So many died of syphilis.
    But modern society came up with all sorts of medicines and means to prevent pregnancy and disease even when people acted wildly natural like animals. Now, people could have sex like super-rabbits and never get pregnant or die of disease.

    Also, vast expansion of material goods and opportunities meant that everyone had a second chance. When educational material had been scarce, many couldn't go to college. So, when someone had a chance to go to school, he had to make sure to do it right cuz there might not be a second chance. His wilder nature told him to bum off, party, skip studies, and take it easy. But that would mean failure and no second chance. But with vast expanse of educational opportunities, one could mess up totally in high school but then be given another chance in community colleges.

    In the past, will to work mattered a lot. It determined whether one lived or died. If one didn't work on the farm and didn't produce enough food, it could mean a lean winter and starvation. So, even though the human nature wanted to slack off, take it easy(like the grasshopper vs the ant), and goof off, one had to follow what was right by civilization that what was right by nature since work culture is key to civilization. An animal that lives by what is right by nature is content to just take from other animals. In contrast, the human organism must do what is right by civilization and work to produce enough food for the long term even if he would prefer to take it easy.

    But mass food production by modern agriculture and market economics produced more food than could be consumed by Americans. Food became cheap, even for the poor. And the government provided free food to tens of millions of folks. That meant one could live like grasshoppers or wild apes and still have enough to eat, even to the point of having pot bellies and fat asses.

    In the past, violating the rules of civilization by doing what is right by nature meant the fall of civilization and the return of barbarism, even the reversion to savagery.

    But modern world made it possible to indulge in wild natural pleasures and still maintain civilization. Also, civilization created medicine and other means to reverse the negative effects of wild natural behavior. Also, indulgence in wild pleasures could boost economic production since vice industries could offer all sorts of pleasures in food, sex, entertainment, thrills, drugs, and etc.

    If a woman acted like a whore in the past, she might die of disease or end up pregnant and have to be a mother. Today, a modern woman can have sex with 100s of men a year and not be pregnant or die of disease. She could have antibiotics for VD. She could use the pill to prevent pregnancy. And even if she gets pregnant, she could use abortion to kill the kid.

    And no matter how lazy and worthless you are, you don't have to worry about starving in the US or EU. Indeed, the state will provide you with free housing, clothes, food, and etc even if you choose to be a wild crazy lunatic.

    Since everyone loves pleasure and since everyone can have pleasure without the dire consequences of the fall of civilization, we've undergone a new revolution in morality.

    Going from nature to civilization meant reversing what is right by nature into what is right by civilization. Mankind gained from civilization but has to sacrifice much of what was natural. Life in civilization became more secure but less fun. More ant-like but less grasshopper-like.

    But in with the rise of plenty and security in the late modern era, mankind can indulge in lots of pleasure. They can be 'natural' once again but without the 'revenge of nature'.
    One could fuc* like rabbits without breeding like rabbits. One could live like a grasshopper without freezing like a grasshopper.

    So, traditional morality and traditional normality are seen as suspect. They are seen as antiquated systems of behavior that are no longer relevant in the Age of Leisure.
    Indeed, the main reason for why people work so hard is for more leisure, not to raise a family. And since people are so addicted to fun, they don't want to say NO to anyone's else's fun, no matter how ridiculous it may be. So, if it's fun for homos to celebrate homo-ness and get 'married', who is to say NO to such fun?

    Steven Pinker seems to believe that traditional morality, though once useful in the transition from nature to civilization, now stands in the way of the New Way where we can have a balance of Social Order(according to science and technology) and Pleasure(that give full release to all our natural fetishes and drives).

    But is this 'return to nature' a return to real nature? Doesn't real nature have consequences? That is how nature balances itself. It's like there is hubris and nemesis. It's like what Merlin says. Everything has its opposites.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jahLEB3DbKs

    But we now pretend that we can do whatever, and there won't be a reckoning since we are protected from it by all these safety nets. We feel that we can indulge in natural pleasures without worry since our science/technology will do the balancing act.
    So, we can hump like animals and have fun but be spared from dire effects by pills, gadgets, and procedures.

    The current economic theory offers the same assurances. After the Great Depression, the government supposedly placed a bunch of safety nets and cushions so that something like that can't happen ever again. In 2008, this was tested with the biggest financial earthquake since 1929. We were told the system weathered the stress and survived. The system can save whatever is Too Big to Fail. We need not worry. So, whatever crisis results from the Return of Nature --- greed, lust, hedonism, gluttony, megalomania, etc --- , we need not worry because the System is powerful and secure enough to weather and correct any problem and restore the balance and 'make american great again'. After all, even the HIV horror was contained in the long run with new drugs, and there is now even talk of a total cure for HIV.. which means homos can return to mass-ass-humping and need not worry since science will find a fix for whatever problem that comes along.

    So, on the one hand, the more science and technology advances, the more we become like animals. Gross and indulgent in our appetites for pleasure. It's a strange paradox. With better science and technology, we can totally indulge in animal pleasures --- like in BRAVE NEW WORLD and SLEEPER --- without fear of the breakdown of the system... like what happened to decadent Rome that crumbled and reverted to barbarianism.
    The more we advance scientifically, the more apelike we become. It's fitting that Michio Kaku talks of time travel but also of the value of rap, an apelike music. It is fitting that the most educated Liberal elites are into cuck culture of having their women do apelike Negroes. Intellectual obsessed with being 'more evolved' but having their women have sex with the less evolved. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY GOT IT WRONG. The Star Child should be the Star Ape.

    Indeed, consider the rising swinger culture. There was a time when such would have led to all sorts of diseases and unwanted pregnancies. But now, there is no such anxiety. Also, these people have come up with sophisticated systems of screening to ensure that they can enjoy the animal pleasure without sacrificing their bourgeois comfort. It's all been professionalized and systemized.

    But can this really go on? Will the system finally break? I think it will. Such decadence and indulgence means the West lost the moral resolve to say NO. Even though the West cannot be invaded by barbarians on horseback as in ancient and medieval times, the West has lost the moral compass and resolve to realize what is most central to its existence and survival. So, even though it has the material and military means to defend itself from invaders, it lacks moral courage since its concept of 'western values' has been corrupted by globalism. EU cannot stop the Soft Invasion of 'refugees' who tug at Western heartstrings. 'Western Values' are now all about hedonism + virtue-signaling; and Western people, whose only meaning comes from shallow pleasures, feel that they have NO RIGHT to say NO to newcomers who also want to share in the Pleasures. A decadent people who have it so easy lack the resolve to say NO to anyone else. And people who had it easy and inherited this ease don't really feel they own it; they lack the hunger. It's like those who worked to make their fortune cling to what they got, but those who grew up rich don't value the real worth of what they have. They take it for granted and even feel 'guilty' that they got it so easy.

    The young people who grew up in the West after WWII inherited a lot of good times from their parents, and they take it for granted. They don't see the true value of it since they didn't have to struggle for it. Since they were guaranteed everything by parents or society, they think this is a universal right that cannot be denied to anyone. They don't see the good things in their nation as the product of their ancestors' struggle.
    Also, they were raised with PC as replacement for Christianity, and PC teaches them that it's great to indulge in Negro culture and since Negroes are so cool, they must allow tons of African Negroes into their nations.

    And then, over time, the system will fall as Europe is turned Afrope.

    I liked it. Could you elaborate about the western methods? What methods were lacking in Byzantium?

    Read More
  44. @Linh Dinh
    Jocular barroom braggadocio. He said he used to have a 12-incher.

    Jocular barroom braggadocio.

    Standard jocular barroom braggadocio.

    Part of the charm of these stories, at least for me, is that they remind me of my roots. When reading them I can pretty much see, hear and smell the situation. Unless a person was “there,” he’d probably fail to notice that a lot of what goes on in these places is intended as humor, and everyone knows not to take it too seriously if seriously at all.

    People like Marty often exaggerate for humorous effect. It is often so exaggerated that only the most gullible even think of taking it at face value, and if someone does, it tickles the author of the hoax quite well. I know this partly because I was raised around people like that, am guilty of it myself and get a sprightly, impish delight out of “pulling the chain” of those who take themselves much too seriously.

    Although I quickly learned that in a professional sphere I had to unlearn that sort of self expression, I now live in a neighborhood full of uber-pretentious white collars and they are an endless source of humor for me especially since few even have a clue though they’re for the most part convinced they have the answer to everything. And I was taught that concrete ideation was a characteristic of the insane.

    On second thought, maybe it is…

    Read More
  45. @CK
    Medically recorded average 5.75"
    Medically recorded largest erect 13.5"
    As Bessie Smith once said, "It ain't the meat, it's the motion."
    However given our druthers, most would prefer to drive a Peterbilt than
    being stuck with a VW bug.

    However given our druthers, most would prefer to drive a Peterbilt than
    being stuck with a VW bug.

    Not I; while VW bugs are too small, Petes are too slow to get going.

    A moderate size hot rod, built for performance, is where it’s at! ;)

    Read More
    • Agree: Che Guava
    • Replies: @CK
    While it is indeed true that the Peterbilt will not win the 1/4 mile; it will still be going strong
    20 hours later without having to stop for refueling or a lube job.
  46. @Cletus Rothschild
    Thanks Che.

    "What happened to you at work?"

    It's a very long story, but the bottom line is toxic encephalopathy from chemical injuries. Gross OSHA violations.

    Cletus,

    I only understand the ‘encephalos’, and ‘… pathy’ elements, the combination seems very wide. Words you are posting are lucid. I will also take you at your word, that the harm is real.

    … but encephalopathy is a vague term.

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn’t think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical, it will return to me by tomorrow evening.

    Irony, it was supposed to be a model safe workplace in those ways.

    Spare a thought for most of the homeless discarded older men of Japan.

    They used to have tent villages in many parks, also well organised, crime-free, and clean, by their own will.

    Just about none of those tent villages remain.

    Now, just about all are staying in hotels, paid for by the govt., partly organised by the Yakuza, to work on the cleanup of fallout from the Fukushima number 1 plant, and, at worst, actually work in the vicinity. Nobody can go into the containment vessels of the two worst-affected now, perhaps for a few seconds with a lead suit.

    A little drunk and going off on tangents, sorry to hear of your experience, as I say, you are lucid, more than many other posters here.

    OTOH, my other comments above are not without general relevance.

    Viva Cletus!

      

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn’t think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical
     
    Cletus, Che', sorry for your troubles. Toluene, per chance? Sweet-smelling stuff? Aromatic hydrocarbons, deadly and they knew it the minute they came out with them. This stuff was industry's and the military's way of saying deplorable blue-collar workers live too long. They used to give the planes a "hand job" bath at sea to get the salt off of them. Plane captains (check the oil, fuel the plane-type guys, all enlisted18-20 year-olds) would take towels, dip them in five gallon buckets of this stuff, wring em out and wipe the planes, bare-handed, no breathing protection. The stuff would be running down their arms, they reeked of the stuff. My little brother was one of them, he was dead at 39 of a hideous form of cancer associated with that stuff and he only did three years. I worked in a cleaner environment, liquid oxygen and air conditioning and ejection seats, so my work kept me far away from that stuff. But then, asbestos. Any day, one of the nodules will light up in a lung and I'll be off to never-never land, too earlier than I ought. And they knew THAT was bad and used it anyway. Industry in cooperation with OSHA WILL get you dead.

    In the phone business, for decades now, I pass through printing companies and newspaper plants and THEY reek, to this day, of the very same solvents and I see those guys with their cans, rags and brushes, cleaning the presses, some with rubber gloves, none with breathing protection, all soaked with the stuff. I go into one of these places for twenty minutes and I can smell the stuff on my breath for the rest of the day. OSHA-Approved, no prob. Ye Gawds..
    , @Cletus Rothschild
    Thanks Che . . .

    This is way OT for the subject, but I don't mind shedding a bit of light on brain injury.

    “… but encephalopathy is a vague term.”

    It is. I guess it's a kinder way to say “brain damage”.

    “Words you are posting are lucid.”

    In many cases such as mine, many measures of intelligence seem to be intact. A lot of people can do very well on standard IQ tests. But even if people seem to be very intelligent, their intelligence can still suffer relative to what it used to be. A doctor with brain damage may come across as much more intelligent that the average person, yet he may have suffered enough damage to prevent him from working in his field of former expertise. And it's very dangerous because it's difficult to perceive the increasing deficits when it happens over a long period of time, so you're not inclined to see mistakes for the problems that they are. Even if you finally do perceive it, what do you do? Do you tell your boss and potentially get yourself fired? It wound up getting me fired. Assuming that you can simply transition to a less demanding field of expertise misses a very important aspect of the problem: just as you're losing your abilities in your field of expertise, you're also losing the ability to learn new things.

    The harm is most definitely real as my own tests have shown. I've worked very hard at trying to do the things that should come automatically after decades of experience, but it's a losing battle. Whatever lucidity I exhibit here is a shadow of what I used to be and pretty much shows the superficial extent of my intellectual wheelhouse. I can't count the proper change to buy a can of soda at a grocery store or follow simple instructions or make simple decisions or do any number of things that an intelligent person is supposed to do. Even when I tell people where my deficits are, they still get angry at me when I blunder and screw up various parts of my life. Things that have taken me many years to understand through research and personal experience, others think they can figure out in a matter of a few minutes conversation and if I don't listen to their ignorant pontifications, I'm stubborn. So I've given up the fight and I live a generally isolated life as so many people with brain injury do. It isn't by choice, but of necessity.

