Sunday, June 19, 2016

Wake Me Up When The Country Ends





"Wake Me Up When The Country Ends", by Peter S. Dee and the Inhuman $hields ©2016, originally Billie Joe Armstrong/Green Day 2005.

Generations have come and passed.
America can never last.
Wake me up, when the country ends.

Founding Fathers crimes have passed,
Independence gone so fast.
Wake me up, when the country ends.

Here’s your Kool-aid again,
Idiocracy.
Drenched in a cult again
of personality.

As our memories rest,
We forget what freedom costs.
Wake me up, when the country ends.

Constitution’s time has passed,
Illegal migrants swim so fast.
Despertarme, si se puede!

Bend over, once again.
Cast your vote, for evil men.
Wake me up, when November ends.

Here come brain dead again.
Idiocracy.
Wasn’t a comedy,
But a documentary.

As our memory rests,
We never know just what we lost,
Wake me up, when the US ends.

Declaration’s time has passed,
Democracy can never last.
Wake me up, when Republic ends.

Socialism’s come to pass.
Bread and circus goes so fast,
Wake me up, when my welfare ends.
Wake me up, when my healthcare ends.
Wake me up, when my bennies end.

Sunday, May 8, 2016

Progressivism is a Religious Mass Movement: Eric Hoffer, the American Nostradamus

Book Review | The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (Eric Hoffer, 1951, HarperPerrenial 2010 edition)


Would you be interested if I told you there is a book that explains the mechanical phenomena driving the following disruptive modern mass movements and mass sub-movements? 

  • Black Power Matters
  • Occupy Wall Street and the 99%’rs
  • Trumpism
  • The LGBT civil rights movement
  • The campus snowflake movement
  • Social Justice
  • Climate Change
  • Anti-Capitalism
  • Immigration
  • White Guilt
  • Islamism and the Global jihadist Insurgency


Would you be interested in reading it?

What if I told you that this book was published 65 years ago and accurately predicted the forces that would bring down the Soviet Union?

What if I told you this book—despite being so incredibly ancient—contained very few linguistic or historical anachronisms that make books of this age difficult to read?  It literally reads as if it is specifically describing the global chaos in 2016.

Interested yet?

If told you that if you read it, your erectile tissues might swell to be 10 times larger than their normally flaccid state—would you read it then?

DAMMIT!  WOULD YOU READ IT, THEN?!

Good.

I knew you would.

I’m talking about “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” by Eric Hoffer, the so-called self-educated stevedore-philosopher.  He was the original hyphenated American, and his book is the “Tobin’s Spirit Guide” to Progressivism.

The book is under $9 on Amazon.




There have been lots of books written in the past decade that try to describe the modern Progressive movement.  Some are OK, but they seem to nibble around the edges of a gun-shaped Pop Tart.  Some of the better ones I’ve read are by former Lefties like Andrew Breibart, Evan Sayet, David Horowitz, and David Mamet.  (Jesus! Those are all Joos!  Hoffer probably is, too.  Maybe The Protocols of the Elders of Zion weren’t just a Russian hoax after all).  

The problem is these books, while generally insightful and inspirational (aside from being stealthy vehicles of vile Joo witchcraftery), are too biased by the “self”—too wrapped up in the modern experience and personal anecdotes of the authors.  Hoffer never once talks about himself or his interpersonal discovery, and it’s a refreshing break. 

What we have in The True Believer is an exposition into the darkness of human nature which eternally seeks to destroy and dominate others.  It is a guide to the pathologies of Progressivism, which along with its associated kin (Socialism, Communism, Marxism), is perhaps the most dominant mass movement over the past 130 years or so.  We keep trying to reinvent a wheel that Hoffer invented a really long time ago, and did so very well at that.

As I write, it occurs to me I don’t recall Hoffer ever defining “mass movement,” but some examples he cites should do: The Reformation, The French and American Revolutions, Fascism, Communism, and Socialism, Cromwell’s Puritan Revolution, and Islam and Christianity. 

Mass movements, he tells us, are patchworks of other sub-movements and social forces and dynamically change as they mature.  Stalinist Russia was a patchwork of bolshevism, czarism, nationalism, pan-Slavism, monopolistic capitalism, and borrowings from Hitler’s National Socialism, while Hitler’s National Socialism borrowed from Prussianism, racialism, fascism, bolshevism, nationalism, Shintoism, Catholicism, and ancient Hebrew [152].  None of which helps explain the plot of third Indiana Jones movie, unfortunately.

