The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Commentariat
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

[edit: The first comment made by a specific handle will have to be manually approved. I’m in the process of setting up regular commenters with the auto-approval funciton. If I missed you, please leave a comment and I’ll get you added in.

For the purposes of these comment sections, dehumanizing language is anything that refers to a broad group of humans as something other than human based on immutable characteristics of said group (ie “vermin”, “parasites”, etc). Describing particular actions as parasitical is fine so long as accompanying evidence is presented, but blanket absolute statements that are obviously untrue (ie “all members of group X are parasitical”) is not. The intention is for these comment sections to be thought-provoking and idea-generating. There are other places on the internet that are cathartic for those who find spewing vulgarity to be cathartic, but this is not such a place.]

I’ve instituted comment moderation. Known commenters who don’t violate the forum rules–no personal identifying information, no dehumanizing language, no racial slurs, no spamming–will be set up for auto-approval. Violations will result in loss of auto-approval status. Anonymous comments will always require manual approval prior to being displayed, so use a handle!

I’m playing around with the programming on the backend so please be patient as this rank amateur works it out.

 
Hide 58 CommentsLeave a Comment
58 Comments to "Commentariat"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “no personal identifying information”?

    Well, Moderate ME!

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  2. 216 says:

    Drive by post about “grifters”

    The first is a Chapo-type complaint, common to argue that right-wing grifters scare and scam Boomers. As much as anyone tries to autistically debate the facts, the narrative is solid. A lot of movement conservatism is basically affinity fraud, and Chapo-types project this onto anyone right-wing.

    A lot of leftists with student debt take this personally.

    The latter is the opposite, a left-grifter.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  3. neutral says:

    no dehumanizing language

    This is just a vague SJW style term, be more specific.

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @Achmed E. Newman
  4. Testing. Am I a good boy or a bad boy?
    Stay tuned

  5. Fine by me.

    I promise not to use too many echoes. JK 😉

  6. @216

    The first is a Chapo-type complaint, common to argue that right-wing grifters scare and scam Boomers.

    It is also an alt-right (or whatever the term is supposed to be now) that the conservative movement runs on exploiting idiot boomers. It’s stupid in this case though, because ‘Soph’ is obviously too edgy for the conservative movement.

    It’s a pretty pointless and annoying criticism in either case though, since it has little to do with who is actually correct.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  7. szopen says:
    @neutral

    Actually, this is what used to be called “common courtesy” before the common courtesy started to be used by SJWs to fight the ideological opponents.

    • Replies: @songbird
  8. @neutral

    Mr. Epigone did post a bunch of details on this a few months back. I’m not gonna find it now, but, yeah, how about at least a link to that up top, A.E.?

    I know I’ve got to watch it myself, so I don’t expect auto-approval – what’s the time lag? See, with Steve Sailer, it’s all based on his waking-hours, which are not particularly normal. Is there some kind of purgatory one can get into, then be nice for a while, and get back to being autoed?

  9. I’m not human, I identify as a meat popsicle.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  10. This is just a test by a regular reader to see if I currently pass muster for commenting.

  11. “No dehumanizing language”

    Alright, what? This is a rather broad term that could be used to justify deleting a whole plethora of comments. Even good, informative ones that only promulgate the truth and reality of things. You have to be more specific when you say this. Does
    “dehumanizing” just mean brutally honest statements arrayed in a rather crude way? Does it include EastKekistanis structured paragraphs that impressively describe the Negro mindset and mentality? Does it also include my short, direct and succinct comments about Negroids? We have to know AE, and you really should have given us some examples of the dehumanizing language you’re talking about

    “Auto approval status”

    Hast thou bestowed such a noble honour upon me? If not, I beseech you to do so.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  12. peterAUS says:

    Basic group conditioning move.

    Amusing.

  13. Hmmm, what does it mean to be human?

    Are there gradations to humanity?

    Could we call these five:

    sub-human for what they did to Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom?

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom

    Or is it the case that some think we are all capable of such barbarity?

    Or is it dehumanizing to call attention to the sub-human behavior of some?

  14. songbird says:
    @szopen

    There is something bizarre about how they always phrase things.

    Like, “Watch your language during Ramadan, so as to not offend your Muslim coworkers.” I mean, WTF! It’s perfectly okay to be against swearing, but what moral basis does the argument have, if you always have to put it in minoritarian phrasing, about offending group X or Y?

  15. … dehumanizing language is anything that refers to a group of humans as something other than human

    While I agreed with your previous “schoolmarm” post, this doesn’t appear to be well thought out. By this logic referring to normies or Blue Checkmarks (groups of humans) as NPCs (primitive AIs) would be verboten.