    Your example of the Japanese guys is a good one as the Japanese are prideful people and they wouldn't have given in as they have if the problem wasn't valid.
  47. @utu
    Clipping the last vowel or syllable just make you sound tough. It is just a posturing in the hood among low educated guidos and then in the movies and back to popular culture.

    It's American phenomenon popularized by American movies. It did not originate in Sicily or Italy. However it is possible it got exported form the US back to Italy. Even a real mafia in Italy gets some silly ideas from Hollywood like holding guns sideways while shooting and building pink mansions like the one in Scarface.

    You have no idea what you are talking about and neither does your expert apparently. There are dialects of Italian that clip the last syllables and these dialects are quite independent of any New World influence.

    One might give several examples but why bother? You will persist in whatever you wish to believe regardless of any philological facts.

    Read More
  48. Remember the old saying: Pulenta inte’lat lafa bon neca a e’ gat.

    To which an obvious addendum–and for the mouse, of course, pulenta gat.

    Read More
  49. @utu
    Clipping the last vowel or syllable just make you sound tough. It is just a posturing in the hood among low educated guidos and then in the movies and back to popular culture.

    It's American phenomenon popularized by American movies. It did not originate in Sicily or Italy. However it is possible it got exported form the US back to Italy. Even a real mafia in Italy gets some silly ideas from Hollywood like holding guns sideways while shooting and building pink mansions like the one in Scarface.

    From your article:

    In fact, in some parts of Italy, the dropping of final vowels is common. Restaurantgoers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects, where speakers often do not speak their endings, Professor Albertini said.

    Sicilian, compared to standard Italian, is often referred to as a separate language. As a partial descendant of low-educated Campanian guidos, I can assure you that their pronunciation is not a falling from the pure standard of literary Italian, but a dialect of equal historical standing.

    Also, see below, where an actual linguist discusses the article:

    http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001481.html

    If your ancestors spoke Florentine or a similar dialect, very closely related to standard Italian, that would explain your point of view.

    Salute,
    RSDB

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "Restaurant goers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects" - The keyword here is "imitating." Imitating from where? From enhanced and stylized version developed in American Italian hoods. Then they were further enhanced and popularized by the movies exploiting and constructing Italian mafia themes. I do not deny that there is a link to original Italian dialects still spoken in late 19c and early 20c but the current pronunciations like these

    "They suffer prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL)."

    were made in America and more recently then anybody wants to admit. It is a perfect example of social construction that has only a grain of truth in it while most of it phony.

    The most powerful medium to create social construction via imitation is TV. Even a dog will imitate rather unnatural behavior of a dog seen on TV:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9-vUn3Yvw4

    Does this boxer imitates a real dog or a computer generated dog? Is the dog genuine? It does not matter. The restaurant goers and food shoppers in the United States do not imitate genuine Italians even though they think they do. We should not be surprised that the next in the chain of imitations might be the genuine Sicilians in Italy who will start saying pro-SHOOT or fa-ZOOL unlike nobody among their ancestors. The case of a chicken traveling in time to become the egg from which it was hatched?
    , @E. A. Costa
    There are many ancient Greek and later Arab survivals in Sicilian Italian. Look hard enough and you could also find Phoenician. Ancient and Byzantine Greek also persist in Southern Italy which was once Magna Graecia. There was one Arab occupied city there but no appreciable Arab influence on the local languages.

    Indeed in the 1950's there was discovered an isolated mountain village that still spoke what seems to have been Byzantine Greek (as opposed to ancient), though surrounded by Italian speakers. They were gradually learning Italian, however.

    The example of weakened or dropped final vowels given for pulenta examples above comes from Romagna-Emilia in the north, by the way, not Sicily. There is no influence of New World Italian in these dialects.

    Television and radio have weakened the dialects, as with English, but they are still spoken and written, Pasolini when young was a brilliant poet in his own dialect, for example.

    Utu's expert and his various discussions are nonsense.

  50. You won’t find people in Souther Italy or Sicily pronouncing the same way as you hear among New Jersey Guidos. This does not mean that the clipping of last vowel has no root in old dialects which it does, however the current pronunciation by New Jersey Guidos is not a frozen relict of the old dialect but a stylized enhancement that developed here in the New World and was amplified by media exploiting Italian mafia subculture. More people who use these pronunciations in early stage learned them from movies than form members of their families. This development is fairly recent with the advent of visual mass media and it was not present yet in Godfather but became common in later films.

    Olivo-Shaw only goes half way of my argument:

    http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-capicola-became-gabagool-the-italian-new-jersey-accent-explained

    “If you were to go to southern Italy, you wouldn’t find people saying “gabagool.” But some of the old quirks of the old languages survived into the accents of Standard Italian used there. In Sicily or Calabria, you might indeed find someone ordering “mutzadell.” In their own weird way, Jersey (and New York and Rhode Island and Philadelphia) Italians are keeping the flame of their languages alive even better than Italian-Italians. There’s something both a little silly and a little wonderful about someone who doesn’t even speak the language putting on an antiquated accent for a dead sub-language to order some cheese.”

    Read More
  51. @RSDB
    From your article:

    In fact, in some parts of Italy, the dropping of final vowels is common. Restaurantgoers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects, where speakers often do not speak their endings, Professor Albertini said.
     
    Sicilian, compared to standard Italian, is often referred to as a separate language. As a partial descendant of low-educated Campanian guidos, I can assure you that their pronunciation is not a falling from the pure standard of literary Italian, but a dialect of equal historical standing.

    Also, see below, where an actual linguist discusses the article:
    http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001481.html

    If your ancestors spoke Florentine or a similar dialect, very closely related to standard Italian, that would explain your point of view.

    Salute,
    RSDB

    “Restaurant goers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects” – The keyword here is “imitating.” Imitating from where? From enhanced and stylized version developed in American Italian hoods. Then they were further enhanced and popularized by the movies exploiting and constructing Italian mafia themes. I do not deny that there is a link to original Italian dialects still spoken in late 19c and early 20c but the current pronunciations like these

    “They suffer prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL).”

    were made in America and more recently then anybody wants to admit. It is a perfect example of social construction that has only a grain of truth in it while most of it phony.

    The most powerful medium to create social construction via imitation is TV. Even a dog will imitate rather unnatural behavior of a dog seen on TV:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9-vUn3Yvw4

    Does this boxer imitates a real dog or a computer generated dog? Is the dog genuine? It does not matter. The restaurant goers and food shoppers in the United States do not imitate genuine Italians even though they think they do. We should not be surprised that the next in the chain of imitations might be the genuine Sicilians in Italy who will start saying pro-SHOOT or fa-ZOOL unlike nobody among their ancestors. The case of a chicken traveling in time to become the egg from which it was hatched?

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    For your information, the pulenta examples above come from Romagna-Emilia in the North, not from Sicily, and there are a number of northern dialects in that area that weaken or drop final vowels.

    Your whole thesis is absurd. And that of your expert.
  52. @RSDB
    From your article:

    In fact, in some parts of Italy, the dropping of final vowels is common. Restaurantgoers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects, where speakers often do not speak their endings, Professor Albertini said.
     
    Sicilian, compared to standard Italian, is often referred to as a separate language. As a partial descendant of low-educated Campanian guidos, I can assure you that their pronunciation is not a falling from the pure standard of literary Italian, but a dialect of equal historical standing.

    Also, see below, where an actual linguist discusses the article:
    http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001481.html

    If your ancestors spoke Florentine or a similar dialect, very closely related to standard Italian, that would explain your point of view.

    Salute,
    RSDB

    There are many ancient Greek and later Arab survivals in Sicilian Italian. Look hard enough and you could also find Phoenician. Ancient and Byzantine Greek also persist in Southern Italy which was once Magna Graecia. There was one Arab occupied city there but no appreciable Arab influence on the local languages.

    Indeed in the 1950′s there was discovered an isolated mountain village that still spoke what seems to have been Byzantine Greek (as opposed to ancient), though surrounded by Italian speakers. They were gradually learning Italian, however.

    The example of weakened or dropped final vowels given for pulenta examples above comes from Romagna-Emilia in the north, by the way, not Sicily. There is no influence of New World Italian in these dialects.

    Television and radio have weakened the dialects, as with English, but they are still spoken and written, Pasolini when young was a brilliant poet in his own dialect, for example.

    Utu’s expert and his various discussions are nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RSDB
    Thanks, very interesting information. I had been aware that there were Greek survivals in Calabria and Apulia but not in Sicily.

    You can tell your example is northern because we don't eat polenta down south ( :) ).

    A point Utu has but doesn't make is that the pronunciations he cites are in fact being used by English-speakers in English, some of whom don't know any kind of Italian, so they should really be described as loanwords from various dialects, especially as many speakers (yours truly, for example) will use words/pronunciations originating in different dialects. But Utu's rambling about movies and guidos is rather strange.

    From one (honorary) low-educated guido to another,
    RSDB
    , @Anon
    Emilio-Romagna also had a significant historical Greek influence- is that related in any way to vowel dropping or other features?
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Interesting about the Greek speaking village. I have teased a Calabrian born friend who has light brown hair and blue eyes that he must be descended from Vikings who dropped by his village on the way south but might I now plausibly switch to ancient Greeks for explanation?
  53. Until very recently there were two main categories of monolingual speakers of “standard” versions of languages (including English, French, Italian, etc.):

    (1) foreigners; (2) native speakers who were brought up in households using standard versions of speech in university or entertainment and communication.

    BBC English, for example, is an artificial tongue in pronunciation and the only people who know nothing else are foreigners or children of BBC announcers, etc.

    So too with U.

    In fact it is possible to guess the background of many British academics based on whether they have a native non-U dialect.

    Read More
  54. @utu
    "Restaurant goers and food shoppers in the United States ended up imitating southern and northern dialects" - The keyword here is "imitating." Imitating from where? From enhanced and stylized version developed in American Italian hoods. Then they were further enhanced and popularized by the movies exploiting and constructing Italian mafia themes. I do not deny that there is a link to original Italian dialects still spoken in late 19c and early 20c but the current pronunciations like these

    "They suffer prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL)."

    were made in America and more recently then anybody wants to admit. It is a perfect example of social construction that has only a grain of truth in it while most of it phony.

    The most powerful medium to create social construction via imitation is TV. Even a dog will imitate rather unnatural behavior of a dog seen on TV:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9-vUn3Yvw4

    Does this boxer imitates a real dog or a computer generated dog? Is the dog genuine? It does not matter. The restaurant goers and food shoppers in the United States do not imitate genuine Italians even though they think they do. We should not be surprised that the next in the chain of imitations might be the genuine Sicilians in Italy who will start saying pro-SHOOT or fa-ZOOL unlike nobody among their ancestors. The case of a chicken traveling in time to become the egg from which it was hatched?

    For your information, the pulenta examples above come from Romagna-Emilia in the North, not from Sicily, and there are a number of northern dialects in that area that weaken or drop final vowels.

    Your whole thesis is absurd. And that of your expert.

    Read More
  55. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Oh, sure, I don’t deny that languages change, and an Italian-American is going to sound pretty odd to an Italian, especially as there would have been some blending of southern dialects. But no southerner ever called any soup “PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee”.

    Listen to two Jews sing about it in 1927: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryN1s7jDrfU .

    In this case the American pronunciation is from the Neapolitan fasule:

    https://it.glosbe.com/nap/it/fasule

    Here’s Lou Monte singing about Italian food in general, because you earned it:

    Monte is Calabrese-American (not Sicilian), from Lyndhurst, NJ, and the song is from the 50s or 60s.

    But it appears according to wikipedia that manicotti, which started all this fuss, is an American coinage! I for one, am not going to look any further into that point, because I’ve wasted enough time as it is.

    Just don’t go around correcting their pronunciation and everyone will be happy. :)

    Capisce, signor?

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    Actually one northern dialectical pronunciation is pasta fasul.
    , @E. A. Costa
    You will not find unveng, another Northern dialectal pronunciation on the internet as far as one knows. And no capo dei capi ever used it in real life or in film because outside the dialect most other Italian speakers can't even identify what it is.

    Also one would need to know much more about manicotti to accept the story of US provenance.

    There are other dialects of Italian, not just the Sicilian ones, and before the arrival of Sicilians to the US en masse there were many Northern Italians already there.

    In fact check out the story of the first award of the Congressional Medal of Honor to--ready?--Luigi Palma di Cesnola. Crazy mother....also a fine scholar.

    , @utu
    Rosina lu Monte pronounces last vowels. Thanks! Over dramatic purposeful and conscious clipping of last vowel is relatively recent development among New Jersey Guidos.
    , @E. A. Costa
    When one found out the shoemaker was Calabres', one quite sincerely praised Calabrese salami to the skies (more dynamic than Genoa). He took his time but delivered a masterpiece of renewed life for a pair boots. One was of course overjoyed it was boots he delivered, not some other contract, jeje.
  56. @anon
    Oh, sure, I don't deny that languages change, and an Italian-American is going to sound pretty odd to an Italian, especially as there would have been some blending of southern dialects. But no southerner ever called any soup "PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee".

    Listen to two Jews sing about it in 1927: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryN1s7jDrfU .