Mass movements are pioneered by men of words, materialized by fanatics and consolidated by men of action [147].  At the base level, they feed off frustration of the masses, and at the highest levels eventually become a refuge for the ambitious [152].  In 2016 terms, the latter refers to the numerous sub-movements that seem to arise spontaneously, like Black Power Matters and Occupy, which have actually been biding their time quietly organizing in small collective enclaves, including those radical special interests who spent the Bush years formulating policy and drafting the skeletons of Progressive legislation to be pulled from the shelf when the Lightbringer comes, serving as a prefabricated foundation for Obamacare, Common Core curricula, or Executive Amnesty.

Hoffer tells us that mass movements exert an irresistible attraction to those pre-occupied with individual careers (“career men”), who accelerate the transformation of the mass movement into an enterprise, and that’s where are with modern Progressivism in the Obama era.  Numerous franchised sub-movements and efforts have risen since 2008, many organized and led by career men who include loyal field officers like the Van Jones, the Valerie Jarretts, the Lois Learners, the Reverend Jeremiah Wrights, the fabulist Ben Rhodes, and the thousands of others we will never know by name who work tirelessly in the movement. These are the types of fuckers who get Czar positions in the White House, weekly invites to discuss policy on the golf course (away from White House log books and media cameras and microphones) or Plum Book jobs in the National Security Council and State Department and royally sodomize our foreign policy.

Mass movements arise to destroy the present.  They are preoccupied with the future (it’s no accident the “Occupy” movement is thusly named), and cannot rise until the prevailing order has been deliberately discredited [130].  Hoffer writes, “the present is driven back as if it were an unclean thing and lumped with the detested past [69].  There is no more clear incarnation of what he describes than the campaign to eliminate modern symbols of the Confederacy.  By deprecating the past and present, mass movement fanatics acquire a vague sense of equality [75]. 

It’s pretty clear to even the casual observer that America is has entered a post-American phase and that American culture has under taken tremendous change.  Our 2016 society is not the stable rock it seemed to be during the 80s and 90s.  I can’t speak to the 1860s—or even the 1960s—because those eras seemed very socially turbulent, but I wasn't witness to them.

The 1950’s though, are romanticized as a period of American harmony and middleclass expansion following the Second World War.  Eric Hoffer wrote this book before any of the civil unrest and social change that defined our current America from the 60s onward, so his experience and philosophy is drawn from a much more objective, “dispassionate” place. 

I say “dispassionate” because this book is far from not being passionate, and yet it mostly objective and free from proselytizing.  Hoffer warns us to be aware of all mass movements.  He lived through World War I, the birth of the Soviet Union, the rise of fascism in German and Italy during the “Hitler Decade”, and then experienced the full fury of the Cold War before passing away in 1983.  

Extremely erudite, he explored long-forgotten, classic literature and compared his research with his own experiences.  He writes assertively, knowing he’s figured out what causes people to become Nazis and Communists, fundamentalist Christians, militant atheists, or jihadists. Interestingly, although he argues in categorical tones, he emphasizes he is writing theory, a “book of thoughts.”
Personally, reading as a scientist who loves nothing more than to discredit standing theory as a tool of scientific advancement, it seems Hoffer’s theories have withstood the test of time.  In many ways, it feels like reading a post-mortem analysis of America. 

Hoffer’s a god-damned Nostradamus!

For example, he examines the traits of the leaders and lieutenants in mobilizing successful mass movements.

Who does this sound like in our modern era?

“[The mass movement leader] articulates and justifies the resentment damned up in the souls of the frustrated.  He has an audacity and joy in defiance, a fanatical conviction that he is in possession of the one and only truth, faith in his destiny and luck, a capacity for passionate hatred, contempt for the present, a delight in symbols, spectacles, and ceremony, unbounded brazenness, disregard for consistency and fairness, a capacity for winning and holding the utmost loyalty of a group of able lieutenants… he does not have exceptional intelligence, noble character, or originality... In him, charlatanism is indispensable, and some deliberate misrepresentation of fact [82-83, 114-116]”.