  16. @Achmed E. Newman

    Sailer definitely has certain commenters on auto approve. Entire backs and forth occur while I’m waiting for 1 comment to be approved. He sure doesn’t sleep 72 hours straight.

    Also – one observation I’ve made that seems to correlate with the increasing comment moderation intensity here: Many of the heritage American commenters seem to have greatly reduced their contributions or have disappeared altogether. The bulk of the remaining comment count consists of comments made by mostly the “vibrant” folks (not too dehumanizing a word, I can only hope). The conversations all basically meander back to an argument over which 3rd world ethnic group 1. should be in charge, and 2. have the most access to white pussy, after the white man has been successfully reduced to a status of ineffectual doormat within his own country(ies).

    Scrolling through the handles it’s all twinkies, elitecommies, truthies, bengalies, kekistanis, obdgynies, tahlies, and iffies. That’s what I call unintended moderation.

  17. iffen says:

    Do Neanderthals get dehumanizing protection?

  18. @iffen

    How about Homo erectus? Homo sapiens denisova?

  19. peterAUS says:

    Filtering…I mean moderating….goes both ways.

    Besides, less we are allowed to talk more we’ll be willing to take action.

    It’s all about communication between humans.
    At one extreme there is polite chat in a civilized society. The West was, once upon a time, good at.
    And, at the other extreme, well, you shouldn’t talk while pulling a trigger…..

    Smart societies allow free speech. Safety valve.Less possibility of shootings. Or worse.
    Or better, when you decide to think more about it.

    Looking forward to the moment, not so far in the future now, where whites won’t be able to say anything.

    Good.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  20. @James Bowery

    Of others without their consent, heh.

  21. @Kent Nationalist

    Gauging Gen Z is harder for other generations to do than was the case with previous teenage generations. Boomers tend to have an especially difficult time penetrating the ecosystem, let alone understanding it.

  22. @Daniel Chieh

    Self-identify however you want–and please don’t report me to the Canadian HRC!

  23. @BengaliCanadianDude

    promulgate the truth

    Right, so if you say X group members are roaches or monkies or whatever, you’re being untruthful.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @EastKekistani
  24. @Peripatetic Commenter

    Such barbarity is within the range of the human species and likely every subspecies/race. The propensities are of course different.

  25. @Anatoly Karlin

    Good point. Though it seems qualitatively different than calling people cockroaches, pondering it helps me understand where team twitter was coming from. Does adding the caveat that the dehumanization must be based on immutable characteristics help?

  26. iffen says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    you’re being untruthful.

    Sometimes the line between dishonesty and ignorance is difficult to discern.

    I agree with the schoolmarm and will try to watch my coarse language. I try not to dehumanize any group, only individuals like sewer settling pond scum M. Romney.

    I don’t do a good job of staying on topic because I react to the comments just as much as the post. If the comment section had some sort of tree, people could go off on tangents with others while the main trunk stayed on topic.

  27. @iffen

    Yes. In fifty years when we’ve brought them back Jurassic-Park style, I don’t want some SJW sandblasting my face off the side of a mountain because of how I tolerated Neanderthals to be spoken ill of!

  28. @MikeatMikedotMike

    I’ve never seen 72 hours, but 12 or so today, for example, and only a very few infinities. There’s no doubt that some people are auto-moderated. Maybe Sailer just doesn’t want to look so closely to find more worthy of that, because I can tell he has lots more comments than just 2 years back.

    I think Twinkie is a stand-up guy, BTW, but yes, there are people from all over the world (it seems) writing in. I don’t mind that, especially the ones that understand that they don’t completely know everything about America. It’s the Commies that hang out virtually with Godfree Roberts, most of them American, I’d guess, that are just the worst – they seriously impinge on the site with their high flowrate stupidity.

  29. @peterAUS

    In a world where 50% is generally permitted, I’m not sure it’s pragmatic to go after the person who is pushing for 98% permissibility, but I understand the sentiment.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  30. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Hey you forgot about me… I’m literally as heritage as they come.

    French Canadians were the original Canadians (Canadiens).

  31. @Anatoly Karlin

    Isn’t the NPC meme overrated anyway, though, even if it isn’t as obnoxious as e.g. comparing ethnic/religious groups to animals? The substance seems to be “a group of people adhering to an ideology I disagree with tend to have similar opinions and consume the same media” and/or “most people who follow an ideology I disagree with have devoted little effort to examining their beliefs.”