    In this case the American pronunciation is from the Neapolitan fasule:

    https://it.glosbe.com/nap/it/fasule

    Here's Lou Monte singing about Italian food in general, because you earned it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ve_w2BAVk

    Monte is Calabrese-American (not Sicilian), from Lyndhurst, NJ, and the song is from the 50s or 60s.


    But it appears according to wikipedia that manicotti, which started all this fuss, is an American coinage! I for one, am not going to look any further into that point, because I've wasted enough time as it is.

    Just don't go around correcting their pronunciation and everyone will be happy. :)

    Capisce, signor?

    Actually one northern dialectical pronunciation is pasta fasul.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Interesting! I'd ask which but I don't want to sabotage Linh's thread any further (humor here).

    Italian is a very diverse language, certainly; Americans are used to a very limited range of dialects compared to any European, but particularly an Italian.

    Nevertheless, given the demographics of immigration I think it more likely that the American derives from the southern (edit: now I'm not quite so sure). Your posts on this stuff are definitely worth reading, so thanks.

    Hope you appreciated Lou.

  57. @E. A. Costa
    There are many ancient Greek and later Arab survivals in Sicilian Italian. Look hard enough and you could also find Phoenician. Ancient and Byzantine Greek also persist in Southern Italy which was once Magna Graecia. There was one Arab occupied city there but no appreciable Arab influence on the local languages.

    Indeed in the 1950's there was discovered an isolated mountain village that still spoke what seems to have been Byzantine Greek (as opposed to ancient), though surrounded by Italian speakers. They were gradually learning Italian, however.

    The example of weakened or dropped final vowels given for pulenta examples above comes from Romagna-Emilia in the north, by the way, not Sicily. There is no influence of New World Italian in these dialects.

    Television and radio have weakened the dialects, as with English, but they are still spoken and written, Pasolini when young was a brilliant poet in his own dialect, for example.

    Utu's expert and his various discussions are nonsense.

    Thanks, very interesting information. I had been aware that there were Greek survivals in Calabria and Apulia but not in Sicily.

    You can tell your example is northern because we don’t eat polenta down south ( :) ).

    A point Utu has but doesn’t make is that the pronunciations he cites are in fact being used by English-speakers in English, some of whom don’t know any kind of Italian, so they should really be described as loanwords from various dialects, especially as many speakers (yours truly, for example) will use words/pronunciations originating in different dialects. But Utu’s rambling about movies and guidos is rather strange.

    From one (honorary) low-educated guido to another,
    RSDB

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    Exactamente.
    , @E. A. Costa
    There's a delicious if very select cuisine that includes a recipe for pulenta and squirrel. Goes over big wherever there are hunters, even West Virginians. Minimum three squirrels for two people. Fresh.

    Some small game hunters in them thar hills kill cats in the wild as a matter of course and as competitors. But they leave them dead on the ground.

    When told this by one such hunter, one exclaimed--"What, no pulenta gat!"

    "What's that?"

    He turned green when informed.

  58. @anon
    Oh, sure, I don't deny that languages change, and an Italian-American is going to sound pretty odd to an Italian, especially as there would have been some blending of southern dialects. But no southerner ever called any soup "PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee".

    Listen to two Jews sing about it in 1927: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryN1s7jDrfU .

    In this case the American pronunciation is from the Neapolitan fasule:

    https://it.glosbe.com/nap/it/fasule

    Here's Lou Monte singing about Italian food in general, because you earned it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ve_w2BAVk

    Monte is Calabrese-American (not Sicilian), from Lyndhurst, NJ, and the song is from the 50s or 60s.


    But it appears according to wikipedia that manicotti, which started all this fuss, is an American coinage! I for one, am not going to look any further into that point, because I've wasted enough time as it is.

    Just don't go around correcting their pronunciation and everyone will be happy. :)

    Capisce, signor?

    You will not find unveng, another Northern dialectal pronunciation on the internet as far as one knows. And no capo dei capi ever used it in real life or in film because outside the dialect most other Italian speakers can’t even identify what it is.

    Also one would need to know much more about manicotti to accept the story of US provenance.

    There are other dialects of Italian, not just the Sicilian ones, and before the arrival of Sicilians to the US en masse there were many Northern Italians already there.

    In fact check out the story of the first award of the Congressional Medal of Honor to–ready?–Luigi Palma di Cesnola. Crazy mother….also a fine scholar.

    Read More
  59. @RSDB
    Thanks, very interesting information. I had been aware that there were Greek survivals in Calabria and Apulia but not in Sicily.

    You can tell your example is northern because we don't eat polenta down south ( :) ).

    A point Utu has but doesn't make is that the pronunciations he cites are in fact being used by English-speakers in English, some of whom don't know any kind of Italian, so they should really be described as loanwords from various dialects, especially as many speakers (yours truly, for example) will use words/pronunciations originating in different dialects. But Utu's rambling about movies and guidos is rather strange.

    From one (honorary) low-educated guido to another,
    RSDB

    Exactamente.

    Read More
  60. @anon
    Oh, sure, I don't deny that languages change, and an Italian-American is going to sound pretty odd to an Italian, especially as there would have been some blending of southern dialects. But no southerner ever called any soup "PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee".

    Listen to two Jews sing about it in 1927: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryN1s7jDrfU .

    In this case the American pronunciation is from the Neapolitan fasule:

    https://it.glosbe.com/nap/it/fasule

    Here's Lou Monte singing about Italian food in general, because you earned it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ve_w2BAVk

    Monte is Calabrese-American (not Sicilian), from Lyndhurst, NJ, and the song is from the 50s or 60s.


    But it appears according to wikipedia that manicotti, which started all this fuss, is an American coinage! I for one, am not going to look any further into that point, because I've wasted enough time as it is.

    Just don't go around correcting their pronunciation and everyone will be happy. :)

    Capisce, signor?

    Rosina lu Monte pronounces last vowels. Thanks! Over dramatic purposeful and conscious clipping of last vowel is relatively recent development among New Jersey Guidos.

    Read More
  61. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black. Not that he is "fronting" black behavior. Pardon the confusion.

    I have to admit; I am a bit perplexed by some of you guys and your inability to make the simplest bridges between geopolitics and human nature.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kurt van Ghoye
    Appreciate the video and the implications of the assault on human sexuality detailed therein. Short of storming our corrupt institutions and taking them back, for which the time must be ripe and the wind just right, can we do better than work to make our families into little fortresses?
  62. @RSDB
    Thanks, very interesting information. I had been aware that there were Greek survivals in Calabria and Apulia but not in Sicily.

    You can tell your example is northern because we don't eat polenta down south ( :) ).

    A point Utu has but doesn't make is that the pronunciations he cites are in fact being used by English-speakers in English, some of whom don't know any kind of Italian, so they should really be described as loanwords from various dialects, especially as many speakers (yours truly, for example) will use words/pronunciations originating in different dialects. But Utu's rambling about movies and guidos is rather strange.

    From one (honorary) low-educated guido to another,
    RSDB

    There’s a delicious if very select cuisine that includes a recipe for pulenta and squirrel. Goes over big wherever there are hunters, even West Virginians. Minimum three squirrels for two people. Fresh.

    Some small game hunters in them thar hills kill cats in the wild as a matter of course and as competitors. But they leave them dead on the ground.

    When told this by one such hunter, one exclaimed–”What, no pulenta gat!”

    “What’s that?”

    He turned green when informed.

    Read More
  63. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @E. A. Costa
    Actually one northern dialectical pronunciation is pasta fasul.

    Interesting! I’d ask which but I don’t want to sabotage Linh’s thread any further (humor here).

    Italian is a very diverse language, certainly; Americans are used to a very limited range of dialects compared to any European, but particularly an Italian.

    Nevertheless, given the demographics of immigration I think it more likely that the American derives from the southern (edit: now I’m not quite so sure). Your posts on this stuff are definitely worth reading, so thanks.

    Hope you appreciated Lou.

    Read More
  64. @anon
    Oh, sure, I don't deny that languages change, and an Italian-American is going to sound pretty odd to an Italian, especially as there would have been some blending of southern dialects. But no southerner ever called any soup "PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee".

    Listen to two Jews sing about it in 1927: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryN1s7jDrfU .

    In this case the American pronunciation is from the Neapolitan fasule:

    https://it.glosbe.com/nap/it/fasule

    Here's Lou Monte singing about Italian food in general, because you earned it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ve_w2BAVk

    Monte is Calabrese-American (not Sicilian), from Lyndhurst, NJ, and the song is from the 50s or 60s.


    But it appears according to wikipedia that manicotti, which started all this fuss, is an American coinage! I for one, am not going to look any further into that point, because I've wasted enough time as it is.

    Just don't go around correcting their pronunciation and everyone will be happy. :)

    Capisce, signor?

    When one found out the shoemaker was Calabres’, one quite sincerely praised Calabrese salami to the skies (more dynamic than Genoa). He took his time but delivered a masterpiece of renewed life for a pair boots. One was of course overjoyed it was boots he delivered, not some other contract, jeje.

    Read More
  65. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black. Not that he is "fronting" black behavior. Pardon the confusion.

    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black.

    No, he has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a Sicilian peasant. If blacks were the only dissolute race on the planet life would be simpler. There is a good reason why Southern Italy has been a shithole for centuries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Southern Italians> pretty much any Northern Europeans.
  66. @Che Guava
    Cletus,

    I only understand the 'encephalos', and '... pathy' elements, the combination seems very wide. Words you are posting are lucid. I will also take you at your word, that the harm is real.

    ... but encephalopathy is a vague term.

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn't think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical, it will return to me by tomorrow evening.

    Irony, it was supposed to be a model safe workplace in those ways.

    Spare a thought for most of the homeless discarded older men of Japan.

    They used to have tent villages in many parks, also well organised, crime-free, and clean, by their own will.

    Just about none of those tent villages remain.

    Now, just about all are staying in hotels, paid for by the govt., partly organised by the Yakuza, to work on the cleanup of fallout from the Fukushima number 1 plant, and, at worst, actually work in the vicinity. Nobody can go into the containment vessels of the two worst-affected now, perhaps for a few seconds with a lead suit.

    A little drunk and going off on tangents, sorry to hear of your experience, as I say, you are lucid, more than many other posters here.

    OTOH, my other comments above are not without general relevance.

    Viva Cletus!



      

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn’t think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical

    Cletus, Che’, sorry for your troubles. Toluene, per chance? Sweet-smelling stuff? Aromatic hydrocarbons, deadly and they knew it the minute they came out with them. This stuff was industry’s and the military’s way of saying deplorable blue-collar workers live too long. They used to give the planes a “hand job” bath at sea to get the salt off of them. Plane captains (check the oil, fuel the plane-type guys, all enlisted18-20 year-olds) would take towels, dip them in five gallon buckets of this stuff, wring em out and wipe the planes, bare-handed, no breathing protection. The stuff would be running down their arms, they reeked of the stuff. My little brother was one of them, he was dead at 39 of a hideous form of cancer associated with that stuff and he only did three years. I worked in a cleaner environment, liquid oxygen and air conditioning and ejection seats, so my work kept me far away from that stuff. But then, asbestos. Any day, one of the nodules will light up in a lung and I’ll be off to never-never land, too earlier than I ought. And they knew THAT was bad and used it anyway. Industry in cooperation with OSHA WILL get you dead.

    In the phone business, for decades now, I pass through printing companies and newspaper plants and THEY reek, to this day, of the very same solvents and I see those guys with their cans, rags and brushes, cleaning the presses, some with rubber gloves, none with breathing protection, all soaked with the stuff. I go into one of these places for twenty minutes and I can smell the stuff on my breath for the rest of the day. OSHA-Approved, no prob. Ye Gawds..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Yes, it was some kind of toluene-based mixture.

    Am fortunate to have nowhere near the exposure you describe others as having.

    This reminds me of a physics (or bio-medical electronics, forget which) lecturer who told me that in the early days of microwave-band radar, people on ships would stand close to the transponders to keep warm.

    Horror story, but real. Some died very quickly.

    Informative post, Jim, thanks.
  67. @Che Guava
    Cletus,

    I only understand the 'encephalos', and '... pathy' elements, the combination seems very wide. Words you are posting are lucid. I will also take you at your word, that the harm is real.

    ... but encephalopathy is a vague term.

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn't think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical, it will return to me by tomorrow evening.

    Irony, it was supposed to be a model safe workplace in those ways.

    Spare a thought for most of the homeless discarded older men of Japan.

    They used to have tent villages in many parks, also well organised, crime-free, and clean, by their own will.

    Just about none of those tent villages remain.

    Now, just about all are staying in hotels, paid for by the govt., partly organised by the Yakuza, to work on the cleanup of fallout from the Fukushima number 1 plant, and, at worst, actually work in the vicinity. Nobody can go into the containment vessels of the two worst-affected now, perhaps for a few seconds with a lead suit.

    A little drunk and going off on tangents, sorry to hear of your experience, as I say, you are lucid, more than many other posters here.

    OTOH, my other comments above are not without general relevance.

    Viva Cletus!



      

    Thanks Che . . .

    This is way OT for the subject, but I don’t mind shedding a bit of light on brain injury.

    “… but encephalopathy is a vague term.”

    It is. I guess it’s a kinder way to say “brain damage”.

    “Words you are posting are lucid.”

