NIGGERS FUCKING FEMININE PENIS, BOY PUSSY, HOLLA AT YA BOY jESUS cHRIST.

It’s disappointing how strong the drive to have a tribe is that one would subject oneself over and over again to groups in hope of gaining acceptance. If I had a choice in the matter and I was not limited by my capacity to control this biological desire, I would probably forego trying to find group acceptance. However, I think it is clear that if you want to interact with groups you will have to sacrifice some part of yourself in order to fit in. Perhaps a good compromise is to have only a few people who you can relate with, because it is hard to find more than a few.

That is the irrationality of people, that even though every person is experiencing the same world outside of their heads, they still invariably find some way to disagree with one another.

I think many people don’t realize that most people are completely unconcerned with intellectual honesty. They don’t care whether the positions they arrived at were arrived at through good faith. Everything which matters to a human being is completely a construct of their own invention. It only matters to us - every single one of our moral constructions, because the universe does not care, and our brain is part of the universe operating on the same laws of physics, so consequently our brains do not care about whether our thoughts are rational and irrational.

In fact, most thoughts are merely memes; things which our minds, or perhaps masses of minds latch on to because it is emotionally stimulating. As a result, most of our desires may feel like they were arrived at through sheer force of rationality, as though through free will. But because our brains operate on the same deterministic laws of physics as our indifferent cosmos, even the impulse to be rational wasn’t our decision. That is, if we were ever rational to begin with.

It becomes apparent that it is very difficult to tell whether one is rational or irrational, considering those who are most sure of their rationality are often the ones with the most confused perspectives of the world. As a consequence, it becomes very difficult to find meaningful interactions with those around you besides a very small few. Even then, sometimes people congregate with only people who reinforce their own biases in an echo chamber.

When you realize how irrational human beings are in general, and how to most people communicating on a deeper level is something they simply avoid to try to distance themselves from their own and others irrationality, it becomes a society in which the more you think, the more alien you become, and the more the people on the strange world you inhabit seem like confused animals which have privileged themselves as privileged with unique intelligence.

Sometimes I blame myself for this dilemma, sometimes I blame others for being weak minded fools, still other times I look at it from a balanced perspective and say that this is just the way of the universe. But either way, I am cruelly shackled to humanity as the only, unrivaled intelligent species on planet earth. Not only is there no god, which people cling to to give their lives meaning, there is the reality which the mask people call god covers up - the reality that the universe is indifferent.

One could, of course, take a positive approach when faced with this existential nightmare about the world. After all, even since there is little standard through which people hold each other in terms of intellectual honesty in general, and many people are likely to misinterpret what you say, and not even comprehend why you are wrong if you are wrong, but simply misconstrue your words out of inability to process your thoughts, you can still re-assure yourself that your position is reasonably consistent and rational. After all, you could drive yourself to follow the meme of rationality and self honesty to its logical conclusion and simply support nihilism.

It ultimately comes down to whether you make an arbitrary distinction optimism and pessimism; one would hope. One wants desperately to break free of this hopeless paradigm of uncertainty. But humans are not inherently rational, and you can try to fool your brain for a while, but eventually one will be thrown back to the original function of one’s biological machinery. Humans were never creatures built for logic; they are creatures built for tribal acceptance. One cannot extinguish the desire to conform, but the desire to conform can be conflicted with the desire to rebel, and the two subsequently cancel each other out. One is is left with no resolution, and ultimately, despair.

I was just thinking about arguments for why if god created human beings, that he would punish them for behaving in the way he would behave. I mean, man is supposedly created in god's image (convenient, considering man created the idea of god), so he's punishing people for what he would do. So not only does he love you infinitely, it's on the condition that he also hates you infinitely and would punish you in hell for eternity for not repenting for masturbating.

It seems a little draconian to punish people for eternity, especially how they describe it in Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man in the Catholic sermons describing hell, where basically ever possible imaginable torment is happening to you in every second of every day. That in itself seems really excessive, but of course it's totally arbitrary how you describe hell, and a lot of religious people don't even believe in hell, because religious people are stupid and have no continuity in what they believe, and just believe in doctrines created to try to control the dumb bewildered herd. That's why human nature is so hated by some religions.