    This is certainly true of mainstream liberals, but I think it’s also true of believers of almost any ideology, including, most relevantly in this discussion, white nationalism. To the extent that it’s more accurate in describing liberals, it’s likely because liberalism is currently a culturally hegemonic ideology whose talking points the unwashed masses are exposed to more frequently than those of other ideologies. It’s like the amusing category Scott Alexander created of “argument from my opponent believes something.”

    Presumably, most white nationalists would like their ideas to replace the ideas of liberalism in occupancy of the commanding heights of culture, and thus turn “NPCs” to their side. (For instance, Andrew Anglin of The Daily Stormer has described his goal as “creating a counter-culture that eventually becomes the dominant culture.”) Therefore, I do not see how they can fairly criticize liberals for being “NPCs” when they would want “NPCs” to be on their side instead. As Epictetus said (though I, and I think many others, interpret this quote with perhaps the opposite valence of his intent) :

    “Are not these the same people you told me yesterday were fools and charlatans? Do you then desire the good opinion of fools and charlatans?” 

    I also just generally think that solipsism—“other people are not real, they’re so lame that they must be fictional characters”—and emphasizing one’s immersion in video gaming—“I reference video games because a pointless, sedentary, solitary, often anti-social activity has been an important influence on my thinking”—are poor choices in marketing oneself or one’s ideas to the world.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  32. peterAUS says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    It’s O.K.
    People like you, and sites like this, do serve a practical purpose.

    Canary in mine.

    Two things will happen: either you’ll cens…I mean, moderate, articles/comments here to the point of MSM, or, you’ll get shut down. Just a matter of time.

    Either way that will mean the environment is getting ready for something real.

    In the meantime, not a bad online pub for people who don’t like being muzzled by sheeple around them.

  33. @Stolen Valor Detective

    Your points are true, but the actual substance of the meme is irrelevant. It is an insult that is (supposedly) particularly effective on the sort of people it targets because they often suffer from the conceit that their ideas are original/thought up by them/rebellious/counter-cultural or so on. Of course many alt-right people doubtless believe the same things, but given that their ideas are contrary to current hegemonic ones, it is more true in their case.

  34. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Well, we are neither Third World nor interested in raping white women. No matter what you consider us…I would rather be considered an animal or an alien than some human in the same class as Negroids. If Negroids can be considered X then X IS an insult and I’m anything but X.

    I do agree that there should be no censorship and that there should be more WNs unafraid to say whatever they want here. After all we don’t have any conflict of interest. I have problems with global elites who don’t want us to be independent from them and don’t want us to be able to colonize Sub-Saharan Africa. I also have problems with Negroids and those who act like them such as mestizos. That’s it. The list of the enemies of the white race and the list of the enemies of the NE Asian race have almost the same contents.

  35. @Audacious Epigone

    I agree. Negroids for example are clearly Homo instead of monkeys or non-human apes such as chimpanzees and bonobos.

  36. @Peripatetic Commenter

    I don’t think any action can make an organism that is biologically a human a non-human animal.

    The term we need is “species” or “subspecies”. Blacks aren’t a race because if they can be considered a single race then non-blacks must also be included for genetic reasons which will make the concept of race redundant. On the other hand if we consider race a valid concept below species we have to realize that the difference between blacks and any race in non-blacks is above the level of race. So it is either a species-level or subspecies-level difference. If humans are a species then blacks are evolutionarily a catch-all term for all but one particular divergent group of the Nilotic subspecies. If humans are multiple species then all non-blacks might be considered a single subspecies of the Nilotic species.

    Here is how I classify humanity:

    Humans consist of multiple species, such as Pygmies, Khoisan, Bantus and Nilotics.
    Nilotics are a species that consists of multiple subspecies, including Eurasians. The rest are mostly in Ethiopia, Somalia etc.
    In the subspecies of Eurasians there are multiple races, such as whites, Middle Easterners, NE Asians, Southeast Asians, Amerinds and Australoids.

  37. @EastKekistani

    There are plenty of categorizations that would apply to both blacks and East Asians that even someone with the sort of racial hatred you express wouldn’t actually object to (twelve ribs, nine month gestation, etc).

    One obvious rhetorical problem with your approach is the presumption that you’re representative of Han or even all East Asians.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
  38. @EastKekistani

    Species a tricky term. The ability to interbreed and produce fertile offspring seems like a useful requirement to me (a requirement by which all modern humans are obviously of the same species), but that definition doesn’t get applied to, say, house cats.