I see both Obama and Trump in Hoffer’s description of a mass movement leader, which recall, he wrote in 1951.  This book helps explain why there are numerous  anecdotes of former Obama supporters who switched to Trump in 2016.

I had known of this book only recently, when I heard a popular radio host quote Hoffer to describe Trumpism: “It is the true believer’s ability to ‘shut his eyes and stop his ears to facts that do not deserve to be either seen or heard… he cannot be baffled by contradictions because he denies their existence [80].

This piqued my interest in the book.

I had written a blog post just before the Iowa caucuses called “Encyclopedia Trump and the Curious Case of the Last Straws” (available now in paperback if you print it from my blog and bind it yourself), explaining how I went from Trump-curious to #NeverTrump, based in part on the type of hardcore followers Trump attracted and who curiously refused to see Trump wasn’t who they thought he was, but was a blank canvas on which to project all of their fantasies.  Obama was exactly same type of candidate in 2007-2008.  Hoffer predicts that Trump and Obama fanatics are “ruthless, self-righteous, credulous, disputatious, petty, and rude… and mentally cocky”, just like their respective leader [153, 156].

Still, I was leery of reading such an “old” book because the grammar and lexicon can be difficult to read and contextualize.  Like poetry, I just don’t have the patience to decipher all that groovy jazz, man.

The True Believer, though, reads very modern and quick, perhaps because Hoffer wasn’t educated in the universities of the time with their “proper” ways of writing.

The book is amazingly concise.  And biting.  Hoffer mastered the economy of words, so much so that his sentence structure and grammar are like never-ending jabs that set you up for the cock punch you never see coming.  Every time he grabs your junk and twists, you’ll be cheering and screaming for more punching and twisting.  You can take it, though, because your erectile tissues are swollen and mighty.

“PREACH!” you’ll cry out, desperately plaintive, like Dana’s stalker-boyfriend Yanosh, in Ghostbusters 2, to his boss Vigo the Carpathian.

“COMMAND ME, LORD!’

“YOU WANT ME MAKE BABY WITH DANA, YES?”

Vigo the Carpathian failed at leading a mass movement because he could only attract one frustrated follower, Yanosh.


You might think a book like The True Believer, which describes the nature of mass movements, is about mass psychology.  What is especially illuminating is that it really exposes the individual psychological motivations of someone who joins mass movements, and help show you how to instantly determine whether someone has joined a mass movement.

For example, Hoffer talks of the role of imitation in mass movements.  Think of the conformity in speech, symbolism, and dress you see in feminism, the LGBT, Occupy, and Black Power Matters.  Glitter bombs, rape and hate hoaxes, racial dog whistles, incessant meme-speak and ALL CAPS—these are examples of common, specific actions (often unconsciously performed) taken by individuals that identify them as members of a mass movement, merely imitative and conforming “anonymous particles with no [individual] will. [84]”

He talks of the important role “extravagant hope” plays in mass movements.  “The hopeful can draw strength from the most ridiculous sources of power—a slogan, a word, a button [9].  Don’t forget Obama’s ghost written autobiography.  I’m completely certain that “The Audacity of Hope” author (Bill Ayers) read The True Believer and used it as a manual alongside Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

Hoffer describes the potential converts to mass movements, in great detail and haunting accuracy: The Undesirables, The Poor (in five categories, no less), The Misfits, The Inordinately Selfish, The Ambitious, Minorities, and The Sinners.

You know how women were often credited for helping organize the Tea Party movement? 
Hoffer describes these types as The Bored spinsters and middle-aged housewives.  They existed even in cases of Islam and the Nazis, which are/were movements that frown on female activities outside of the home.  Hitler, for example, was financed in part by industrialist “society ladies thirsting for adventure” while the French Revolution had their equivalent in MILFs of businessmen who “were devastated by boredom,” and restlessly “applauded innovators.”  And for what it’s worth, they had the vapors, too.  I’ll tell you, when the Smoking Hot Asian Wife™ gets the vapors, I’m in for a rough night.

He talks about how the break-down of the family and pre-existing belief systems (like the completely non-existent culture wars on Christianity and the nuclear family) are essential for any mass movement to obtain followers [34, 36-37, 52].