    In many cases such as mine, many measures of intelligence seem to be intact. A lot of people can do very well on standard IQ tests. But even if people seem to be very intelligent, their intelligence can still suffer relative to what it used to be. A doctor with brain damage may come across as much more intelligent that the average person, yet he may have suffered enough damage to prevent him from working in his field of former expertise. And it’s very dangerous because it’s difficult to perceive the increasing deficits when it happens over a long period of time, so you’re not inclined to see mistakes for the problems that they are. Even if you finally do perceive it, what do you do? Do you tell your boss and potentially get yourself fired? It wound up getting me fired. Assuming that you can simply transition to a less demanding field of expertise misses a very important aspect of the problem: just as you’re losing your abilities in your field of expertise, you’re also losing the ability to learn new things.

    The harm is most definitely real as my own tests have shown. I’ve worked very hard at trying to do the things that should come automatically after decades of experience, but it’s a losing battle. Whatever lucidity I exhibit here is a shadow of what I used to be and pretty much shows the superficial extent of my intellectual wheelhouse. I can’t count the proper change to buy a can of soda at a grocery store or follow simple instructions or make simple decisions or do any number of things that an intelligent person is supposed to do. Even when I tell people where my deficits are, they still get angry at me when I blunder and screw up various parts of my life. Things that have taken me many years to understand through research and personal experience, others think they can figure out in a matter of a few minutes conversation and if I don’t listen to their ignorant pontifications, I’m stubborn. So I’ve given up the fight and I live a generally isolated life as so many people with brain injury do. It isn’t by choice, but of necessity.

    Your example of the Japanese guys is a good one as the Japanese are prideful people and they wouldn’t have given in as they have if the problem wasn’t valid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Hey Cletus,
    I will be posting too much with this, but pretty sure Linh Dinh won't mind.

    Your words are very good, I am sorry to hear of your incapacity, but from your words, it is very hard to see. You write very well!

    Japanese research says that simple calculations are very good for the brain if frail in some areas.

    So, if you have trouble counting change, practise the calculations.

    You may even enjoy it. I would be a foolish friend, but an ocean away.

    Your good writing means that the damage is very limited.
  68. @Anon
    That the family is the core purpose of human life can be understood by physical and emotional facts.

    Why does anyone exist at all? Because someone had a job? Because someone read a book? Because someone played with a machine?

    No, it is because he or she has a father and mother.
    Now, a human life can be created by just any man and any woman having sex. The father can abandon the kid, and the mother can choose to be a 'single mother'. Or she can just put the kid up for adoption. But, this is terrible. This is why we need sexual morality, and why having children must be associated with values and meaning and commitment.

    Anyway, every human life exists only because he or she has a father and mother. That is the central physical fact of life. If you are against the family, then you can only be against your own existence. And it makes no sense to be pro-sex and anti-family since you're saying that fathers and mothers have no special responsibility to take care of their own kids. That is bad for everyone. Bad for the moral health of the parents, bad for the child's future, and bad for society that must carry the financial burden and bear the social costs. Only sex within family culture will ensure that father and mother will form a bond to be responsible for the very life they create.

    So, if one cherishes one's own existence, one has to be for Family Culture.

    But aside from the physical fact, there is the emotional fact.

    If you were to ask your father about what is most important in his life, his answer has to be his wife and kids. I mean what else would a decent man say? That his car matters more to him? Or his stereo? Or his TV set? Or his computer? Or his movie collection? Or his book collection? Or his tool set? Or his boat? Or his snow mobile? His gun collection? Now, all those things are nice to have, but any man who cherishes such stuff over his wife and kids would be an idiot or sociopath. Even a nice big house comes nowhere near wife and kids. I mean if a man had to save his wife & kids or his house, what would he choose? Sacrifice his family for some material possession? Only a sociopath would do that.
    A man can lose a car and get a new car. A man can lose a house and get a new house. But his wife and kids are irreplaceable.
    Unfortunately, there are sociopathic or shallow men who will sacrifice the well-being of their wife and kids for material goods or their insipid jollies. Some will even kill near ones for material gain. They are despicable.

    Anyway, a true man would say his wife(and his kids) are the most important 'things' in his life. It can't be anything else. Even if he has a great job, his wife and kids come first. There is something wrong with a man who abandons or even destroys his wife and kids because his job is more important to him. It's no big deal to move from job to job, but it's not okay to move from family to family. A man like Trump can afford to do so and provide for everyone, but such would be recipe for social hell for everyone else.

    Granted, divorces do happen, and man and woman can come to hate one another. But a man should always feel great bond and responsibility for his own kids. Fathers who lack this quality are scum.
    It's like the story told by Gerald Ford. He tracked down his father, and the man pulled out $20 bucks, handed it to his son, and walked away.
    There was a time when such behavior on the part of the father would have been seen as low. No longer. After all, such 'judgmentalism' would condemn too many Negro men who never stick around. Also, a lot of white men and Hispanic men act the same. Also, with single motherhood being the New Norm, it is deemed perfectly okay for the guy to just walk away and let the woman be a 'single mother' like Murphy Brown. And he is to be lauded if he did a lesbian a favor by getting her pregnant so that she could either raise the kid single or with 'two mommies'.

    But in a sane and moral world, a man and a woman should look for love and find someone they can settle down with. And a man should regard his wife more highly than anything else, and the woman should feel the same way about the man. And what they do in life should be considered in terms of "How is it good for the family?"
    As long as they are together, even if they lose everything(in a fire or earthquake) they can struggle together to make it again. And from such a bond comes the ideal environment for the kids, even in hard times. Even if the family loses everything, if the man and woman stick together and take care of the kid, the kid will grow up with proper values which are priceless.

    Our individualist-libertine values turned family itself into a place of competition where the man sees the woman as rival than partner. Instead of working together for the good of the family, the man thinks only in terms of my 'career'. This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don't go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night. The fathers hardly talk with their wives and hardly know the kids who only know school work and shallow pop culture. No wonder Japan is turning into shi*. Fathers are really married to the corporation, and the kids are really raised by TV and education system geared to turn them into test-takers.

    In the West, it's all about career, career, and career. And a lot of people think this is cool because the kind of jobs we see in movies tend to be privileged, special, and exciting. The fantasy of everyone having some super-cool job filled with interesting stuff. In fact, most jobs are drudgery, and this goes for white collar jobs too. Drone stuff, stuck-at-office stuff, paper-shuffling stuff, and etc. Any person who lives only for this 'career' is an idiot. Most jobs in manufacturing are drudgery. Most jobs in service are routine and dull. And most white collar jobs are few notches above clerk duty. So, where does the meaning of life come from? Family: spouse and kids. And family is important because culture, heritage, and identity can be passed through them. Imagine you're Jewish and you wanna pass down your Jewish identity and heritage to your kids. You better create a family setting because if you just hump some single ho and refuse to play the role of father and hardly see your kids, they are gonna grow up into Pop Culture junkie morons.

    Also, family culture makes people aware of the fact that they are born, grow up, grow older, and die. Life has beginning, growth, middle, decline, and death. No one can escape this. And being part of a family makes one realize this through grandparents and relatives. But our individualist-consumer culture fixes our eyes and ears on the illusory fountain-of-youth of pop culture that doles out fantasy of everlasting fun. Even as people grow older, they still listen to pop music catered to teens. And they watch movies and read books meant for kids. Consider all the adults hooked on Harry Potter. And those silly comic book movies. And celebrity culture always produces a new batch of young nubile whores and dumb studs. And TV shows even women reaching middle age doing little else but acting 'young' and jumping in and out of bed as sluts and skanks. It creates the false illusion that life is all about 'staying young forever' than accepting maturity and aging and passing down the torch to your children. Many men and women don't even have kids since they were too invested in fun. Or too invested in looking for fantasy ideal lover who is rare or doesn't exist. And even those who did have kids never grew up. Fathers abandoned the kids, and women are single-mothers without culture who expose their kids to pop culture that urges them to get ugly tattoos and piercings.

    I mean WHAT KIND OF PARENTS raised kids like these?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3996676/Clubbers-feared-trapped-California-warehouse-party-blaze-breaks-out.html

    One thing for sure, decent and supportive parenting isn't enough. Consider the Braddocks and Robinsons in THE GRADUATE. Braddocks raised Ben properly enough, sending him to good schools and all. And Robinsons seemed to have done okay with Elaine too.
    But even if Ben and Elaine are materially well off and well-educated, they have no center, no core value, because the ONLY CULTURE they know is genteel suburban materialism. There is no sense of ethnos, heritage, or culture.
    It is different with Michael Corleone who grew up under Vito Corleone who is about the family, culture, and values, even though he was exiled from Sicily at a young age.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fF7Hh8jQftw

    Material well-being is nice, but it offers no meaning in and of itself. It is like living in Ikea or Costco. I'm all for having nice material goods, but meaning comes from something else, but it seems so many Americans have lost that. And so have Europeans. No wonder they have no sense of anything. Even their notion of 'western values' is totally nuts. Apparently, 'western values' are all about allowing western races to be flooded by non-western-races in the hope that the newcomers will take to these 'values', such as 'gay marriage', rap music, and defining as one of 50 genders.

    If anything, the notion of 'western values' is dubious. After all, if 'western values' made the West such a success, why didn't it happen with Byzantium? It preserved Christendom. And it safeguarded classical culture when Rome fell in the West. So, if 'western values' are so great, why was the history of Byzantium one of decline, stasis, and collapse? And if 'western values' are so great, why did some western nations achieve so much more than other ones? After all, not every European nation achieved greatness. And which Western Values when we speak of 'western values'? Spain and Britain both had 'western values'. Why did Spain keep slipping while Britain continue to rise? Christianity, Communism, Fascism, Capitalism, Anarchism, and etc are all 'western values'. 'Western values' comprise Medivalism, Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, Great Awakening, the European Left, the European Right, Socialism, individualism, collectivism, realism, utopianism, etc. There are too many western ways and ideas to sum up into a single set of 'western values'. One might say all those different schools of thought amount to pluralism as the key component of 'western values', but plenty of western societies through history had little use for pluralism and were very repressive. Also, pluralism isn't necessarily a key to success. Indian civilization was pluralist with the fusion of all kinds of traditions and customs, but it stopped advancing at some point.

    So, if we want to understand the power of the West, it makes more sense to speak of Western Methods than Western Values. Which methods that developed in certain parts of the West led to the advantages that led to great revolutions and domination of the world? Were these methods related to certain key values? Also worth asking is, why did Western nations that rose so high and so fast soon embark on a rapid course of suicide and self-immolation? Maybe there is a very dark side to this Western thing as well.

    Anyway, the dying West should shut up about its 'western values'. I mean why should the non-west adopt those 'values' that are leading to the destruction to the West? One thing for sure, the West didn't rise to its glory by following the 'western values' of the Current Year. On its rise to world dominance, the leading European nations had certain Methods of thinking, solving problems, organizing systems, incentivizing activities, and directing social forces. Those Methods are the key. And those Methods back then were not about celebrating homo decadence and welcoming masses of foreign invasion. If the non-west wants to learn the best of the West, learn the methods that were key during the West's rise to power, not the current 'values' that are leading the West to decadence and destruction.

    The current PC attacks the bad ole days, but the Methods of the bad ole days led to greatness and glory, whereas the Values of today are leading to degeneracy and demise. But we have idiots talking about 'western values' instead of 'western methods'. Methods are concrete. Values are gooey and mushy, ever so fluid and at the mercy of the latest trends in bogus 'social science'.
    Better to speak of Western Methods and, furthermore, Western Conditions. One of the conditions back then was all-white societies in Europe. Indeed, the great post-war boom after WWII happened when Europe was virtually all-white.
    But current PC makes us turn a blind eye to those Methods and Conditions and focuses on a wonky reinterpretation of 'western values', as if the glory of the West is due to worship of Diversity(when the West was saved by beating off Huns, Mongols, and Muslims) and homo decadence. In fact, despite the repressive aspects of Christianity, its one good impact on the West was its moral injunctions against excessive decadence and hedonism.

    People make jokes about FATHER KNOWS BEST and LEAVE IT TO BEAVER. Those are dismissed as relics of the bad ole 50s. So, what have we gotten in their stead? Father blows best? Father cucks best by having negro bull do mother? Father has best ass tattoo? Father let me get piercings all my face? Father listens to Miley Cyrus and watches Family Guy? Father took me to homo parade? Father says he wants to be a woman and wears a dress?

    Granted, the problem of FATHER KNOWS BEST and such shows was they had no sense of history and culture. They are all about nice pleasant life in the here and now as nuclear families keeping up with the Joneses. It is Braddock-ism of THE GRADUATE. And on that score, it was lacking in something essential. But what kind of alternatives do we have today? The bald headed loon on BREAKING BAD? The fat testicle-chinned blob of father FAMILY GUY? The degenerate on MARRIED WITH CHILDREN? We still so have clean-cut depictions of family life, but these are usually 'gay families' of the New Normal. Yeah, the only acceptable way to have a clean-cut traditional family is to have two 'daddies' bugger each other in the ass or two 'mommies' who stick cucumbers up each other poons.