But the one argument which I remember from my confirmation class when I was a kid, which was given by someone else, to the question of why god would create us a certain way and then punish us, was something along the lines of "if we didn't have jurisdiction over our own actions, then we couldn't be free". Which first of all, begs the question of whether we're free, and second of all, raises the question of why you would want to be free if it meant god wants to punish you for whatever reason the church authorities make up.

Either way the concept of freedom is irrelevant to most people. Most people don't even care if they're biologically free, in a sense of the physical laws of the universe, or will try to escape the question by proposing an immortal soul which somehow drives the body and overlaps the body, and controls it through spooky magical forces. I don't think most people really think that hard about it though.

The only reason I'm thinking about this at all is because I've been reading James Joyce and I've been reading through parts with Catholic sermons, and I've been really really annoyed at page after page of preachers describing the torments of hell. Either way it's just a bunch of brainwashing bullshit to make people feel ashamed of themselves, and make them follow the lowest form of morality, which is doing something moral because you're afraid of punishment as opposed to doing it because it's the right thing to do.

There's been 3 armed robberies at my college in the past couple months. When the fuck will someone do something to control these niggers?

My water kettle which I boil water in was just whistling and boiling, and I listened to it and thought "my tea kettle is making the big nigger". I like associating random events with the word nigger, it's a strange thing. Probably because we associate the word nigger with strange things, for strange reasons. So I felt inspired to use it in my own way inspired by the phonetic pop which the word makes. One makes a reving sound with ones vocal chords as if revving a motorcycle nnnNNNIGGERRRRrrrrrr. The n is held, the IGGER come quick, and the r trails off like a leaving train. A full rev up, acceleration, and then departure, as real as time's passing itself.

Also, I have an autobiographical story to tell. A nigger stole. This is my 3 word story, but there was in fact an armed nigger who robbed a student at my college at gunpoint recently. Of course one must not generalize based on a handful of people, of course. I have nothing against black people whatsoever. But have you ever read Nabokov? He had an appreciation for literature which pushed the edge.

I was just sitting on my floor reading The Inferno by Dante and I'm not wearing pants, so my butt hole was gaping open and sucking in air. And I got the idea to see if I could lightly stick my finger up my butt and then pull it out again, but my sphincter closed on the tip of my finger. I thought about how buttholes are kind of like those chinese finger torture devices they sell at party stores.

She was like "it's so much" and I just laughed. She said she didn't expect it to shoot into the back of her throat.

Biggly bubble butt bitch bouncing on my girth. I look at the flag and am filled with the intoxicating scent of urine, it's the hoe. She's urinated on me. Only in America can a hoe urinate on you and you know you're free, elsewhere it's frowned upon. I wave my flag and chow down on a real American hamburger, and I know that I'm free. I wave my gun in the other hand and cry out for the government to be overthrown, because I love this land and this country, and I want only corporations to be in charge of the people, because privately owned oligarchies are truly what the founding fathers had in mind. I let out a primal scream, ROAAAAAAAAAAAH! I am man, ruler women, and destroyer of minorties! USA USA USA CLIMATE CHANGE DOESN'T EXIST, ALL HAIL FOSSIL FUELS HAHAHAHAHAHA *gun shots*

What is a flickering flame? Hericlitus says that our world is a perpetual state of fire. One both steps into a river, and does not step into the same river twice.

In a way he was right, matter is in a perpetual state of entropy. It’s part of the beauty of the duality of our universe, that it is both deterministic, and chaotic and entropic.

But what else is a flickering flame? A flickering flame is a transfixing, dancing spectacle, it’s a consuming destroyer, it’s the thing which brings life through light, and creates fertile ground through what it reduces to ash. Never the same flame twice, just as Hericlitus’s river.

Could it also be the flame of the lighter, lighting an herb? It could perhaps be the light which lights and herb, although some prefer a vaporizer.

The flame is also like the essential self giving way to constantly emerging patterns of thought, transducing the agony of fixating on a changing, ungraspable world, which slips through the fingers like sand.

A flickering flame, dancing, passionate, destructive, life giving, the way of the world. Entropy in its purest form. The evaporated self giving way to continual emergence and becoming.

