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.

Stop posting.

Stop breathing

Cuck!