    THE GODFATHER offered a meaningful vision of life because Vito Corleone had a sense of culture, family, and culture. Though not an educated man, he had good sense about his role as husband and father. And this is why Michael Corleone's life is meaningful in the way that so many lives are not meaningful in modern movies. Michael also gains a deep sense of where he came from. Even as he becomes American, he doesn't forget his roots.
    And DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. Even though Evgraf begins as a destructive radical, he comes to his senses somewhat and tries to reconnect his niece to the memory of his half-brother. He comes to realize the importance of family.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOpJKzIzUxw

    Family isn't everything, but it is the center from which all else begins to connect and matter. This is why 'gay marriage' is one of the most evil developments in the history of mankind. It turned family from a culturalization of nature into a lifestyle choice for decadents and deviants. It furthermore mocks the meaning of biology and morality with ludicrous notions of 'two daddies' and 'two mommies'. The people who did this deserve condemnation for all eternity. Their decadent and degenerate vileness is beyond forgiveness. That this has been normalized in US and EU means so much of Western Greatness is now associated and smeared with this decadent notion of 'western values' where the greatest good is worshiping a homo's penis inside the poopchute of another man. And we are supposed to honor this more if the penis happens to be black and the buttock white. Kong-dong-bung-ism is 'western values'.
    That so many Americans offered no resistance to this rot goes to show how totally venal the modern world has become... and what a sinister force globalism really is.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3k9KZOAmE

    Yet, in a twisted way, the recent development makes perverse sense because civilization was only possible by reversing the sense of rightness. The rise of decadence is a revenge of nature managed by technology to do least harm while doling out the pleasure.

    After all, what is right by civilization is the reversal of what is right by nature. By nature, it is right to steal. Animals take from one another all the time. There are no rules but 'gimme gimme'. If a bear can steal from another bear, it will. If wolves can steal from a bear, they will. If another pack of wolves can steal it, they will. And so on. And rape is right by nature. Horny males will hunt down and pork females. They feel heat and sexually conquer females. Or females in heat will beg for it. There's no morality. What is right by nature is what comes naturally by instincts and drives. It is a kind of primal Nietzcheanism where the stronger does as it wants without compunction or reservation or 'guilt'. Nature is about dominance. It is about satiating basic primal drives that lead to food and sex and continuation via offsprings.

    But in order to have civilization, all the things that were right by nature had to be reversed. So, taking stuff became 'stealing', a bad. So, humping out of heat became 'rape', a bad. So, killing for gain, so right in nature, became 'murder', a terrible thing.
    For civilization to work, humans had to be convinced that what is right by nature is wrong by culture. Of course, this didn't happen overnight. As humans evolved as social animals, they gradually developed the emotional qualities that became more receptive to notions of common good and proto-altruism than merely brazen self-interest. Indeed, these qualities can also be found in other social animals who sometimes suppress self-interest for team work and common good. Even so, animals have no moral code.
    In contrast, civilization codified laws and systems that emotionally convinced humans that it is WRONG to do and even feel certain things(or think certain ideas). The positive side of this was that it made for more stable and cooperative society. The negative side was that mankind has to suppress its natural instincts of virility and vitality. Even before the rise of Christianity, what Nietzsche condemned in Christian slave morality took place with civilization itself. Civilization cannot exist with everyone trying to be top dog. What is right by nature tells each human organism to do whatever to get 'what is mine'. To ensure that such doesn't happen, civilization must do something more than rule by fear to ensure people will behave. Such a civilization can only be like a prison full of criminals and killers who must be watched at all times. For civilization to work well, people must be convinced that it is WRONG to do certain things EVEN IF they could get away with it. And this was achieved not only by cultivation, education, and teaching of values but by eugenic processes. A civilization might harshly punish those who got out of line. The violators might be killed, exiled, or have their balls cut off. Over time, the wolfish types were weeded out more while the doggish types were spared to breed. So, humans, at least of some races, became more amenable to earnestly accepting civilizational ideals.
    This is why non-blacks take better to civilization than blacks do. Black hardly underwent this process since most of them evolved in non-civilization environments of chucking spears at hippos, running from hyenas, hollering at gorillas, and clubbing gophers for dinner. The wolfish blacks were not weeded out, so black genes tend to be wild. So, blacks are like natural-born-criminals. Even if you try to educate them and cultivate them, their inner souls feel like "gots to have me dat". There are few brakes in the Negro mind. Fewer inhibitions, few introspective faculties. Negro be looking at something and be feeling, "gots to have me". The wilder Negroes will just lunge for it cuz they got no patience. It's like Michael Brown had to have himself some cigar, shoo. He gonna grab himself some, sheeeeiiit. But some Negroes are more jazzy than rappy, and they, like Obama and other dudes, be looking for some slick genteel way to get what they want. But even they are all about 'gots to have me'. Jazziness is not about reflection and depth. It's about being slick and fast and tricky to get what one wants. It is gibbonic. If Michael Brown or Mike Tyson are gorillian and just grab stuff, the Obamas of the world be gibbonic and do all sorts of tricky acrobatics to get their banana. But what Michael Brown and Obama have in common is they both lack conscience, introspection, and genuine reflection. It's about 'gots to have me'. Michael Brown wanted cigars and even tried to grab the gun of an officer. Obama pulled the biggest negro con ever by going for president. Like the slickster in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION, he played white folks' psychology like a jazz keyboard. He knew what buttons to push. And he had great help from Jews who owned the media and most top institutions and eased the way for him as The One and the messiah for white prog folks who, being post-christian, wanted a new religion, and it was Obama as messenger of hope and faith and holy homo 'marriage'.

    Sadly, the chance of civilizing blacks is now impossible, and this goes for both US and EU. Even if whites had the moral advantage over blacks, it would be difficult to civilize blacks because blacks have yet to go through a weeding process that favors the doggish over the wolfish. Suppose for the next 500 yrs, we only allowed the mild Negroes to mate while forbidding wilder aggressives ones from mating. Over time, Negroes might become milder and kinder, more amenable to what is right by civilization. But blacks are still FOJ or Fresh Out of the Jungle. If anything, black evolution favored the wolfies over the doggies. Black women who best shook ass and tits were favored, and black guys who best danced, chucked spears, beat bongo drums, talked shi*, and slung their dongs were favored.

    Given this reality, it is difficult for whites to civilize blacks.
    Even so, if whites had moral advantage over blacks, the latter might make a bit more effort. Consider the past when whites did indeed have a moral advantage over blacks. Back then, white message to blacks were, "Look, imperialism and slavery weren't very nice on our part, but you blacks are jungle savages who were acting like naked apes in the dark continent forever. We took your black ass out of the wilderness and placed you in civilization. I know your ugabuga ways make you wanna holler and act crazy, BUT that is NOT Okay in our civilization of higher values and principles. Indeed, if we white folks acted like you Negroes, we wouldn't even have civilization. We'd be chucking spears at hippos in jungles too. So, make an effort not to act too apeish and wild and crazy."

    Now, a Negro hearing such talk might have been offended, but he would have also thought, "You know, dat white man be some punkass mofo, but maybe he right. After all, my ancestors in Africa run around naked, got no technology, be living next to monkeys and rhinos, and don't even have decent knife to cut watermelon with."
    So, at the very least, the Negro might feel that he has to be a credit to his race and prove his worth.

    Even with such pressure, it was difficult to civilize blacks because guys with the genetics of Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, and others are difficult to tame. All the more so since they are stronger than white man and can strike out and whup everybody. This is why so many teachers are scared half to death of black students.

    Anyway, if it was very difficult to civilize Negroes even when white man had the moral advantage over the Negro, imagine the difficulty of civilizing them when black folks have been handed the moral upperhand. Actually, blacks have been made holy via the MLK cult and Mandela myth. As such, secular whites and even Evangelical cucks look upon blacks as some holy race.

    This means it is now IMPOSSIBLE to solve the black problem that will just get worse and worse and worse. The race that is most problematic, difficult, aggressive, insane, pathological, murderous, rapacious, rape-driven, and vicious has been placed on the altar to sit judgement on everyone else by calling them 'racist' and 'white supremacist'.
    With whites stuck in the position of moral inferiority and weakness, it means they can never criticize black behavior no matter how bad it gets. And in 2015, it got totally rotten with BLM lunacy and even ghastly murders of cops. But MSM always justifies or excuses black foulness. And even Donald Trump never criticized black foulness. Hillary was egging them on. It is no wonder that some Democrats secretly think immigration is the only solution to the black problem. As much as they blather about holy blacks and MLK, their enthusiasm for Diversity via immigration --- mainly from Asia and Latin America --- seems to imply an unspoken policy of ANYONE BUT BLACK. But, unfortunately, a good number of immigrants also come from Africa that is exploding in population.

    Of course, EU may be messed up even more as black Africans can easily reach the EU where the policy is "we take in all negroes who make it to sea."
    EU also has instituted a policy of moral inferiority to blacks. For whatever reason --- imperialism, holocaust, racism, etc --- , white Europeans see themselves as moral inferiors to blacks and Muslims. So, whites have no right to judge those people or criticize them, and those who do will be dragged off to prison for 'hate speech'.

    These conditions will lead to major disaster. Tons of blacks entering is different from, say, tons of Asians entering. Too many Asians will also alter and destroy white Europe, but all Asians can easily be brought to civilized behavior since Asian genes evolved to be amenable to the civilizational process.
    In contrast, black genes are anti-civilizational since they evolved in jungles and steppes of Africa filled with angry elephants, lions, rhinos, buffalos, gorillas, and hippos who hate Negroes more than the most 'racist' redneck ever did.

    Too Many Asians will mean a different civilization in Europe. Too Many Africans will mean end of civilization.

    But what is EU doing? It is teaching white kids that Negroes are perfect angels, indeed the moral superiors of whites. White kids from a young age ware made to worship MLK, Mandela, and Obama. So, there is a quasi-spiritual worship of the craziest and most savage race on earth. But then, this savagery is also a turn-on. And this makes EU and US so schizo. On the one hand, the holy Negro is the higher spiritual figure, like those Morgan Freeman characters in Hollywood movies. But the Negro is also sought for his savage athleticism, wild colorfulness, the pounding round butt, and long dong.
    On the one hand, the Negro is the angel from whom whites needs to seek redemption. On the other hand, the Negro is the wild jungle liberator of white folks who'd been repressed by the tyranny of civilization. Negro is redeemer of soul and liberator of senses. The Negro has the mournful look and soulful bellowing voice about how he done have a dream, but he can also whup everyone, outrun everyone, dance faster, and hump longer. Don't progs see any contradiction in this? How can morally superior spiritual Negroes also be wild and crazy jungle Negroes of sports and rap? If Negroes are to be admired for their cool thuggery and jungle animal lust, just what is so high-and-mighty about Negro ethics and morality? It's all just a crazy prog fantasy.

    And we are seeing the result of this delusion in US and EU. Negroes are destroying more and more and more. And blacks in Africa keep breeding like rabbits, and more and more white wombs now produce black babies. This spells the doom of white civilization, but whites are brainwashed by PC and see themselves as moral inferiors of holy blacks when, in fact, blacks are the craziest bunch of natural lunatics the world has ever seen.

    White people think that because they had power over blacks and exploited them --- yes, whites did --- , that makes white evil and blacks noble.
    But there is problem in the logic. Suppose there is a decent Amish community. Its folks are mostly nice. Suppose there is a wild bandit tribe that goes around robbing and raising hell. Suppose this wild bandit tribe raids other wild bandit tribes and carries off prisoners to be sold as slaves.
    Now, it's obvious that the Amish are saner and better than the wild bandit folks.
    But suppose Amish come upon lots of land and need manpower. They get a bit greedy and decide to buy slaves from the wild bandit tribe. So, the wild bandit tribe offers to sell as slaves their captives who themselves are members of other wild bandit tribes. These slaves, being of bandit lineage, are naturally wild.
    Anyway, the Amish buy and use these wild bandit folks as slaves. Since the slaves have wild nature, the Amish must be tough with them and even whip em once awhile. Unless a clear message is sent to these wild fellers, they get out of hand and act nuts.

    Suppose Amish eventually figure that slavery is wrong and emancipate the wild bandit folks. And the Amish try to civilize them. But the Amish discover it is difficult since the wild bandit folks are naturally predisposed to holler too much like Toshiro Mifune in SEVEN SAMURAI.
    Still, the Amish try and get some results because the Moral Narrative favors the Amish. While the narrative addresses the wrongness of slavery, it say the wild bandit folks are of barbarian origin and need to be strictly controlled because, otherwise, they will start acting crazy. The narrative favors the Amish as the civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks.
    Also, suppose wild bandit folks are stronger than Amish, therefore dangerous.

    But suppose time passes, and Jews enter the Amish world and take over the narrative and change it. Jews say there are no racial differences between Amish and wild bandit folks. In other words, the Amish notion that wild bandit folks need to be supervised and elevated is just a 'racist' lie devised to maintain Amish supremacism over wild bandit folks who are racially no different from the Amish. So, the Amish must not only feel bad about slavery but about the whole notion of how the wild bandit folks need to make greater effort at civilization since they are more predisposed to be wild and crazy. According to the new narrative, the Amish were NEVER civilizational mentors of the wild bandit folks but mere exploiters, oppressors, and haters.
    So, the wild bandit folks gain the moral advantage. They feel they have nothing to learn from Amish anymore. Since they are morally so high and mighty whereas Amish are guilty of everything, they blame Amish for all their problems. And since their natural predisposition is to be savage, wild, and crazy, they have no means of self-criticism or introspection to realize that maybe the Amish aren't all bad and they themselves are all good. And since they are stronger than the Amish, they begin to whup Amish butt all over the place. That, as we know, would be the beginning of the end.
    Isn't that like the problem that White America has with blacks?