The thought crossed my mind just now, that when I speak of philosophy, and others are not interested, it is somewhat funny. I smile mischeviously at this occurence. But then my smile quickly turns to a drooping, almost caveman like expression. I know not why. But then I remember, (I have indeed not been reduced to mere stupidity), the expression is one of tiredness. The tiredness is when one smiles mischeviously - oh, I suppose we might as well just say grimmace, because that is actually what it is - and one realizes that one cannot soffit their entire interaction with others on this mischieviousness. Mischief is only tolerate in small doses, until the playfulness turns to anger.

We know that things make us tired because we can no longer tolerate the things which make us tired, is the obvious answer. The uncommon answer, is that we can't know why the things make us tired which makes us tired. We can't know what we cannot know, which is an obvious syllogism. Ah, tiresome Calvin! You speak again of your psychological infirmities. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I do conceed, I am somewhat psychologically infirm, but I cannot wager that you are any more aware of the unknown than me. In fact it would seem to me that I am just as much of a mystery to you as you are to me! That is the crux of it.

Oh, cliche, cliche, Calvin! Amateur hour was last year, and we planned not to have in annually! Yes ladies and gentlemen, I know, I understand your impatience, and your quick judgment. Our lives are indeed very boring, and it manifests itself in your quite abrupt way of making that fact known at the very precipitous moment of a thought which could possibly threaten your sad, pathetic little assumptions - your preconceived notions. Yes, reader, I am quite mad at you, and you should consider me perfectly justified in being mad. You may not easily understand your disposition, for it is not an easy concept to grasp, but you would do well to know that you are indeed deserving of this scorn which I am about to present to you.

You see, reader, you too are ignorant in many ways. This is why you are deserving of scorn. (Although perhaps I project on you the frustrations I have with my parents, which is indeed true, because my dad finds philosophy terribly intolerable. That is in fact why I had this thought in the first place, why I started writing this whole thing. But it is not only with philosophy, it is also with everyone who finds things intolerably tiresome).

You are deserving of scorn because no matter how hard I try, I can never know exactly what it is which will trigger your little snowflake alarm. WEEE OOOO EEEEE OOOO EEEE OOOO! Your thoughts are particular to you, you do not share thoughts with another person! I cannot make inferences of what every person will be thinking outside off my head ("FOOLISH CALVIN, YOU HAVE ANGERED ME FOR THE LAST TIME! I WILL CALL UPON MY GOD TO SMOTE YOU IF YOU DO NOT STOP YOUR INCESSANT BULLSHIT!", yes, reader, I know of your anger, but you will be sitting in a corner with your pupils dilated screaming a high pitch only a dog can hear if you do not learn to deal with mine and your own infirmities. For your infirmities are are equally as bad as mine, we both share that ignorance of the unknown. You, for example, are exasperated at me, to the point of taking a sledge hammer and running around swinging it at random people! Your exasperation has been noted and dismissed), your thoughts are merely what they call in logical philosophy a "sufficient condition", not a "necessary condition". It is true that some readers are exasperated, and we can say all readers are human, but we cannot say that all readers are exasperated, that would be an inductive, not deductive statement. We can say "all readers are human", but not "all humans are readers" (this is disregarding that other robots or alien species cannot read, but we can admit some of them likely can). Yes, I can only induct what it is in the world outside of my head, except through mathematics. Are you a mathematical equation, reader? I thought not.

I suppose that is what it is all about. Our own tiredness, our own infirmity. We can only read the greats so long until we are overwhelmed and can hardly even breath. I wish I knew why this happens to me, it is because I am extremely infirm. Or perhaps I am just over zealous. Who knows. Anyways, I am happy to have said all that, even though the only thing which it really means is "I'm tired because people can't understand each other". You get the idea. That is all that I really wanted to say, and there is not much more to elaborate upon the subject besides that. Good day.

The left is filled with people who if you say something offensive, you have committed a sin. You are then, therefor, unworthy of salvation. For one cannot help but be impure, and to fight against purity testing, is to fight against the fate that leftists condemn themselves. Religion is dead, god is dead. The necropolus of the dead, is what leftists construct, with their faith in pure individuals. Embracing the impure, dirtying ones mind with the most heinous greivances, is the only way to remain alive in the garden of dead gods that the left worships.