He describes, ironically, how ancient Christianity, as a virulent mass-movement in the day, had the toughest time converting those in rural, backwards areas (those who bitterly clung to pre-existing cults) over those in urban centers [42].  Think back to Obama’s speech to San Francisco Progressive urbanites on the “bitter clingers” (specifically referring to rural Pennsylvania where I myself was raised and live), who clung to ancient texts like the Constitution (2nd Amendment) and cults (Christianity, a competing ideology to neocommunism).

Throughout the book I kept overlaying current events on his prophetic canvas. 

How farsighted do the following examples sound?

1.     “The leader[s] of mass movements have overwhelming contempt for the present—for all the stubborn facts of the present—even those of geography and the weather [89].” 

I assume Hoffer was channeling Hitler’s 1,000 Year Reich here.  Think of the way Hitler dissolved borders early through the threat of force and later on by conquest, and of the ill-fated Operation Barbarossa in 1943; Hitler ignored Napoleon’s own Russian winter disaster.  One can easily see parallels in Obama’s “wrong side of history” and “the debate is over” memes, his amplification of climate change as a threat over the global Islamic insurgency, and insistence on ignoring America’s sovereignty at our borders.

2.     “Mass movements can rise and spread without a God, but not without a devil [91].” 

Hitler had his Joo devils, and a Japanese delegation to Berlin in 1932 studying the National Socialist movement lamented “I wish we had something like [National Socialism] in Japan, only we can’t, because we haven’t got any Jews.”  Foreigners make the best enemies, Hoffer says.  So in today’s neocommunist movement, you’ve got the process of making Americans foreigners in their own country through fundamental transformation and otherization, demonizing the past and present while making white Americans to be descendants of European colonialists who wrought genocide on the noble inhabitants of the New World.

3.     “Should Americans begin to hate foreigners whole-heartedly, it will be an indication that they will have lost confidence in their own way of life [96].” 

If this doesn’t at least somewhat explain Trumpism and the modern anti-immigrant zeitgeist… But what caused this backlash?  America once embraced the “out of many, one” heritage, but the immigration system has turned many Americans against foreigners, and justly so.  It’s a disruptive, irrational, and abused tool political classes use to cement long-term political and economic power.  Americans have lost confidence in the American way of life, and it’s happened through a systematic Progressive inculcation of anti-Americanism via the mass media (news, music, movies), in education, and in politics abetted by the watering down of Americanism through mass immigration from the Third World.

4.     “Even when men league themselves mightily together to promote tolerance and peace on earth, they are likely to be violently intolerant toward those not of a like mind.” [99].  True Believers will actually see in tolerating opposing, “correct” viewpoints a sign of weakness, frivolity, and ignorance [87].  So we’ve got insta-outrage social media mobs, the Gaystapo, campus safe spaces free of tolerance, mass shootings—and since politics is downstream of culture, free-speech intolerant legislation and anti-First Amendment court decisions are becoming common.

5.     “There is a deep reassurance for the frustrated in witnessing the downfall of the fortunate and the disgrace of the righteous [98].” This is the bedrock of Bernie Sander’s campaign and the Occupy movement.

6.     On what will cause the Soviet downfall:

“A popular upheaval in Soviet Russia is hardly likely before the people get a real taste of the good life.  The most dangerous moment for the regime of the Politburo will be when a considerable improvement in the economic conditions of the Russian masses has been achieved and the iron totalitarian rule somewhat relaxed [29].”

“The more unworkable communism proves in Russia, and the more its leaders are compelled to compromise and adulterate the original creed, the more brazen and arrogant will be their attack on a non-believing world [111].”

For you kids under 40, American soft-power (Christianity, Levis and Coke, rock-n-roll music, and our overseas news broadcasts) had a subverting effect of the power of Soviet dogma on the masses, giving them the “taste of the good life” Hoffer mentioned.  It’s joked within the circles I travel that if North Korea ever does invade southward, DPRK soldiers will drop their weapons and defect at the first sight of a 7-Eleven.

Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979, staying through 1989.  This period is recognized as a time when Russia attempted to moderate through glasnost and perestroika, right before collapsing in 1992.  Interestingly, Hoffer also speaks of the disruptive force returning war veterans can be to society, an under-researched variable related to the Soviet collapse, in my opinion.  Armies, he argues, are a type of mass movement. Since members of mass movements are nearly interchangeable, this may present a problem. I suspect less so, though, for the modern American veteran, who took on a profession versus a conscription.