    Thankfully, the black population of the US is less than 15%, but even that is high enough to cause so many problems all over. And with more coming from Africa, there's bound to be more troubles down the line, especially as all Negroes are told in the US that they are moral superiors, whereas whites, as moral inferiors, have no right to judge blacks over anything.
    As for all the black Africans moving to Europe where the young generation worship Mandela and Bob Marley and Seal and Kanye West and Lumumba and Long Dong Silver, how will that turn out? It's gonna be hellish downfall. The Muslim problem in Europe is child's play compared to the true hell that will come with the massive arrivals of black Africans who are FOJ or Fresh out of the Jungle.

    Anyway, if civilization was made possible by reversing what is right by nature, post-civilization now operates by reversing what is right by civilization, at least in some areas.

    Civilization had to decree as wrong what is right by nature. In nature, taking is right. All animals will take from other animals. There are no rules. The only 'right' in nature is what comes naturally. So, if a big bear can take a kill from a cougar, it will. And there is nothing the cougar can do about it.
    While civilization also had wars and pillaging, and etc, especially against enemies, those within the same civilization had to play the same rules. A kind of honor-among-thieves. Otherwise, civilization couldn't develop and progress.
    In time, honor-among-thieves wasn't enough for complex civilization. Such system was, after all, just a mutual pact among thieves committed to stealing... like the hoodlums in RESERVOIR DOGS. They didn't believe stealing was wrong; they just didn't steal from one another for mutual benefit and mutual fear. They had no higher principle.

    In contrast, complex civilization needs people who really believe it is wrong to steal even if they could get away with it. So, what is right by civilization is the opposite of what is right by nature. So, in a way, civilization is a kind of necessary perversion of nature. Its morality is kind of 'slave morality'. It chains the virile and vital animal in us. The fact that so many people love gangster movies, rappers, thug heroes, barbarian king stories, rough sports, and pirates of romance novels goes to show that, on some level, they all feel stifled by civilization's morality that forbade freedom to our nature. Something in us wants to root for Randall McMurphy who just goes for whatever he wants.

    Still, the reason why civilization had to suppress what is right by nature was obvious: if natural forces were allowed to run free, civilization fell apart, and all would be lost.

    At some point, however, Western mankind discovered that excessive suppression of nature actually held back civilizational progress. It prevented people from being adventurous and take risks. It also led to stagnant corruption whereupon those with the power cynically invoked morality and honor to suppress any voices as vices when, in fact, those voices needed to be heard and offered necessary criticism and possibilities.
    The West came upon a compromise whereby natural energies would be released on condition that they be sublimated toward higher goals, enterprises, and expressions. So, something like the Renaissance and later Enlightenment happened. There was more freedom for individuals, but the expressions and endeavors had to reach high, seek deeper meaning, serve the glory of God, expand the power of the domain by new discoveries in science or new voyages for land and resources. Homo artists could be creative, but they had to serve God or higher beauty than fantasize about massive orgies with leather dildos up their ass. If Robert Mapplethorpe had lived during the Renaissance, maybe he would have been Caravaggio.
    Still, the tension between civilization and nature was not an easy one.

    But then, after WWII, there was prolonged time of peace and prosperity with vast advances in technology, medicine, and everything else. For one thing, civilizations no longer needed to fear being overrun by barbarians. In the past, even the greatest civilizations could be conquered by barbarians such as Huns, Mongols, Vikings, Germanic barbarians, Berbers, and etc. But there was no such danger in modern times.
    Or vast numbers of people could be wiped out plagues and epidemics. Modern societies lost all such fears. Modern society could only be conquered by other modern societies.

    Also, with new means of transportation and boom in housing, so many people could own homes and live safely. Also, technology rid society of the negative consequences of wild natural behavior. Prior to such technology, wild natural behavior was checked either by social sanctions/punishment or by nature's revenge. If a woman fooled around, she would get pregnant and would have to take care of the kid. And the guy who got the girl pregnant might be forced into shotgun marriage. Also, there were sexual diseases for those who fooled around recklessly. So many died of syphilis.
    But modern society came up with all sorts of medicines and means to prevent pregnancy and disease even when people acted wildly natural like animals. Now, people could have sex like super-rabbits and never get pregnant or die of disease.

    Also, vast expansion of material goods and opportunities meant that everyone had a second chance. When educational material had been scarce, many couldn't go to college. So, when someone had a chance to go to school, he had to make sure to do it right cuz there might not be a second chance. His wilder nature told him to bum off, party, skip studies, and take it easy. But that would mean failure and no second chance. But with vast expanse of educational opportunities, one could mess up totally in high school but then be given another chance in community colleges.

    In the past, will to work mattered a lot. It determined whether one lived or died. If one didn't work on the farm and didn't produce enough food, it could mean a lean winter and starvation. So, even though the human nature wanted to slack off, take it easy(like the grasshopper vs the ant), and goof off, one had to follow what was right by civilization that what was right by nature since work culture is key to civilization. An animal that lives by what is right by nature is content to just take from other animals. In contrast, the human organism must do what is right by civilization and work to produce enough food for the long term even if he would prefer to take it easy.

    But mass food production by modern agriculture and market economics produced more food than could be consumed by Americans. Food became cheap, even for the poor. And the government provided free food to tens of millions of folks. That meant one could live like grasshoppers or wild apes and still have enough to eat, even to the point of having pot bellies and fat asses.

    In the past, violating the rules of civilization by doing what is right by nature meant the fall of civilization and the return of barbarism, even the reversion to savagery.

    But modern world made it possible to indulge in wild natural pleasures and still maintain civilization. Also, civilization created medicine and other means to reverse the negative effects of wild natural behavior. Also, indulgence in wild pleasures could boost economic production since vice industries could offer all sorts of pleasures in food, sex, entertainment, thrills, drugs, and etc.

    If a woman acted like a whore in the past, she might die of disease or end up pregnant and have to be a mother. Today, a modern woman can have sex with 100s of men a year and not be pregnant or die of disease. She could have antibiotics for VD. She could use the pill to prevent pregnancy. And even if she gets pregnant, she could use abortion to kill the kid.

    And no matter how lazy and worthless you are, you don't have to worry about starving in the US or EU. Indeed, the state will provide you with free housing, clothes, food, and etc even if you choose to be a wild crazy lunatic.

    Since everyone loves pleasure and since everyone can have pleasure without the dire consequences of the fall of civilization, we've undergone a new revolution in morality.

    Going from nature to civilization meant reversing what is right by nature into what is right by civilization. Mankind gained from civilization but has to sacrifice much of what was natural. Life in civilization became more secure but less fun. More ant-like but less grasshopper-like.

    But in with the rise of plenty and security in the late modern era, mankind can indulge in lots of pleasure. They can be 'natural' once again but without the 'revenge of nature'.
    One could fuc* like rabbits without breeding like rabbits. One could live like a grasshopper without freezing like a grasshopper.

    So, traditional morality and traditional normality are seen as suspect. They are seen as antiquated systems of behavior that are no longer relevant in the Age of Leisure.
    Indeed, the main reason for why people work so hard is for more leisure, not to raise a family. And since people are so addicted to fun, they don't want to say NO to anyone's else's fun, no matter how ridiculous it may be. So, if it's fun for homos to celebrate homo-ness and get 'married', who is to say NO to such fun?

    Steven Pinker seems to believe that traditional morality, though once useful in the transition from nature to civilization, now stands in the way of the New Way where we can have a balance of Social Order(according to science and technology) and Pleasure(that give full release to all our natural fetishes and drives).

    But is this 'return to nature' a return to real nature? Doesn't real nature have consequences? That is how nature balances itself. It's like there is hubris and nemesis. It's like what Merlin says. Everything has its opposites.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jahLEB3DbKs

    But we now pretend that we can do whatever, and there won't be a reckoning since we are protected from it by all these safety nets. We feel that we can indulge in natural pleasures without worry since our science/technology will do the balancing act.
    So, we can hump like animals and have fun but be spared from dire effects by pills, gadgets, and procedures.

    The current economic theory offers the same assurances. After the Great Depression, the government supposedly placed a bunch of safety nets and cushions so that something like that can't happen ever again. In 2008, this was tested with the biggest financial earthquake since 1929. We were told the system weathered the stress and survived. The system can save whatever is Too Big to Fail. We need not worry. So, whatever crisis results from the Return of Nature --- greed, lust, hedonism, gluttony, megalomania, etc --- , we need not worry because the System is powerful and secure enough to weather and correct any problem and restore the balance and 'make american great again'. After all, even the HIV horror was contained in the long run with new drugs, and there is now even talk of a total cure for HIV.. which means homos can return to mass-ass-humping and need not worry since science will find a fix for whatever problem that comes along.

    So, on the one hand, the more science and technology advances, the more we become like animals. Gross and indulgent in our appetites for pleasure. It's a strange paradox. With better science and technology, we can totally indulge in animal pleasures --- like in BRAVE NEW WORLD and SLEEPER --- without fear of the breakdown of the system... like what happened to decadent Rome that crumbled and reverted to barbarianism.
    The more we advance scientifically, the more apelike we become. It's fitting that Michio Kaku talks of time travel but also of the value of rap, an apelike music. It is fitting that the most educated Liberal elites are into cuck culture of having their women do apelike Negroes. Intellectual obsessed with being 'more evolved' but having their women have sex with the less evolved. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY GOT IT WRONG. The Star Child should be the Star Ape.

    Indeed, consider the rising swinger culture. There was a time when such would have led to all sorts of diseases and unwanted pregnancies. But now, there is no such anxiety. Also, these people have come up with sophisticated systems of screening to ensure that they can enjoy the animal pleasure without sacrificing their bourgeois comfort. It's all been professionalized and systemized.

    But can this really go on? Will the system finally break? I think it will. Such decadence and indulgence means the West lost the moral resolve to say NO. Even though the West cannot be invaded by barbarians on horseback as in ancient and medieval times, the West has lost the moral compass and resolve to realize what is most central to its existence and survival. So, even though it has the material and military means to defend itself from invaders, it lacks moral courage since its concept of 'western values' has been corrupted by globalism. EU cannot stop the Soft Invasion of 'refugees' who tug at Western heartstrings. 'Western Values' are now all about hedonism + virtue-signaling; and Western people, whose only meaning comes from shallow pleasures, feel that they have NO RIGHT to say NO to newcomers who also want to share in the Pleasures. A decadent people who have it so easy lack the resolve to say NO to anyone else. And people who had it easy and inherited this ease don't really feel they own it; they lack the hunger. It's like those who worked to make their fortune cling to what they got, but those who grew up rich don't value the real worth of what they have. They take it for granted and even feel 'guilty' that they got it so easy.

    The young people who grew up in the West after WWII inherited a lot of good times from their parents, and they take it for granted. They don't see the true value of it since they didn't have to struggle for it. Since they were guaranteed everything by parents or society, they think this is a universal right that cannot be denied to anyone. They don't see the good things in their nation as the product of their ancestors' struggle.
    Also, they were raised with PC as replacement for Christianity, and PC teaches them that it's great to indulge in Negro culture and since Negroes are so cool, they must allow tons of African Negroes into their nations.

    And then, over time, the system will fall as Europe is turned Afrope.

    Hello Priss.

    You make many good points in that rant, to many of which I’d like to reply, but will keep it brief.

    This is also the case in Japan(even in cases where they are married to housewives) where too many men don’t go home after work but hang with fellow buddies at bars and clubs late into the night.

    That was the custom, in the run-up to the bubble economy, for over ten years after the bubble burst, and in a restrained way (the company pays for a couple of hours to say thanks on occasion) it continues at times, but is increasingly rare.

    Sure, some sectors (some finance, some real estate?, politicians for sure) retain the custom, but it is rare now.

    More to the point, there was a govt. ruling that married women had an automatic right to their husbands’ pensions, the result was a huge spike in divorce from sixty-something men, I knew several who were affected, some clearly arseholes, many clearly not.

    Could say much more on that, let alone some of your other points, but will leave it there for now.

    Why don’t you contact the site and restore an old user name and keep it fixed, or ask to use a new one?

    It is a little sad to see you always having to post as Anon or Anonymous now.

    Read More
  69. @Jim Christian

    I once had a boss who ordered me to use a solvent with dangerous fumes to get a printing machine working. Didn’t think about it much until the next day, but the clear breach of work safety laws. Forgot the name of the chemical
     
    Cletus, Che', sorry for your troubles. Toluene, per chance? Sweet-smelling stuff? Aromatic hydrocarbons, deadly and they knew it the minute they came out with them. This stuff was industry's and the military's way of saying deplorable blue-collar workers live too long. They used to give the planes a "hand job" bath at sea to get the salt off of them. Plane captains (check the oil, fuel the plane-type guys, all enlisted18-20 year-olds) would take towels, dip them in five gallon buckets of this stuff, wring em out and wipe the planes, bare-handed, no breathing protection. The stuff would be running down their arms, they reeked of the stuff. My little brother was one of them, he was dead at 39 of a hideous form of cancer associated with that stuff and he only did three years. I worked in a cleaner environment, liquid oxygen and air conditioning and ejection seats, so my work kept me far away from that stuff. But then, asbestos. Any day, one of the nodules will light up in a lung and I'll be off to never-never land, too earlier than I ought. And they knew THAT was bad and used it anyway. Industry in cooperation with OSHA WILL get you dead.