Imagine if you thought your way into dizzying insanity. If your perception of reality could become detached simply by contemplating the axioms of its foundation. I suppose them if you forgot them for a second, then reality may be very strange and confusing. If thinking of them in a different way was enough to begin to change your reality then I suppose we could have already changed our realities. But what if we were to try to change our reality through pure thought. Let me try.

I cannot see what is behind the other side of that wall, so I must believe that there are things in between the other side of the wall which are blocking my view. What are these things which are blocking my vioew? I see a bunch of little spheres called atoms, at least, that is what science tells me. I can’t actually visualize what an atom is, becauseI have never seen an aytom with my bear eyes.

Instead of the atom, we have instead merely the surface texture of some object or other. That texture is always a different color. It is part of the rainbow of colors. The rainbow of colors is caused by the different frequencies in waves. The higher the frequency, the closer towards, violet, the lower, the closer towards red.

But these concepts called red, blue, waves, freqwuencies, all of them just appear to me as images. They are images of a little zig zag line denoting the waves, of the condept of a color based ion what I have experienced. I cannot actually touch the reality of these concepts, they exist only in my mind.

It would seem that I find myself at a stand still. I can now realize tyhat I can only break down concepts into these pictures, when it comes to the reality of the world outside my head. But what about other things, like touch? What abouyt words? Mathematics? I am only a feeling robot, I am hooked up to my senses, and I feel them as they arrive, and then I have only the memory of the thought in passing.

But I am teathered to this thing called reality, privileged by the scientific understanding. Yes, that is what it is. If I had no concept of reality, then maybe I would not only be a feeling machine, teathered to the box, and the box receiving input through a few clear rubber tubes feeding all of these things into the box. That box is the enemy. I am angry at the box, because it contains the whole totality of my experience.

Now what is this? Anger? I am apparently angry at the box, but the box is me. I am angry at myself, I am angry at this concept which I created. I only made myself angry. It’s not working, I failed to make myself go insane. I can still maintain a lucid vision, a consistency in reality; reality has not all of a sudden become unfamiliar. But my concepts are only pictures. It is because of the box! Smash the box! The picture of the box is gone, after it disappeared in a poof, rubber tubes and all. But yet, the memory of the box lives on. Terrible certainty.

Why am I so unimaginative, I can only think of my own thoughts in a meta sense? If I were a true writer, I may say beautiful poetic things, but I have no sense of poetry, I have no sense imagination. I cannot create anything, I cannot say something which lays outside of the realm of the certain - HAHA. Laughter. It is absurd. True absurdity is silliness. Yes, it is the thing which fights off the destruction of your mind through filling you with distractions.

But most laughter is simply courtesy laughter. How often does one laugh and they are actually warding off the absurd? For a moment it felt as though it was gone, but then I remembered. Certainty. You must follow certainty, or else, if you wanted to create a fictional story, or if you wanted to convey some message… you would not be able to create a plot line with any logical consistency. Working within the parameters of what is consistent, is what gives people their fucking certainty. SMASH THE BOX!

But when will reality ever not be consistent. It is not you who imposes the consistency on reality, it is reality which imposes consistency on you. You cannot escape consistency. You cannot be certain that the next moment will be uncertain, because each moment was always certain. The constant stream of reality which binds you your sanity.

But why would you want to go insane? It is always when you think, or are afraid that you’re going insane, when feel a terrible fright comes over you. But you are never actually insane, it is only that you forgot for a moment something you were about to say, or you were not coordinated with your surroundings, a thing which always can happen to someone when they’re ehem. So that gives you the feeling of fright. The feeling of fright is because you felt that you were going insane Certainty. But if you are certain of something, that would mean you’re actually insane, so you could never know whether you are insane, because you would be certain you’re not insane.

If you were certain of things which can’t be true, then you could never know if you are insane or not insane. Except of course, if you saw things which were certainly unusual, and you had no control over whether you saw them or not. This would be an invasion of the unusual into the certain. Take for instance, you think you hear a voice, but it turns out to only be sound of the piano player’s breath in a rather well recorded classical music CD, or some background static.