But what impact do our own veterans, returning home from 15 years of war, bring to our mass movements at home?  I warned a liberal friend in March 2003 that there will be far-reaching, unpredictable effects on American society from our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as I myself was mobilizing to begin over ten years of on-and-off cycles of domestic-based and over-seas warfighting.  Personally, though, I was secretly thinking of the Duncan Hunters, Tom Cottons, Alan Wests, Joni Ernst, Ryan Zinke, and even relatively moderate liberals like Hawaii’s Tulsi Gabbard and Tammy Duckworth, who would, shaped by their war-time experiences, run for and rise into positions of leadership in the US Congress.

These wars themselves certainly created increasing levels of frustration in America and ushered in the Obama Transformation, but what negative affect will our veterans themselves play, if any, in our own collapse, or hopefully, our salvation?

(Side note: I write about how when Reagan defeated The Soviet Union, he set up America for it's ultimate defeat by Communism in You've Defeated America For Good, #NeoComs. Well Played.)


What Can We Learn from Hoffer to Help Now?

What Hoffer paints in The True Believer is a dark depiction of where we are headed, yet it’s something he apparently didn’t envision specifically for America.  Our world is undergoing the type of mass movements that herald global conflict on the scale of the world wars.  We are entering a dangerous place that threatens to sweep us away into a maelstrom of tumult, and there is little we can do—or will do—to prevent it from happening.  We will fight until we are tired and millions are dead, and another mass movement comes along to talk the place of the last.
Or, will we? Are there any practical lessons we can gather from Hoffer and prevent or delay what looks inevitable to me? 

1. Frustration is the Cause of All Mass Movements, and the One Counter We Had is Dying

Frustration is at the heart of all mass movements.  The frustrated are ailed by the consciousness of an “irremediably blemished self”, and their main desire is to escape that self.  Freedom and opportunity create frustration and the inordinately selfish are particularly susceptible to frustration [48-49, 59].  There are numerous other paths to frustration, but the counter to frustration is self-reliance, individualism, and an industrious, creative spirit.  You can see all three character traits lacking among those who adopt Progressive ideology.

You’re not going to believe this, but Hoffer credited the “lack of handicrafts in modern times” and a fading of the individual’s creative powers as a cause of individual frustration and rise of mass movements [34].

In 1951!  In 2016, our throw-away culture is inundated by cheap over-seas goods, an omnipresent service industry, and instantly ephemeral—yet eternally stored—social media.

The lack of handicraft?!  No one makes anything substantive anymore for survival, nor needs to be particularly well educated or industrious to provide for themselves.  As a result, we are awash in mediocrity in all levels of society and professions.

Hoffer explains the interference of a mass movement with the creative process is deep-reaching because literature, art, and science must be propagandized and “practical” [155].  We see this today in the terrible state of 21st century science, with falsified experimental results and rampant bias in all scientific fields.

Oh, you don’t science, bro?  Well let’s catch Fast & Furious 8.  I hear Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson are in it.  Propaganda, by the way, Hoffer says is likewise deeply repetitious and “unabashedly imitative,” and it is.

Alternatively, perhaps the ability to post your tits to Twitter, making a Vine of yourself lighting farts, knocking out the entire season 5 of Game of Thrones in one sitting, or finding and blogging all the cheats to South Park’s Stick of Truth is all the handicraft we need to stave off frustration.  Or, perhaps we still need more substantive handicraft in life and these easy, fleeting accomplishments take time away from mastering an instrument or another language, completing a tradecraft course, or completing martial arts training.

Maybe Hoffer was onto something, as the society I described has only come about in the past 30 years or so, apparently coinciding with the main-streaming of Progressivism.  Someone who is still creative in the movie industry should make a documentary about this phenomenon and call it, oh… I don’t know… “Idiot Democracy” or something. 

Hey, I got it!  How about “Idiocracy?”