  39. @Audacious Epigone

    Right. So at least we need a consistent definition of species. Even if Homo sapiens are considered a species blacks are still not a race. Instead they are a catch-all term that describes all humans who don’t belong to a certain highly divergent subgroup of the Nilotic subspecies. All races are defined by who they are. “Blacks” on the other hand are a blanket term that can only be defined by who they aren’t. Hence they are at least a concept that includes multiple subspecies.

  40. @Audacious Epigone

    Sure. I do have problems with “nine month gestation though” since it is race-dependent and subspecies-dependent.

    https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/33/1/107/668109

    Here “Asian” should be mostly interpreted as “South Asian”.

  41. https://mchb.hrsa.gov/chusa13/perinatal-health-status-indicators/p/preterm-birth.html

    Racial differences in preterm birth rates exist but are still less significant than subspecies differences in preterm birth rates..

  42. @EastKekistani

    I don’t think any action can make an organism that is biologically a human a non-human animal.

    So saying “such acts are totally inhuman!” is forbidden if referenced to a specific actor?

    The term we need is “species” or “subspecies”.

    Based on genetic distance, innate capabilities and norms of behavior, and the ability of hybrid offspring to fit into the society of either parent, there are at least 3 extant species of genus Homo:  sub-Saharan Africans, Australian abos, and Europeans/Asians/other.  I’m leaning more towards a dozen or more species because of such obvious dividing lines between e.g. Congoids, Khoisan and pygmies.  These differences create natural (if not total) reproductive isolation, which is the defining characteristic of a species boundary.

    Instead of beating ourselves up over our failure to make Africans and Mexicans into Americans Just Like Us, recognizing innate biological differences frees us to have different expectations.  You can call this “dehumanizing”.  It’s also so realistic, this is already our de-facto situation:  black children are not expected to either behave or achieve in public schools, for example.

    100 years from now I expect genus Homo to be sub-specified into sapiens sapiens (European), sapiens africanus, and a bunch of other designations that sort out by eyeball into the categories known for centuries but currently anathematized.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  43. @Audacious Epigone

    Using feline standards maybe humanity is actually a genus or even a subfamily. Negroids at least span several species or maybe even several genera.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  44. @EastKekistani

    To be clear, I hold no personal animosity towards you or most of the rest that I mentioned. However, I am not perfect. Being told all of my life, as well as by otherwise intelligent descendants of Europeans here at Unz and elsewhere, that I must just accept the fact that I have no right to live almost exclusively among my own kind has fostered a clear bit of resentment. If that resentment bleeds through my comments here, oh well.

    I have no desire to push my way of life upon the people of Asia, Africa, or the southern Americas. I want the US military out of every single country in the world, except the US. I wish the Chinese and the Hindus and the Bantus and the ME’s and muslims and the mestizos well, as long as they stay in their own countries. People from those groups do not assimilate in western society, in anything other than minimal numbers. By minimal less than 10% combined of the entire population, with Muslims being a fraction of that 10%.

    Sadly, this simple believe gets me branded a white nationalist, a “WN” – which is by the way, a slur that is just as dehumanizing in its application as any slur that I hesitate to even type as it will get me banned. (It’s silly that we must pretend these words don’t exist and cannot even type them out for mere reference.) But I can type out words like redneck, hillbilly, cracker, WN, nazi, without fear of reprimand, but reference the ennword and it’s the end of the world. As always, slurs against “whites” are always given more latitude.

    I am a patriotic American, born and raised, 7th generation. When my immigrant ancestors came here, there was no welfare, section 8, H1B, SS, or any other government program to steal from. They came here to escape real famine (no magical country across the ocean to send gibs in those days) and oppression that had gone on for almost 1000 years. They came here, worked their asses off or they died. Period. My ancestors did not come here and attempt to turn the US into an even shittier version of their former country, as is the want today. They assimilated. Those two points alone, distinguish and legitimize my claim to the American experience above and beyond any immigrant arrival post WWII.

  45. @MikeatMikedotMike

    that I must just accept the fact that I have no right to live almost exclusively among my own kind has fostered a clear bit of resentment.

    I have no wish to impose anything on you.

    I wish the Chinese and the Hindus and the Bantus and the ME’s and muslims and the mestizos well, as long as they stay in their own countries.

    Uh..that doesn’t work. As long as there are Negroid countries or majority Negroid communities there are Negroid problems. Mere segregation does not work as Negroid problems such as Ebola and HIV tend to metastasize and spread everywhere.

    Sadly, this simple believe gets me branded a white nationalist, a “WN” – which is by the way, a slur that is just as dehumanizing in its application as any slur that I hesitate to even type as it will get me banned. (It’s silly that we must pretend these words don’t exist and cannot even type them out for mere reference.) But I can type out words like redneck, hillbilly, cracker, WN, nazi, without fear of reprimand, but reference the ennword and it’s the end of the world. As always, slurs against “whites” are always given more latitude.