Maybe you are confused, and momentarily you don’t know where sounds are coming from. You hear a sound which you are certain signals your insanity. But no, it turns out the sound was only part of something going on in the room. The concretity of the room around still applies. The colors, the shapes. They’re so familiar. It is so frustrating. I may as well just get used to this, but there is no getting used to it.

I analyze and I analyze, but yet I am still attached to reality. Or maybe I just want to be. Sometimes I feel that it is simply because I do not let myself, because I am afraid, to let go and simply experience the world as if it was detached from myself. I am fraid to let go of this reality. Maybe whenever I start to lose track of what sound is coming from where, what thought came from where, that because of fright I simply do not let myself go. Social pressure to conform, I suppose

I think that when you start to forget that you may have succeeded a little, and your brain is trying to shut down the thought before it leads you a place of which it is difficult to return. You start to forget what you were about to say, and you want to reach that point in your mind where you have stopped… thinking, about reality. No. It is that sad certainty again. I forget… Yes, I see now. When your mind starts to forget what it was about to say and cannot connect the dots anymore, because it confused itself.

I certainly did confuse myself, i cannot connect what I was trying to say down that train of thought together anymore. That feeling of trying to gather the strands of what you were going to say together, that is the feeling of uncertainty, it is when you start to feel as though the sounds around you are coming from random places, and you afraid that they came from your own mind, that you imagined them. But how could you, when it the box with the clear plastic tubes coming out, just feeling information in?

Perhaps it is because inside that box, the connectors start sending signals out, instead of signals in. It was reversed. The senses in your mind started projecting themselves back out to the sense organs which sense in the body. It takes signals from inside the box and it stops feeling as though they are coming directly from your sense. Could insanity perhaps be the reversal of the direction your senses are sent inside your brain? But that is too simple, this reversal of the senses…

Surely there are more complicated metaphysical concepts which I could try to fuck myself up with. This just goes to show my lack of imagination. I am so bound into familiar signals of reality, that I cannot construct things which aren’t combinations of other signals like the paintings of Euronymous Bosch. All the little animals in the painting, they are all simply constructions of multiple forms seen in nature. Color, shape, size. The things by which we could not imagine they “exist” without… I feel dizzy…. without using pieces of what we have gathered through our boxes to construct these forms.

But could your mind create a form? One completely detached from this reality in which you could not have received through your box? I think experience says this is impossible. Perhaps to see, and not comprehend. The absurdity. That is the opposite of certainty. It’s absurdity. To look at a thing and have no concept of what it is. Not to apply these meanings to it, but to look at it and LMAO… I just thought of how Jean Paul Sartre hallucinated crabs… but anyways, as I was saying… it did it again, I started to forget… oh yes… to look at it and not comprehend what it is at all.

That is strange, when you forget. You wonder what happened to your thought. Why did it get cut off, what is this consistency of memory? Why would thoughts be scary, when you have god? God is when people project their meaning on to something beyond it, hence god is a reflection of the ego. God is you, and whatever you think about reality. The concept of god is so silly. But it makes some people happy. You would have to be truly insane to think that there is another thing separate from this reality called god. Because it cannot be perceived with your mind in this reality. It is the thing on the other side, it is the familiar thing which you imagine things about.

Yes, I see. And this thing does not have to be a person, it could be anytrhing. It could be the universe. You could make up whatever you want about it and it would be true, because you said that it was true. Oh yes. This is truly a crazy thought. It leads your mind off on a tangent, thinking about all the constituent parts of this concept.

However, when you think about it, you as a secular person are projecting your own thoughts onto the universe. So in a way, atheists are projecting their ego onto the concept of it just as much. You make assumptions about reality, the god believers project assumptions based on their own observation. Yet for someone who believes in god they certainly function pretty normally in their lives. Projection. Why is it that I don’t believe in god? It is because projecting myself onto the world is just as silly as projecting myself onto god, when god is myself. Just the same as it is silly to project yourself onto the world.

Yes, I think it is silly to project myself onto a negative image of myself, across from me, perhaps inverted in colors, perhaps I am white, and it is black, denoting yin and yang (oh, not really, that was just a silly symbol I threw in to try to sound deep, and it failed!). I think instead it is more realistic to just project the signals I collect back onto the world around me, and not assume that the signals came from the negative image of myself, but simply to assume that the signals simply came from the world.