The frustration of the modern elite in education and media (the future leaders, lieutenants, recruiters, and communicators of mass movements) stems from an inability to act, juxtaposed with the great ability to talk a good game.  “How else explain the surprising fact that the Lenins, Trotskys, Mussolinis, Hitlers, [and Obamas] spent the best part of their lives talking their heads off in cafes and meetings reveal themselves suddenly as the most able and tireless men of action of their time [122]?” 

Successful action is actually undesirable in either the movement or in the frustrated follower, according to Hoffer.  It’s one reason why Progressives attempt impossible tasks like fighting poverty, climate change, and controlling human nature [76].  You might joke that this theory doesn’t explain why they become psychology, journalism, or education majors and avoid science, technology, engineering, or math (STEM).  The answer, by the way, is pussy.  Hot chicks don’t do STEM.

Nay, Hoffer tells us.  The True Believer’s sense of security is not tied to the excellence of his cause, but only from his passion for the cause [85].  Success becomes an end, and with successful resolution the frustrated would gain self-confidence—the opposite of diminution of self, which is a necessary part of the psychological process required to lose oneself to the collective [123]. 

Perhaps successful action is partly how some—like the idealistic young and self-made blacks—are able to break free from the Progressive Plantation as they become more accomplished, and why the least accomplished may not.

The Protestant Work Ethic helped create true penchant for action in America which almost certainly stymied the types of mass movements infecting other parts of the world throughout our two American centuries.  Do the math, however.  The Protestant Work Ethic and the Judeo-Christian underpinnings of America are terminally ill.  Waves upon waves of legal and illegal Third World immigration and easy government assistance to Romney’s 47%’rs have infected us like the worst virus. Our noble work ethic will not come back once it’s in the grave, and America will lose its inoculation from the disease of frustration.

From vast personal experience, whenever a previously forested watershed reaches about 15% impermeable surface (rooves, roads, parking lots), the stream draining the watershed really begins to appear damaged in relation its formerly high quality.  The stream banks suffer from greater erosion because water runs-off faster with greater force.  The water chemistry becomes impaired for a whole host of reasons, including contact with new pollutants and increased sediment loads, poorer bioassimilative capacity, and less infiltration and contact of precipitation run-off with the subsurface geochemistry.  The stream also becomes warmer and therefore holds less dissolved oxygen.  The community of aquatic insects and fish that inhabit the water changes drastically, replaced by a more pollution tolerant biocommunity not capable of normal energy cycling (the community becomes ghettoized.  Rack, rack city, bitch!  -h/t Tyga).   

Once you reach 15% imperviousness, the watershed is basically irreversibly fucked.  Oh, it might be nice to look at in some places, and on the surface seem like a nice, cute little stream to the casual observer, but it is no longer a stable ecosystem.  Rack, rack city, bitch.

So what percentage does degradation look like in America? 

17% of American jobs are held by immigrants. 
Over 47% of Americans are on some form of public assistance.
About 30% of Americans are not in the workforce.
Around 10% of the population are illegal immigrants.

I guess the lesson learned is that we’re fucked and our natural defenses have never been weaker against the frustration that gives energy to the mass movements which plague us currently.  Strap in, America.  It’s going to a rough ride and we may not make it out alive.  At least we have guns and shelf-stable food.  Enjoy what you have today as much as you can.

2. Immigration is a Mass Movement, Literally and, Well, Literally.

If there is any place where Hoffer somewhat mis-prognosticated, it’s on immigration.  He was over-confident in America’s capacity to assimilate immigrants, but he never could have known we would allow as many as 30 million illegal Third World migrants and tens of millions of legals over the past 30 years alone.  I surmise he based his confidence on our success at integrating Western European immigrants like the Germans, Italians, Irish, and Polish, because when he wrote The True Believer, America was well over 90% white.

He tells us immigration itself is a type of mass movement [20].  When you overlay the massive global immigration which has been occurring over the past 30 years with political mass movements simultaneously occurring, there is going to be a synergy of effect which can only be dangerously disruptive for us all. 

Where have the migrants gone?  Europe and America.

Where has the modern Progressive movement risen?  Europe and America. 

Where will the next World War breakout?  No one knows, but there is going to be a hell of a lot more violence and terrorism in both Europe and America going forward.

Hoffer presciently warns us that those who come to America to seek out an idealized version of America (i.e., having unrealistic notions of freedom, justice, or equality) will find reality lacking and consequently insulate themselves against Americanism in a sense of superiority (e.g., La Raza and Muslims), and we certainly see that this happened in Europe [120]. 