    In the phone business, for decades now, I pass through printing companies and newspaper plants and THEY reek, to this day, of the very same solvents and I see those guys with their cans, rags and brushes, cleaning the presses, some with rubber gloves, none with breathing protection, all soaked with the stuff. I go into one of these places for twenty minutes and I can smell the stuff on my breath for the rest of the day. OSHA-Approved, no prob. Ye Gawds..

    Yes, it was some kind of toluene-based mixture.

    Am fortunate to have nowhere near the exposure you describe others as having.

    This reminds me of a physics (or bio-medical electronics, forget which) lecturer who told me that in the early days of microwave-band radar, people on ships would stand close to the transponders to keep warm.

    Horror story, but real. Some died very quickly.

    Informative post, Jim, thanks.

    Read More
  70. @jacques sheete

    However given our druthers, most would prefer to drive a Peterbilt than
    being stuck with a VW bug.
     
    Not I; while VW bugs are too small, Petes are too slow to get going.

    A moderate size hot rod, built for performance, is where it's at! ;)

    While it is indeed true that the Peterbilt will not win the 1/4 mile; it will still be going strong
    20 hours later without having to stop for refueling or a lube job.

    Read More
  71. @Cletus Rothschild
    Thanks Che . . .

    This is way OT for the subject, but I don't mind shedding a bit of light on brain injury.

    “… but encephalopathy is a vague term.”

    It is. I guess it's a kinder way to say “brain damage”.

    “Words you are posting are lucid.”

    In many cases such as mine, many measures of intelligence seem to be intact. A lot of people can do very well on standard IQ tests. But even if people seem to be very intelligent, their intelligence can still suffer relative to what it used to be. A doctor with brain damage may come across as much more intelligent that the average person, yet he may have suffered enough damage to prevent him from working in his field of former expertise. And it's very dangerous because it's difficult to perceive the increasing deficits when it happens over a long period of time, so you're not inclined to see mistakes for the problems that they are. Even if you finally do perceive it, what do you do? Do you tell your boss and potentially get yourself fired? It wound up getting me fired. Assuming that you can simply transition to a less demanding field of expertise misses a very important aspect of the problem: just as you're losing your abilities in your field of expertise, you're also losing the ability to learn new things.

    The harm is most definitely real as my own tests have shown. I've worked very hard at trying to do the things that should come automatically after decades of experience, but it's a losing battle. Whatever lucidity I exhibit here is a shadow of what I used to be and pretty much shows the superficial extent of my intellectual wheelhouse. I can't count the proper change to buy a can of soda at a grocery store or follow simple instructions or make simple decisions or do any number of things that an intelligent person is supposed to do. Even when I tell people where my deficits are, they still get angry at me when I blunder and screw up various parts of my life. Things that have taken me many years to understand through research and personal experience, others think they can figure out in a matter of a few minutes conversation and if I don't listen to their ignorant pontifications, I'm stubborn. So I've given up the fight and I live a generally isolated life as so many people with brain injury do. It isn't by choice, but of necessity.

    Your example of the Japanese guys is a good one as the Japanese are prideful people and they wouldn't have given in as they have if the problem wasn't valid.

    Hey Cletus,
    I will be posting too much with this, but pretty sure Linh Dinh won’t mind.

    Your words are very good, I am sorry to hear of your incapacity, but from your words, it is very hard to see. You write very well!

    Japanese research says that simple calculations are very good for the brain if frail in some areas.

    So, if you have trouble counting change, practise the calculations.

    You may even enjoy it. I would be a foolish friend, but an ocean away.

    Your good writing means that the damage is very limited.

    Read More
  72. @Peter Akuleyev

    Because he is phenotypically a white man but has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a dissolute black.
     
    No, he has the sexual morals, time preference and impulse control of a Sicilian peasant. If blacks were the only dissolute race on the planet life would be simpler. There is a good reason why Southern Italy has been a shithole for centuries.

    Southern Italians> pretty much any Northern Europeans.

    Read More
  73. @Truth
    Where exactly do you get "wigger" out of this story? Where did he say he wanted to be black?

    How many of his ex-wives and girlfriends had to go on the dole to support his little bastards? He finds ‘em feels ‘em, and fucks ‘em, and we pay for it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    We've paid for Mitt Romney, Donald Trump, and George W. Bush's children much more efficiently over the years. This is an incredibly difficult concept to understand, and will probably take a few years to truly understand it, but it's true; and you now have the knowledge of it. Please do your own research, knowledge is power.
    , @Old Marty
    Not a one my mighty mouthed mis-informed asshole friend (and I'm being generous because its the Christmas season)...

    I've provided very well for any and all of my family thru the years, I've owned more Homes, Couches and Bedroom sets in the course of my life than any 10 people have collectively owned.

    My "Bastards" (as you so freely refer) are my Children, who for the most part have become very productive members of society...

    Just because your mind paints me as something other than what is your idea citizen, does not give you the right to imply that I've been a dead beat Father or one who has not handled his financial obligations properly...
  74. @Kurt van Ghoye
    I can kinda see that. At the same time I think that men and women need to do more, much more. Make families great again is the general thrust. The way there passes through a goodly amount of shaming and moral pressure. We need to be willing to apply it in our own lives and to a lesser degree when judging others. I am going to do my part in my own fledgling family, by the grace of God.

    The way there passes through a goodly amount of shaming and moral pressure.

    In order to feel shame you must have morals, and if you think leftists have morals then you have not been paying attention.

    Read More
  75. @utu
    "managut = manicotti in Sicilian" - I don't think so. It is American invention often seen in Italian mafia movies. The same goes for:

    "prosciutto (pro-SHOOT-toe) becoming pro-SHOOT, calzone (cal-TSO-nay) becoming cal-ZONE and pasta e fagioli (PAH-stah eh faj-YOH-lee) becoming pasta fasul (fa-ZOOL)."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/nyregion/you-say-prosciutto-i-say-proshoot-and-purists-cringe.html

    "And Gregory Pell, an assistant professor at Hofstra University who teaches Italian, said that because of the way double consonants were spoken, such as the double "t" in manicotti, Americans might not clearly hear the last "ee" sound. When New Yorkers drop their endings, he said, "it's become a new word and its own version.""

    Different dialects of the same language can pronounce the same word differently. This is also known as a colloquialism. It doesn’t mean the subject of the word is different so I am going to assume that “managut = manicotti in Sicilian” is correct.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    You are correct about colloquialism but in this case this colloquialism was developed in NY and NJ and not in Sicily. Nobody in Sicily would agree with “managut = manicotti in Sicilian”.
  76. @Truth
    I have to admit; I am a bit perplexed by some of you guys and your inability to make the simplest bridges between geopolitics and human nature.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYNMYP7DSXg

    Appreciate the video and the implications of the assault on human sexuality detailed therein. Short of storming our corrupt institutions and taking them back, for which the time must be ripe and the wind just right, can we do better than work to make our families into little fortresses?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    First we must know who the enemy is, and what his his motivation; other poor people are not the enemy, and his motivation Is to keep us fighting amongst each other to prevent us from fighting him. Secondly, we must vote with the only reasonable vote we have, our pocketbooks and checkbooks, that means go out our way to stop intentionally making them rich.
  77. @woodNfish
    Different dialects of the same language can pronounce the same word differently. This is also known as a colloquialism. It doesn't mean the subject of the word is different so I am going to assume that “managut = manicotti in Sicilian” is correct.

    You are correct about colloquialism but in this case this colloquialism was developed in NY and NJ and not in Sicily. Nobody in Sicily would agree with “managut = manicotti in Sicilian”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    Of course it is an American colloquialism. Lin even stated that in the article. Colloquialisms are always regional.
  78. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @E. A. Costa
    There are many ancient Greek and later Arab survivals in Sicilian Italian. Look hard enough and you could also find Phoenician. Ancient and Byzantine Greek also persist in Southern Italy which was once Magna Graecia. There was one Arab occupied city there but no appreciable Arab influence on the local languages.

    Indeed in the 1950's there was discovered an isolated mountain village that still spoke what seems to have been Byzantine Greek (as opposed to ancient), though surrounded by Italian speakers. They were gradually learning Italian, however.

    The example of weakened or dropped final vowels given for pulenta examples above comes from Romagna-Emilia in the north, by the way, not Sicily. There is no influence of New World Italian in these dialects.

    Television and radio have weakened the dialects, as with English, but they are still spoken and written, Pasolini when young was a brilliant poet in his own dialect, for example.

    Utu's expert and his various discussions are nonsense.

    Emilio-Romagna also had a significant historical Greek influence- is that related in any way to vowel dropping or other features?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Actually I suppose French influence is more likely.
  79. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Appreciate the video and the implications of the assault on human sexuality detailed therein. Short of storming our corrupt institutions and taking them back, for which the time must be ripe and the wind just right, can we do better than work to make our families into little fortresses?

    First we must know who the enemy is, and what his his motivation; other poor people are not the enemy, and his motivation Is to keep us fighting amongst each other to prevent us from fighting him. Secondly, we must vote with the only reasonable vote we have, our pocketbooks and checkbooks, that means go out our way to stop intentionally making them rich.

    Read More
  80. @woodNfish
    How many of his ex-wives and girlfriends had to go on the dole to support his little bastards? He finds 'em feels 'em, and fucks 'em, and we pay for it.

    We’ve paid for Mitt Romney, Donald Trump, and George W. Bush’s children much more efficiently over the years. This is an incredibly difficult concept to understand, and will probably take a few years to truly understand it, but it’s true; and you now have the knowledge of it. Please do your own research, knowledge is power.

    Read More
  81. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anon
    Emilio-Romagna also had a significant historical Greek influence- is that related in any way to vowel dropping or other features?

    Actually I suppose French influence is more likely.

    Read More
  82. @utu
    You are correct about colloquialism but in this case this colloquialism was developed in NY and NJ and not in Sicily. Nobody in Sicily would agree with “managut = manicotti in Sicilian”.

    Of course it is an American colloquialism. Lin even stated that in the article. Colloquialisms are always regional.

    Read More
  83. @Linh Dinh
    Hi Che Guava,

    You ever come to Philly, I'll take you to Friendly and Jack's in Kensington. Jack's is so cheap, you can get buzzed on five bucks!

    Linh

    I don’t see why the OP replied to your reply to me, but …

    Hope I can go there some time, I would really like to visit the southeast, Appalachia, midwest, Las Vegas if work ever permits. Thanks for the invitation for Phily.

    Linh, do you know of Lucius Shepherd?

    He is a good current US SF writer, from what I have read, always settings are from the western side of Pennsylvania, through Virginia, one in Florida.

    Although I have only read some of his short stories and novellas, they are good to great. Don’t know about the novels.

    You are more international jet-set than I, if you are in Tokyo, Mr. Unz is free to give you my e-mail address, only place where I have a social connection that is sounding like the Friendly Lounge, but nobody speaks much english, is fun. I am only to speaking Japanese there, but you would likely like it.

    Read More
  84. Hi Che Guava,

    I don’t fly around as much these days. My political writing has shut many doors, so I’m hardly invited to give readings any more.

    It’s a career suicide in this country to talk about black crime, slam the idea of Israel and sneer at Democratic Party leaders.

    Mieko Kawakami is pushing to have my Postcards book published in Japan, however. If that happens, there’s a good chance I’ll go to Tokyo. I’ll look you up.

    Linh

    Read More
  85. @Kurt van Ghoye
    Snipworthy, R-selected POS wigger.

    "I’ve always been a very good provider"

    I'd like to hear his wives' and many kids' side of the story.

    We’re supposed to believe that he provided well for SEVEN children?

    And by three different women, how admirable.

    Another dirtbag. Not interesting or thought-provoking, LD.

    Read More
  86. @Dan Hayes
    I look forward each week to Linh's vignettes. These introduce me to a wholly different way of life. Superficially these are portraits of losers, but that's beside the point and wrong to boot. The chronicled people have lived their life their way and oftentimes showing startling resilience and fortitude.

    And an important point: what personality traits has enabled Linh to succeed so well as a Father Confessor?

    What personality traits does Linh Dinh possess to allow him to succeed so well?

    I’ve known Linh fairly well for a few years and Value his friendship, so I feel I may be able to answer this question.

    Linh is an honest, outgoing and very friendly person who goes out of his way to meet new people. He is extremely patient and possesses the rare SKILL of being able to listen to what other people say.

    People recognize these qualities and allow Linh to endear himself to them.

    Above all, Linh is brave enough to approach even the people who seem most deplorable to society and connect with them. Many of these people probably never view him suspiciously or assume he has ulterior motives to take advantage of them.

    Of course, I am just brushing the surface of Linhs personality as I have experienced, but I dothink these points illustrate why Linh is so successful in his role as an interviewer (or father confessor, as the case may be).

    Read More
  87. @Anon
    Linh Dinh considers many American lives, broken ones too.

    Maybe we should consider some sexual politics.

    When a woman loses a job, she gains a family.

    When a man loses a job, he loses a family.

    The main purpose of human life is to have a family.

    A woman can have a family without a job because a man will marry a woman without a job.