Yes, I do not contain this duality that a god believer contains to make negative assumptions about myself. Not negative as in undesirable, but photo negative. But why would you be prejudice against the concept of god? Why would you be prejudice against a concept which is supposed to be inherently beautiful? No. It’s not always beautiful. Sometimes the idea of god can be extremely scary. People are supposed to fear god, because what does god do? God sends you to hell. Yeeeeees god sends you to hell. Hehehe.

Hmm, I forgot what I was about to say. But maybe that’s what the FUCKING certainty is. The certainty is when you can no longer remember what you were about to say. When everything goes back to assumptions. Maybe when you finally do achieve insanity, it is when you could remember what you were about to say, the memories don’t clear and fade for a moment leaving you with only…

wow, these sentences are hard to read sometimes after I think too hard about it. That is beyond a slight of memory, that is developing a difficulty to form concepts based on the words you’re using…. no what was I about to say? I apologize for making this sentence so disjointed, I could stop typing and just think about it instead of typing stream of consciousness. Hah! …oh, I meant to say fade, not fake. It was a typo. That’s what distracted me. Oh yes, I remember where I was. But the thing I thought I was about to say, I realized didn’t fit with the sentence. I realized that I was about to make an incorrect assumption.

Leaving you with only what? That really is the question. When your memory fades for a moment, it leaves you essentially with nothing. That nothing, the big nothing. The nothing which is most scary. So far we have the absurd, the certain, and now, we have the nothing. How can one really contemplat nothing? Nothing is not something which one can actually contemplate, because when you think of nothing, it’s not an a-priori concept, it is the abscence of an a-priori concept. Try to imagine a concept without it’s a-priori concept, you can’t.

Wasn’t I about to say something about god? I switched thoughts. Yes, now I see. Each thought is like a strand of string, each thought is like a train. All these threads. The thoughts come out of the box. Now we have a picture of some of the box with the transparent tubes on it going in, and the box is projecting all these strands of thought out, or does it go in? That is the thing. Inside your head, there’s all these electrical signals. It’s not that the thoughts go in or out. The thoughts merely exist in your head. It is not as though… oh yes, these thoughts make me dizzy… it is not as though they go in or out of a box.

I think I made a breathrough. Yes, this is the breakthrough. I feel as though I found an uncertain concept! If I think about these thoughts inside my head, after they have already entered my head, instead of just letting myself go and experience the thoughts outside my head, I think about them as though they are thoughts already in my head. In there I capture them. I don’t simply look into the world outside my head. But if… yes, I see. That is why I forget. I know what is in between these lapses in memories. The lapses in memory are me trying to think about the concept I was trying to think about necessary for me to have consistence of a memory, the certainty. It is me uncertain for a second. Yes, I found true uncertainty, and it is the lapses in between certainty, when you can no longer remember how reality fits together anymore only briefly, and they manifest themselves in a dumbing quality which makes you forget the thought you were about to say…. and come back to the certainty.

I cannot seem to escape the certainty, and I am sorry reader, but I just can’t do it! I am going to make you so bored, thinking about all these contrived concepts, that I keep coming back to because of my inability to keep a progressive thought going, just a repeat, boring thing, predictable! But I am projecting, and now you are god, if we are to go by the the assumption that god is only what you project yourself onto. Yes, I am projecting how I feel onto you. That is beautiful.

I can see now why I may care so much about what other people think. It is just because like how I project myself onto god, I project myself onto others as well. I project my own concept of reality onto the world, because it is not as though these strands could come out of my head, they are within my head. Everything is within my head. I guess this may be what Descartes would call the soul, or unity, and when you break it up, it is what Hume would call, the bundle self. Unity. God.

So to sum up. There is a box, inside your head, with see through rubber tubes going into the box. But strings which seem to go out from inside your head, when really, they are inside the box. But the box is what your consciousness is inside. There is no strings of thought in the box. The box is empty, except for electric waves. And you cannot relate to what is outside of the box, except through your own projection. It is with this box, that someone can think of reality, god, the self, certainty, nothingness, and uncertainty. It is all a part of the box. This is all I can be certain of. I realize now that I think, therefor I am. I am the thing inside the box. Hume’s bundle self, you cannot imagine a unity of it. You can only think of yourself. If you are a very empirical thinker, you are not an internal thinker. They are not an amalgamation of all the things around you if you are a thinker of unity, they are only a bundle if you imagine all the things outside your head as though they were outside of the box, such as Hume. He believed so strongly in perception, as Descartes did not.

