Sunday, June 11, 2017

A Darkening Meadow

Aryan-descended Americans are quite vulgar and racist in how they approach the issue of racism. Because they assume that western Europe is filled with Indo-Aryan peoples, they assume that some quantity of "free speech" is allowed. Conversely, because they assume that Slavs are more authoritarian, they tend to easily believe that speech is "less free" in Russia and/or eastern Europe than it is in Aryan climes. Since they don't understand the ethnic distinctions between peoples in Africa, nor east Asia, nor much of South and Central Asia, they assume that such regions are more "totalitarian" (as they define it, which really means "more honest" in comparison to their own societies), and hence, expect nothing "better" of them, and are not particularly intrigued when a citizen and/or journalist disappears, just like they're not particularly intrigued when a citizen and/or journalist in more-Aryan lands gets fired and loses a marriage and a future as punishment for some dumbass, yet utterly benign, comment. It's exceedingly difficult to get them to perceive, let alone acknowledge, ethnic differences between non-Aryan groups (other than "black" and "Hispanic" and maybe "Asian" or "Indian"); they're more likely to believe that "people/journalists just get killed there sometimes" (because there isn't an Indo-Aryan majority, they assume such things just happens naturally) than to want to understand the vast and crucial distinctions that non-Aryans recognize among themselves.

They view the Columbian Pentagon and Palo Alto as rather harmless (Aryan) protectorates which are expected to follow certain humane (Aryan) standards, but are so bored by stiff-chinned Bantu or slanty-eyed Koreans that it takes truly panopticonal levels of media hype to get them to even begin to care about public attitudes or policies in those spooky, dusky places. Whereas the life-destroyed citizen in Aryan lands might've made a clumsy drunken joke about how fat black chicks are, the executed citizen in non-Aryan lands might've been working with a foreign NGO to smuggle out pictures of warehouse safety in Production Zone Twelve. And to Aryan-descended westerners, only one of those fates is newsworthy, because only that one affects the decency and integrity of the State/people involved.

No surprise to students of corruption is that the eastern and southern presumed-tyrants are often more freedom-loving in their policies than the Aryan audience can imagine. One's ability to grovel, make a cash contribution to the local police or attorneys' offices, may be substantially cheaper in the authoritarian state than in the "free" one. Not that the authoritarian state is good in any way, but its honesty, and the honesty of its bribery, is, by perhaps all relevant standards, not only refreshing, but superior. In Mexico, you may insult a local politician for being mas negro que yo, get a public slap or pay someone fifty bucks, then go on with life. In far more civilized America, you may merely lose your job, then be of googleable interest to everyone you meet for the next five to ten years. No one will yet jail you for naughty words, but the de-socialization and future-stripping aspects of formal pariah-hood go much farther than the offended Guatemalan judge's assistants: the mild becomes mountainous, the record permanent, and the standard of offensiveness substantially lower. In America, you can threaten the public official, and receive merely a few years in prison, in contrast to the Guatemalan garrote; outside of the dwindling Aryan holdfasts, though, the penumbra of possible offenses dwindles drastically. In so many words, there is less fear of noticing the new HR woman's finely turned calves, or the countless hoards of other potential, yet unwritten and theoretically-lightly-punished, offenses.

The humane, systemic punishment in the Aryan world is something of an oversized bezoar, making the digestion appear to run more smoothly until that last fatal clog. Because we can type, "Mark Zuckerberg is a clown," and not (so far as this one knows) be arrested, we think we're living centuries ahead of the pitiable North Koreaners, who may not insult Piggy Gangnam Style. In trade for our stress relief, the number of prohibitions is much higher than merely respect for state or leader, and retaliation is outsourced to everyone. All future employers, mates, presiding courts, government clerks, and drive-thru attendants are the enforcers of our soft tyranny, and we embrace it as being our salvation from a flogging or a firing squad?

Neither hell is good; neither hell is decently tolerable. But have we chosen the wrong one? How many years of anxious, sleepless nights; how many shattered dreams; how many wrecked careers, evictions, Walmart parking lots, church shelters, senses of having failed one's family, growing old a fallen speck of nothing, would you embrace to save yourself getting your ass beat by some besuited thugs and that's it?

Is it a genetic correlation? Or, is it an inevitable consequence of certain kinds of civilization, wherein the subtle society proves to be the bioluminescent clover in a monster's meadow, going suddenly dark and softly still once we've wandered far enough inside?


  1. Because we can type, "Mark Zuckerberg is a clown," and not (so far as this one knows) be arrested...

    Why arrest, when you can merely blacklist? Which has longer negative impacts upon employment?

    A curious 21st C-grown Amuriken Yoot might crunch the data on zuckbuck posts, looking at the negatives cast upon Lord Mark, and testing the longer-term employment of those who were aspersion-tossers. What would our Yoot find, do you think?

    1. Only the NSA knows (so to speak). This one should do a post on undetectable retribution.

    2. Yes, please.