    A man cannot have a family without a job because a woman will not marry a man without a job.

    So, when a man takes a well-paying job from a woman, he is offering her a chance to have a family.
    But, when a woman takes a well-paying job from a man, she is robbing him of the chance to have a family.

    We are organisms, and the main purpose of organism is continue through reproduction of life and culture through the family.

    We talk of women's right to work, but what about men's right to family?

    How can men have families when so many choice jobs are taken by women?

    When a man takes a job from a woman, he doesn't take away her chance to have a family. She may lose her job but can still have what is most important to life, a family.

    But when a woman takes a job from a man, she takes away his chance to have a family. She takes away the job and the chance to have a family.

    No wonder so many American males are dispirited and lost.

    This is why asexual individualist libertarian ideology of economics is all wrong.

    Jobs exist not because we love to work. Most work is boring. We work to have families.

    No family, no continuance of life and culture.

    And the current situation prevents so many men from having families.

    i cant think of a single job taken by any woman from a man. city clerks office? thats ridiculous- my heritage and future isnt dependent on some lazy mans push paper work.

    the whole comment is ridiculous. the problem is not jobs its inflation of asset values. it costs too much to buy a house and the title is still insecure because of property taxes, foreclosures eviction and shutoffs. thats it- not jobs, not immigrants, not women.

    LAND AND REAL ESTATE

    Read More
  88. @Wizard of Oz
    All the comments including criticisms of the piece or its subject have assumed Marty was telling the truth. How much do you believe of it?

    And what BTW are we to make of "I got three inches cut off"????!!

    @ jacques sheete…

    I am the subject of the Author, I’d like to thank you for noticing that this Interview was taken with-in a local bar while consuming Beers. The only statement that is and was misleading is about the “Cut off 3 inches” I can not remember exactly was said by another patron at the time, but I was just injecting a bit of humor and of course a laugh for the other guys at the Bar…

    For what it’s worth, Linn relayed “My Life” accurately but rather shallow, there is so much more to me and my values and lifestyle that was not included at the time of the interview, which is my fault because when this was started, I was just taking on Repair work, I since got involved in a “Total Rehab” and had promised the property owner a Christmas delivery. That being said, I missed several appointments with Linn so he could “Fill in” the in between years.

    @ Unka Buck …

    Old Marty is not a man of means, just a hard working dude who grew up the way I did, nothing pretentious nor nothing to be ashamed of. No one took notice that the $8.00 drink was ordered by Gary Maddox and NOT Old Marty…

    Old Marty enjoys 6 or 8 Budweiser 12 oz bottles a day @ $3.25 a pop… If I person who has been working pretty much every day of his life cant stop by the local watering hole and enjoy a few cold brews then something is totally wrong with life…

    @ Wizard of Oz….

    Sitting in a Bar filled with other patrons who have known me or my family for 50ish years, there is not much that can be said or alluded to while being over heard in an oral interview that would not be called out as Bullshit if it weren’t the truth. Considering the fact that the interview was held in a small neighborhood Taproom in South Philly where every one knows mostly everyone else I’d have to state that “Old Marty” is pretty forthright and on point…

    @ The other people commenting in a negative way;

    I’ve lived my life the way I seen fit, did what I wanted, when I wanted. What worked for me, may not work for others. This lifetime doesn’t own me a dime and at the same time I owe no anything either.

    For those sitting there behind a Computer and rushing to judgements on someone you’ve only read a few paragraphs of Humor infested dialog about, only shows how sad their own lives must be. Remember, In a glass house, don’t throw stones…

    In other words, I did it my way and on my own! When it comes time for the Old Rocking Chair, I’ll be able to look back at my life and laugh till I drop dead. I do not have to defend my life, I’ve already lived it…

    Enjoy life as you make it, Live it the way you feel is best, It is, what it is… (Old Marty)

    @ Linn… Thanks Buddy!

    Read More
  89. @Old Marty
    @ jacques sheete...

    I am the subject of the Author, I'd like to thank you for noticing that this Interview was taken with-in a local bar while consuming Beers. The only statement that is and was misleading is about the "Cut off 3 inches" I can not remember exactly was said by another patron at the time, but I was just injecting a bit of humor and of course a laugh for the other guys at the Bar...

    For what it's worth, Linn relayed "My Life" accurately but rather shallow, there is so much more to me and my values and lifestyle that was not included at the time of the interview, which is my fault because when this was started, I was just taking on Repair work, I since got involved in a "Total Rehab" and had promised the property owner a Christmas delivery. That being said, I missed several appointments with Linn so he could "Fill in" the in between years.

    @ Unka Buck ...

    Old Marty is not a man of means, just a hard working dude who grew up the way I did, nothing pretentious nor nothing to be ashamed of. No one took notice that the $8.00 drink was ordered by Gary Maddox and NOT Old Marty...

    Old Marty enjoys 6 or 8 Budweiser 12 oz bottles a day @ $3.25 a pop... If I person who has been working pretty much every day of his life cant stop by the local watering hole and enjoy a few cold brews then something is totally wrong with life...

    @ Wizard of Oz....

    Sitting in a Bar filled with other patrons who have known me or my family for 50ish years, there is not much that can be said or alluded to while being over heard in an oral interview that would not be called out as Bullshit if it weren't the truth. Considering the fact that the interview was held in a small neighborhood Taproom in South Philly where every one knows mostly everyone else I'd have to state that "Old Marty" is pretty forthright and on point...

    @ The other people commenting in a negative way;

    I've lived my life the way I seen fit, did what I wanted, when I wanted. What worked for me, may not work for others. This lifetime doesn't own me a dime and at the same time I owe no anything either.

    For those sitting there behind a Computer and rushing to judgements on someone you've only read a few paragraphs of Humor infested dialog about, only shows how sad their own lives must be. Remember, In a glass house, don't throw stones...

    In other words, I did it my way and on my own! When it comes time for the Old Rocking Chair, I'll be able to look back at my life and laugh till I drop dead. I do not have to defend my life, I've already lived it...

    Enjoy life as you make it, Live it the way you feel is best, It is, what it is... (Old Marty)

    @ Linn... Thanks Buddy!

    Thank you! And a Happy Christmas…

    Read More
  90. @E. A. Costa
    There are many ancient Greek and later Arab survivals in Sicilian Italian. Look hard enough and you could also find Phoenician. Ancient and Byzantine Greek also persist in Southern Italy which was once Magna Graecia. There was one Arab occupied city there but no appreciable Arab influence on the local languages.

    Indeed in the 1950's there was discovered an isolated mountain village that still spoke what seems to have been Byzantine Greek (as opposed to ancient), though surrounded by Italian speakers. They were gradually learning Italian, however.

    The example of weakened or dropped final vowels given for pulenta examples above comes from Romagna-Emilia in the north, by the way, not Sicily. There is no influence of New World Italian in these dialects.

    Television and radio have weakened the dialects, as with English, but they are still spoken and written, Pasolini when young was a brilliant poet in his own dialect, for example.

    Utu's expert and his various discussions are nonsense.

    Interesting about the Greek speaking village. I have teased a Calabrian born friend who has light brown hair and blue eyes that he must be descended from Vikings who dropped by his village on the way south but might I now plausibly switch to ancient Greeks for explanation?

    Read More
  91. @Unka Buck
    Of such ephemera is every life made. Lacking only the ability to rise above the inchoate and, adding fat fingers to plastic keys, work the electronic magick that assigns thought to infinity. Roll on 'Nacherly Speaking' and the coming of vocal narrative that whole governmental agencies are paid to mine for pith in our sad world.

    The pen will prove to be less mighty than the sword.

    But at $8 bucks a pop one has to assume that dear old "Marty the fixture" either is a man of substance "downing a few each evening", or else he don't drink that fancy shit.

    "Linh Dinh' (Lyndon?) might be in a better place to judge, but shouldn't such 'proven' watering holes, the ones with real, as opposed to ersatz 'kultur', be rated by the distance to which they have subsided into the earth over time? Shouldn't you, physically, have to go 'down' to enter a 'dive'?

    I'd give this a solid B on the Hemingway scale.

    And I really liked the part about getting laid.

    @ Unka Buck …

    Old Marty is not a man of means, just a hard working dude who grew up the way I did, nothing pretentious nor nothing to be ashamed of. No one took notice that the $8.00 drink was ordered by Gary Maddox and NOT Old Marty…

    Old Marty enjoys 6 or 8 Budweiser 12 oz bottles a day @ $3.25 a pop… If I person who has been working pretty much every day of his life cant stop by the local watering hole and enjoy a few cold brews then something is totally wrong with life…

    Read More
  92. @jacques sheete

    What benefit is there to knowing the life details of this piece of shit?
     
    I'm betting yer counting it a benefit that you can feel superior enough to deride him as a piece of shit.

    What benefit is there in posting a comment like that?

    @ jacques sheete…

    I am the subject of the Author, I’d like to thank you for noticing that this Interview was taken with-in a local bar while consuming Beers. The only statement that is and was misleading is about the “Cut off 3 inches” I can not remember exactly was said by another patron at the time, but I was just injecting a bit of humor and of course a laugh for the other guys at the Bar…

    For what it’s worth, Linn relayed “My Life” accurately but rather shallow, there is so much more to me and my values and lifestyle that was not included at the time of the interview, which is my fault because when this was started, I was just taking on Repair work, I since got involved in a “Total Rehab” and had promised the property owner a Christmas delivery. That being said, I missed several appointments with Linn so he could “Fill in” the in between years.

    Read More
  93. @Dwright
    So far off pal. I am a working man with a business who supported Trump.
    We don't support immoral tomcats who have values of gutter snipes, why do you?

    Working man , not my kind.

    I’ve lived my life the way I seen fit, did what I wanted, when I wanted. What worked for me, may not work for others. This lifetime doesn’t own me a dime and at the same time I owe no anything either.

    For those sitting there behind a Computer and rushing to judgements on someone you’ve only read a few paragraphs of Humor infested dialog about, only shows how sad their own lives must be. Remember, In a glass house, don’t throw stones…

    In other words, I did it my way and on my own! When it comes time for the Old Rocking Chair, I’ll be able to look back at my life and laugh till I drop dead. I do not have to defend my life, I’ve already lived it…

    Enjoy life as you make it, Live it the way you feel is best, It is, what it is… (Old Marty)

    Read More
  94. @woodNfish
    How many of his ex-wives and girlfriends had to go on the dole to support his little bastards? He finds 'em feels 'em, and fucks 'em, and we pay for it.

    Not a one my mighty mouthed mis-informed asshole friend (and I’m being generous because its the Christmas season)…

    I’ve provided very well for any and all of my family thru the years, I’ve owned more Homes, Couches and Bedroom sets in the course of my life than any 10 people have collectively owned.

    My “Bastards” (as you so freely refer) are my Children, who for the most part have become very productive members of society…

    Just because your mind paints me as something other than what is your idea citizen, does not give you the right to imply that I’ve been a dead beat Father or one who has not handled his financial obligations properly…

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    Marty, if you don't like the truth of what illegitimate children are called, perhaps you should have married the mothers of your children. Any dick can have children, but it takes a lot more than that and money to be a father, and as your third paragraph implies, there are other sides to your story.

    I'd like to think that you responded out of some sense of shame, but considering the arrogance of your response I doubt that is true. Shame used to be a useful tool for maintaining a civil society and helped to prevent people like you from doing as much damage as you and those like you have done to our society today. I expect your history of broken families will also be your legacy.
  95. @Old Marty
    Not a one my mighty mouthed mis-informed asshole friend (and I'm being generous because its the Christmas season)...

    I've provided very well for any and all of my family thru the years, I've owned more Homes, Couches and Bedroom sets in the course of my life than any 10 people have collectively owned.

    My "Bastards" (as you so freely refer) are my Children, who for the most part have become very productive members of society...

    Just because your mind paints me as something other than what is your idea citizen, does not give you the right to imply that I've been a dead beat Father or one who has not handled his financial obligations properly...

    Marty, if you don’t like the truth of what illegitimate children are called, perhaps you should have married the mothers of your children. Any dick can have children, but it takes a lot more than that and money to be a father, and as your third paragraph implies, there are other sides to your story.

    I’d like to think that you responded out of some sense of shame, but considering the arrogance of your response I doubt that is true. Shame used to be a useful tool for maintaining a civil society and helped to prevent people like you from doing as much damage as you and those like you have done to our society today. I expect your history of broken families will also be your legacy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Linh Dinh
    Marty had seven children by three of his five wives. None of his kids is a bastard.
  96. @woodNfish
    Marty, if you don't like the truth of what illegitimate children are called, perhaps you should have married the mothers of your children. Any dick can have children, but it takes a lot more than that and money to be a father, and as your third paragraph implies, there are other sides to your story.

    I'd like to think that you responded out of some sense of shame, but considering the arrogance of your response I doubt that is true. Shame used to be a useful tool for maintaining a civil society and helped to prevent people like you from doing as much damage as you and those like you have done to our society today. I expect your history of broken families will also be your legacy.

    Marty had seven children by three of his five wives. None of his kids is a bastard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    I stand corrected and offer my apology to Marty fore referring to his children as bastards.
  97. @Linh Dinh
    Marty had seven children by three of his five wives. None of his kids is a bastard.

    I stand corrected and offer my apology to Marty fore referring to his children as bastards.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Linh Dinh Comments via RSS