He eerily writes, “There is perhaps some hope to be derived from the… successful programs of socialization in the small Scandinavian states [which] indicate perhaps that when the attempt to realize an ideal society is undertaken by a small [homogeneous] population it can proceed and succeed in an atmosphere which is neither hectic nor coercive [159].  Sweden and Denmark were nice socialist exemplars while they lasted.  Long live Swedenmarkistan!

Hoffer specifically mentions the difficulty the Third World would have assimilating in America due to their susceptibility to frustration borne of freedom and from the crumbling of their traditional communal and tribal solidarities they left behind [38], or perhaps cling to in ghettos that slowly become no-go zones.  Durka, durka Mohammed, Bitch!

3.     It sounds crazy, but individuals don’t naturally crave freedom and American-style democracy—even as strong as we imagine post-WW II patriotism was when Hoffer wrote The True Believer 65 years ago.  American democracy failed to draw converts, he argued back then.  We re-learned that lesson painfully in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Arab Spring—and Russia never developed into a democracy after its collapse.  How, today, after decades of anti-American indoctrination in our education systems, in the mass media can we offer a constructive alternative mass movement?

Freedom and opportunity, like peace, sells.  But who’s buying?  Hoffer tells us freedom equally aggravates frustration as much as it alleviates it.  “Unless a man has the talents to make something of himself, freedom is an irksome burden… we join a mass movement to escape individual responsibility, or in the words of the ardent young Nazi, “to be free from freedom [31].”

Unlimited opportunity breeds frustration just as badly as a lack of opportunity, because there is so much to be done or that could be done, the present can seem overwhelming and frustration with the present increases.  Frustration leads to fear, fear to anger, anger to hate, and hate to the dark side… and the next thing you know you’re high on Molly and pulling a train at the after-party for a successful LGBT glitter-bombing of your hated CPAC anti-hero, ultra-MILF Michelle Malkin.  You won’t remember a damn thing about the bukkake dénouement, but it’ll all be on your Go-Pro, so relax.

Hoffer explains the modern snowflake movement long before it ever happened, as a rejection of freedom.  “Those who see their lives as spoiled and wasted crave equality and fraternity more than they do freedom… the passion for equality is partly a passion for anonymity: to be one thread of the many making a tunic… they want to eliminate free competition and the ruthless testing to which the individual is continually subjected in a free society [33].

We see in our snowflakes a “denunciation of the present, a facility for make-believe, a proneness to hate, a readiness to imitate, [unquestioning] credulity, a readiness to attempt the impossible, and many others… [60]. 

I see in our snowflakes the following warning, “When hopes and dreams are loose in the streets, it is well for the timid to lock doors, shutter windows, and lie low until the wrath has passed… there is often a monstrous incongruity between the hopes, however noble and tender, and the action which follows them.  It is as if ivied maidens and garland youths were to herald the four horsemen of the apocalypse [11].

Ivied maidens heralding the Apocalype during a Slut Walk, which is ironic, because lesbians aren't really sluts no matter how much carpet they eat nor how long are their daisy chains.  Slut Walks, by the way, are really just speed dating events.

3. Call Out and "Shame" Progressive Mass Movements For What They Are: Religions 

Mass movements can be identified and named by their religious symbolism.  They share installation of religious themes into practical matters, or in Hoffer’s words, “religiofication.”  Hoffer declares atheism is a religion—something we’ve independently re-discovered, and have lumped worshippers of other mass movements into the devoutly pious, such as climate change cultists.  

“For though ours is a godless age, it is the very opposite of irreligious [xiii, 86]”, and it’s nothing new, but seems to be something re simply have to continually rediscover due to our naturally limited life spans.  Hoffer cites the 19th Century-era historian-philosopher Ernest Renen (d.1892) who warned that Socialism was “the coming religion” and that being secular, it would lead to a religiofication of politics and economics [158]. 

As followers of the one true religion, it follows that The True Believer see infidels who follow “an autonomous, self-sufficient existence (i.e., freedom) not only as barren and meaningless, but also as depraved and evil”, and therefore worthy of justified hatred and elimination.  The same is true for those who follow competing belief systems like Christianity or objectivism or Constitutionalism.  Any other path or belief system is vile and dangerous.