    There is nothing wrong with WN not because nationalism is always legitimate but because nationalism of high-IQ races is legitimate.

    I am a patriotic American, born and raised, 7th generation. When my immigrant ancestors came here, there was no welfare, section 8, H1B, SS, or any other government program to steal from. They came here to escape real famine (no magical country across the ocean to send gibs in those days) and oppression that had gone on for almost 1000 years. They came here, worked their asses off or they died. Period. My ancestors did not come here and attempt to turn the US into an even shittier version of their former country, as is the want today. They assimilated. Those two points alone, distinguish and legitimize my claim to the American experience above and beyond any immigrant arrival post WWII.

    Sure. This is why we need to get our own colonies just like what you guys did. IQ, wealth and knowledge are not sufficient. State-building has to be done.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  46. MBlanc46 says:

    I will have a hard time not referring to corporate Repubs by the “v word”, but I will refrain in order to continue to be persona grata around here. I would never use such language regarding immutable characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, or sex.

  47. MBlanc46 says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Simply expressing the attitudes and opinions held by my grandparents, parents, aunts and uncles gets me branded a “white nationalist” and “white supremacist”.

  48. @Mr. Rational

    No, descriptions of behavior are fine if the obvious intent isn’t to dehumanize. If it’s “group X are roach-like” as a technical workaround, it’s no good but otherwise it’s fine.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  49. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Schoolmarm disapproves of those anti-white slurs.

    Is it really asking too much for comments to just refer to people in roughly the same way the US Census does?

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  50. @Audacious Epigone

    Why is “syeknom redrum” not okay to describe the extremely well-documented tendency of a certain ethny to be such?  It’s still okay to describe one’s own offspring as “curtain climbers” and, at a somewhat later age, “yard apes”.  I think.  It’s certainly not malicious.

    “NAPA” is humorous, and also describes the antipathy of a certain ethny for nature and a weird-to-others predilection for walking down the middle of vehicular roadways.

    The “problem” with such terms is that they carry way too much truth in them for The Narrative.  That should be a problem for The Narrative, not for us.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  51. @EastKekistani

    I didn’t say you want to impose anything on me. But you’re an individual. A million of an individual’s co-ethnics will work to install policy that is beneficial to their identity. It’s natural, I get it. And it’s exactly the reason why non western European descended people must be have their numbers severely limited here in the West.

    As far as your reference to negros, I have made clear plenty of times that the only solution to the NQ is repatriation of all but the top 10% of them. I am also aware that it will never happen, which IMO makes me more realistic than those who cling to the notion of some sort of harmonious multi racial solution still being possible.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  52. @Audacious Epigone

    No it isn’t asking too much. But I think there is a difference in referencing terms to illustrate a point (as I did) compared to using those terms as pejoratives.

  53. @MikeatMikedotMike

    I have made clear plenty of times that the only solution to the NQ is repatriation of all but the top 10% of them. I am also aware that it will never happen

    Of course it will never happen.  By the time the blacks figured out that it was their best option, both the resources and the patience for that process would be exhausted.

    But that’s not the only solution.  We’ve had plenty of examples of solutions in the past century and a half, including on American soil.  The memorial marker to a graveyard from such a solution to the Southerner Problem was recently removed in Wisconsin; the Turkish treatment of the Armenians, and the British treatment of the Boers, are two more examples.

    Hunger, exposure and disease are “solutions” to “problem” populations.  They require little in the way of resources.  When resources and patience are exhausted, they will be at the top of the list.  Do not underestimate just how much patience is already frayed; the next major economic downturn will snap it.

    Yes, of course that will be ugly.  But if you can’t think of such things, you walk straight into them and get what was literally unthinkable.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  54. @Mr. Rational

    Allow me to amend my statement from “only” to “only mostly non-violent.” 🙂

  55. @Mr. Rational

    A documented tendency to be… monkeys?

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  56. @Audacious Epigone

    To be impulsively murderous.  “Monkeying around”, “monkey business” and “monkey see, monkey do” are phrases of long standing and reflect commonalities between primates which include genus Homo.  The last turns out to have a biological explanation:  mirror neurons.  They appear to be common to most, if not all, primates.

    “Chimping out” is more prejudicial, but it also accurately describes a stereotypical behavior in common between Pan troglodytes and a certain strain of Homo.  Other strains have seriously suppressed such behavior.  Is this something we are forbidden to Notice even here?

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Your comment will appear after approval from the moderator.


 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 Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS