Why are you calling the liberals "sociopathic" if they are the society build builders of the West and the upholders of its morality? Is that a meaningless buzzword?
And regarding the liberal/conservative divide - I just don't see it. To me, the only real opposition to the values of the Americans in history were the Mormons - because they wrote a scripture that superceded the Bible. Why has America failed to give birth to any other competitor (such as Hitler in Germany and Lenin in Russia) remains a mystery to me, however - might have something to do with the founder effect of the original stock (and the defeat of the Confederacy).
Although to be fair, another factor is probably the insane prosperity and geographic security of the USA. The ruination of Europe in 1945 was the final coffin into any political activities the Americans might have engaged in.
Hi Adunai, while system NPCs believe establishment narratives at face value, the sociopathic liberals both know that the messaging is false (because they often help craft it) and that it is damaging to the fabric and social norms of society, but push it anyway out of an nebulous ends-justifies-the-means mentality -- and it is this combination that I associate with sociopathy. They act with deliberate noblesse malice toward the majority population instead of the noblesse oblige of rulers of past generations. For example, take the case of Norm Eisen, who has been involved in creating much of the meta-narratives of the past 7 years: https://www.revolver.news/2020/09/meet-norm-eisen-legal-hatchet-man-and-central-operative-in-the-color-revolution-against-president-trump/ . Or Alex Soros, who has admitted that he wants to destroy western society in order to make it more comfortable for himself: “Explaining his father’s motives, he said, “The reason you fight for an open society [i.e. a euphemism for a top-down forced multi-cultural society with stamped out populism and a weak, angry, divided population ruled over by finance] is because that’s the only society that you can live in, as a Jew — unless you become a nationalist and only fight for your own rights in your own state.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/magazine/george-soros-democrat-open-society.html . Or look at Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's text messaging: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40” and, in one particular message when Page asked if Trump would ever become president, Strzok reportedly replied, “No. No he won't. We'll stop it.” Or consider the civil service personnel and their backers who decided to push this: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-fentanyl-penalties
Re: the system NPC vs. non-ideological dissident divide (I assume that is what you mean by liberal/conservative?) the former identify as allies and defenders of the establishment, while the latter feel that their interests are being undermined, even though they have difficulty articulating it and end up watching Fox, OAN, Newsmax etc. The "Republican" vs. "Democrat" party labels are not a very good distinction because both are controlled by the same monied interests, but the differences in thought and emotional processes of their followers is an important one imo.
Re: why America has failed to give birth to any other competitor (other than the South in the Civil War), I agree that a major part of it is the prosperity and geography of the west. As mentioned in the Introduction, Carl Schmitt argues that when times are good nobody likes a pessimistic naysayer, and times have been generally good-enough in America since its founding, with a huge landmass to absorb growth and no threat of invasion, and it has also done a top-grade job both in its media and educational propaganda. But, for example, 93% of Americans were against entering the war with Germany up through 1940 (which is why FDR needed Pearl Harbor, which he both had advance knowledge of and brought it about by the U.S. embargo of oil to Japan; he needed to shatter the anti-war opposition). The rulers of the west just do a great job in steamrolling opposition.
While I see the Truth in: "the loser clique loser dissidents are the only ones with the individualism, the discernment, and the moral fortitude to dissent from the herd. For them to suffer for the actions of the multitudes is a real tragedy."
Parts of me judge that many decent Westmen I know are "go-along conformies" by nature, evolved to operate under a trustworthy hierarchy. They aren't adapted to be under pathocracy. My ancestors who wrote the Codex Oera Linda knew they had to keep the corruptors and poisoners out of their hierarchies.
The Oera Linda is a sad tale of the fall of our high-moral, high-trust communities falling, one by one, to the sociopathic "elites" that the people of Frya saw ruling the peoples of Linda and Finda. https://oeralinda.nl
Why are you calling the liberals "sociopathic" if they are the society build builders of the West and the upholders of its morality? Is that a meaningless buzzword?
And regarding the liberal/conservative divide - I just don't see it. To me, the only real opposition to the values of the Americans in history were the Mormons - because they wrote a scripture that superceded the Bible. Why has America failed to give birth to any other competitor (such as Hitler in Germany and Lenin in Russia) remains a mystery to me, however - might have something to do with the founder effect of the original stock (and the defeat of the Confederacy).
Although to be fair, another factor is probably the insane prosperity and geographic security of the USA. The ruination of Europe in 1945 was the final coffin into any political activities the Americans might have engaged in.
Hi Adunai, while system NPCs believe establishment narratives at face value, the sociopathic liberals both know that the messaging is false (because they often help craft it) and that it is damaging to the fabric and social norms of society, but push it anyway out of an nebulous ends-justifies-the-means mentality -- and it is this combination that I associate with sociopathy. They act with deliberate noblesse malice toward the majority population instead of the noblesse oblige of rulers of past generations. For example, take the case of Norm Eisen, who has been involved in creating much of the meta-narratives of the past 7 years: https://www.revolver.news/2020/09/meet-norm-eisen-legal-hatchet-man-and-central-operative-in-the-color-revolution-against-president-trump/ . Or Alex Soros, who has admitted that he wants to destroy western society in order to make it more comfortable for himself: “Explaining his father’s motives, he said, “The reason you fight for an open society [i.e. a euphemism for a top-down forced multi-cultural society with stamped out populism and a weak, angry, divided population ruled over by finance] is because that’s the only society that you can live in, as a Jew — unless you become a nationalist and only fight for your own rights in your own state.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/magazine/george-soros-democrat-open-society.html . Or look at Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's text messaging: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40” and, in one particular message when Page asked if Trump would ever become president, Strzok reportedly replied, “No. No he won't. We'll stop it.” Or consider the civil service personnel and their backers who decided to push this: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-fentanyl-penalties
Re: the system NPC vs. non-ideological dissident divide (I assume that is what you mean by liberal/conservative?) the former identify as allies and defenders of the establishment, while the latter feel that their interests are being undermined, even though they have difficulty articulating it and end up watching Fox, OAN, Newsmax etc. The "Republican" vs. "Democrat" party labels are not a very good distinction because both are controlled by the same monied interests, but the differences in thought and emotional processes of their followers is an important one imo.
Re: why America has failed to give birth to any other competitor (other than the South in the Civil War), I agree that a major part of it is the prosperity and geography of the west. As mentioned in the Introduction, Carl Schmitt argues that when times are good nobody likes a pessimistic naysayer, and times have been generally good-enough in America since its founding, with a huge landmass to absorb growth and no threat of invasion, and it has also done a top-grade job both in its media and educational propaganda. But, for example, 93% of Americans were against entering the war with Germany up through 1940 (which is why FDR needed Pearl Harbor, which he both had advance knowledge of and brought it about by the U.S. embargo of oil to Japan; he needed to shatter the anti-war opposition). The rulers of the west just do a great job in steamrolling opposition.
My life makes a bit more sense now... uh oh.
While I see the Truth in: "the loser clique loser dissidents are the only ones with the individualism, the discernment, and the moral fortitude to dissent from the herd. For them to suffer for the actions of the multitudes is a real tragedy."
Parts of me judge that many decent Westmen I know are "go-along conformies" by nature, evolved to operate under a trustworthy hierarchy. They aren't adapted to be under pathocracy. My ancestors who wrote the Codex Oera Linda knew they had to keep the corruptors and poisoners out of their hierarchies.
The Oera Linda is a sad tale of the fall of our high-moral, high-trust communities falling, one by one, to the sociopathic "elites" that the people of Frya saw ruling the peoples of Linda and Finda. https://oeralinda.nl
I like that term 'pathocracy'