What causes bigotry? I noticed that there’s a strong tendency for conservatives to want to subordinate others; supporting policies which subordinate others is consistent among conservatives across the board. The overarching thread tying the desire to subordinate and conservativism together seems to be the feeling of threat. A conservative feels a threat to both their physical and psychological well being. When the conservative can no longer make themselves dominant over others, this undermines the conservative’s sense of superiority, they feel powerless, their egos crumble. They operate on an underlying assumption that society is a system of dominance, where the weak subordinate the strong, and if the people they subordinate are not kept in check, then they will become the subordinates.

This feeling of threat leads to the preservation of cultural hegemony, which manifests itself in things like racism, sexism, homophobia, capitalism, etc. The “dominance hierarchy”, words used explicitly by an openly sexist and transphobic person named Jordan Peterson (who believes trans people run on “the ideology of Joseph Stalin which led to the deaths of millions”, and women shouldn’t wear makeup in the workplace so they don’t get sexually assaulted), seems to be a common thread linking conservative beliefs to one another. The main people at the top of this dominance hierarchy are white cisgender, heterosexual men, (although the hierarchy of dominance extends through many categories of people all the way down to the lowest and most condemned people in society).

All forms of bigotry are in some form or another, extensions of the myth of the dominance hierarchy. Examples of the mythology of the dominance hierarchy personified would be scientific racism, scientific sexism (saying someone is biologically inferior, in other words), and calling trans people and homosexuals mentally ill. The use of mental illness is weaponized in a way to subordinate others, when in reality a person’s ability or disability is only a measure of the value arbitrarily assigned by a person. Something is only a mental illness when it obstructs a person’s ability to live their life functionally. However, since these things threaten a conservative’s sense of superiority and domination, they subjectively assign the label to those whose characteristics they feel are threatening to their cultural hegemony.

This sense of superiority is pervaded institutionally through culture in many forms, in which cultural hegemony is reinforced through things like toxic masculinity and racism. Toxic masculinity is the substrata underlying all forms of bigotry towards sex and gender. Sexism towards trans people is not entirely dissimilar to sexism towards women. Women represent the subordinate class to a conservative, and men represent a dominant class. Because men are seen as dominators, when a man takes the role of a female, this is seen as a loss of a part of the dominant class. Men are frightened by displays of femininity in what they perceive as other men, because their sense of masculinity becomes vulnerable. Whether it is a man taking the role of a husband to another man, or someone assigned male at birth taking the role of a women, those who subscribe to the idea of the dominance hierarchy see this as a subversion of traditional gender roles, in which straight, cisgender men are at the top of society controlling women. The betrayal of their cultural hegemony to femininity is what those who subscribe to the dominance hierarchy see in homosexuals and transsexuals. People like Jordan Peterson, interestingly enough, say that “femininity represents chaos and masculinity represents order”, the same conservative who says “transsexuals represent the ideology of Joseph Stalin”, which “killed millions of people”, according to Jordan Peterson.

Cultural domination of toxic masculinity and racism intersect in interesting ways. An example would be the conservative concept of a “cuck”. If men subscribe to feminism they are “cucks”, because they are enabling domination by the subordinate class. The cuck is defined as a man who allows another man to sleep with his girlfriend. Here’s where the racism comes in. The cuck, aka the guy whose girlfriend he allows to sleep with other people, often has a girlfriend who chooses to sleep with a black male. The concept of race mixing is now involved, a taboo to racists. Not only is there loss of of the institution of the patriarchy, there is now also a loss of the institution of white supremacy. The concept of the cuck is a common slur used by right wingers, which combines white supremacy and toxic masculinity, and shows the interesting ways in which the two can intersect.

The example of why conservatives dislike socialism is so obvious, it is clearly outlined by people like Karl Marx who sees it as class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. It is simply another form of domination exhibited by conservatives who wish to maintain the dominance hierarchy, which is clear as day, and relates to the others in that one only need to replace the word women, or gay, or trans, or person of color, with the word worker, and replace straight white cis male with capitalist owner class. Here you have the dichotomy which explains why Jordan Peterson hates socialism, and feels that transgender people operate on “the ideology of Joseph Stalin”, when in reality he is conveying cold war scare tactics used to subordinate all who do not fall under the those at the top of the dominance hierarchy.

The psychological threat to a conservative is clear: the encroachment on hegemonic institutions of domination by things like civil rights threaten their sense of superiority which they build on the mythology of the dominance hierarchy. It seems that this pattern of domination, cultivated through a false sense of superiority, protects a fragile ego, which they could not maintain without mythologizing other’s inferiority. The conservative can’t be anything without being superior to others. To a conservative, if they are not on top of others, the others will desire to dominate over them. That is how the dominance hierarchy works in the mind of a conservative; they fear the uprising of the oppressed which will subordinate them to the position they put others in. Steve Bannon said that he fears women will “take control of society”.

The threat of violence is mutual: The threat of violence exists between those who perpetuate the dominance hierarchy, and those who are oppressed by those who dominate over them. Both sides feel that the other is threatening them; the conservatives feel that the subordinates threaten their way of life, and the subordinates feel that the conservatives threaten theirs, which is why the subordinate seeks to undermine the dominance of the conservative. The conservative wishes to conserve their dominance. The concerns on each side are mutual; fear of poverty, rape, indentured servitude, murder, loss of identity. The real question becomes, what would happen if equality among genders, races, and classes became a reality? Would the progressives not wish to conserve their equal world once they have dismantled the hierarchies of oppression?

Some would say that there is no such thing as progress, one might say that since there is no goal or plan given to us, whatever we wish to achieve is simply arbitrary. If humanity cannot see past the mythology of money, gender, race, and dominance hierarchy, humanity will be doomed to establish them once again. Once a hierarchy is established, the same cycles will occur. Those who wish to subordinate those below them will fear that the oppressed will break their chains and overcome the oppressor, only so that they can become the master. This is actually a common theme throughout history. One nation sieges a territory and enslaves all their citizens, one culture sieges a nation and appropriates their culture into their own. Is it possible for people to be socialized to such a degree that forms of dominance and oppression are eliminated?

The agonist would say that once any system is established, it will be torn down by schism from within, or rebellion from without. Agon means “struggle or contest”. The agonist would rebel against the idea that human beings are mold-able clay, and say that because of the inherent tendencies of human beings, some would simply be pre-disposed to behave in a certain way which is detrimental to those who tend to seek liberty. The racist, the sexist, the homophobe, they will feel that their way of life is threatened regardless of any socialization, because it is their innate tendency to subordinate. One might point to the rise of right wing authoritarianism around the world and say that the theory of agonism is true.

However, there is hope. Promoting love, and establishing a system which is preferable to all, may be so desirable that enough people might wish to conserve it. If, once capitalism runs it’s course, and if we survive the environmental destruction it has reaped, once the majority of people live in a society where inequality is eliminated for a vast amount of people, so many people might feel that this way of life is preferable, that they would see capitalism and bigotry towards others as an evil so contemptible that they would reject it completely. Capitalism was an overthrow of feudalism that achieved some liberties; instead of being an oppressor ruling over a vast population of slaves by birth right, and assigning people a category by caste, one could move freely through positions of servitude and domination. This is the vast majority of people who are not in positions of power. If the final phase of distribution occurred - the ownership of people’s livelihood being collective, then the vast proportion of people would no longer be under servitude, and the few oppressive, greedy individuals who wish to perpetuate this constant struggle between humanity could become the minority. Their will would dwindle, and they would be the pariah which they sow through their false sense of superiority and hate.

Lesbians are edgy cunts. They have this expression on their face like "ugh, yeah, look at me, I eat carpet. I'm so cool and angry, don't fuck with me, I hate men!", while gay guys have this expression of "I am the most sweet and adorable thing you have ever laid eyes on! Let's talk about fine literature in a coffee shop with our cute designer coats and scarfs."