Accordingly, we need to continually refer to mass movements as militantly religious, identifying and calling out specifics.  The True Believer “is one of the chosen, bolstered and protected by invincible powers, and destined to inherit the earth [126.]”  Militant atheists wage jihad with as much fervor as any radicalized Muslim.

We have also got to embrace the truth that appeals based on logic and logical reasoning do not affect The True Believer, who is immune to logic and reason and other sources of morality [86].  Avoid the frustration upfront.  I don’t mean we stop finding and highlighting illogical contradictions in their ideologies and constant hypocrisies and projections, however.  In fact, we need to explain the roots of these contradictions and hypocrisies are actually pathologies.

And we also need to ramp up other attacks, like rhetorical argumentation, outright mocking, and pure (but true) ad hominem.  For example, calling someone who is a member of a mass movement a “True Believer” or “pathologically insane” may not be attacking their argument, but fuck it—logical reasoning doesn’t work, so feel free to attack the messenger directly. 

We have got to constantly, and loudly, align the modern Progressive mass movements with other violent and destructive mass movements like National Socialism, neocommunism, and violent Islamism.  Hoffer recognized that followers of mass movements—even those apparently at opposite ideological poles—are in fact, at the same pole.  They belong to the same family and share the same type of hatred brothers have and contempt that familiarity breeds.  Hitler, for example, looked at German Communists as welcome, potential National Socialists, and Karl Radek looked on Nazis as future communist recruits [17, 86, 163].  Mock Progressives as clinically Nazi-esque, using factual argumentation, while avoiding Godwin’s Law violations.

Hoffer argues fanatics be convinced; they can only be converted to another mass movement [86], hopefully one which is positive, like Christianity.  I say this as a 99% atheist: we need a lot more Christians and a lot less of the other destructive mass movements of our day which are actively supplanting Christianity as a mass movement.  Unfortunately, a Christian revival is unlikely to occur without a corresponding human extinction event. 

Do what you can to support and respect Christianity and its role in a stable America, despite your personal religious or irreligious beliefs.  This will sound strange to evangelicals, but Christianity in America is “much more” than “just” about the eternal salvation of souls.


The Merciful End (Of This Book Review, and Eventually America)

Ultimately, mass movements are defeated through overwhelming violence, a suitable replacement, or the decapitation (literal or figuratively through marginalization) of leaders and lieutenants.

It seems to the cynic in me we are globally at a place of no return, even if America is salvageable.  We’ve reached the tipping point and will have to prepare to fight for our own freedom and experience epic suffering in our lifetimes, on a global scale. 

The depressed optimist in me, however, hopes that we can have a new, healthy American Nationalist movement led by a successful Conservative messenger (I’m looking at you, Ted Cruz) and bolstered by economic growth to syphon the frustrated off in a constructive direction and lead the world to safety.  Hoffer agrees, “Any marked improvement in economic conditions would almost certainly activate the tradition of freedom which is a tradition of revolt [160].


Since the leading GOP candidate Trump is almost certainly going to be schlonged in a general election, get ready to grab the South Park Stick of Truth sequel and blog those cheats for me to follow.  It’s going to be awesome, and if you get a chance, #WakeMeUpWhenTheCountryEnds.

Sunday, January 31, 2016

Encyclopedia Trump and the Curious Case of the Last Straws


I was going to title this post something like "Conversations with Donald Trump Supporters," but how incredibly boring is that?

And the post was going to start out like this:

Meanwhile, at 1,700 Iowa Caucus sites February 1st, 2016...


Trump Supporter: No! No, no, not Cruz! I said Trump. Nobody's comin' up with Cruz. Who works out with Cruz? You won't even get your heart goin, not even a mouse on a wheel.

Unconvinced Voter: That... uh, good point.

Trump Supporter: Trump's the key man here. Think about it. Trump casinos. Trump wives. Trump, man, that's the number. 7 Trumpkins twirlin' on a branch, eatin' lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch. 


You know that old children's tale from the sea! It's like you're dreamin' about Gorgonzola cheese when it's clearly Brie time, baby. 

Step into my office!

Unconvinced Voter: Why?

Trump Supporter: 'Cause you're fuckin' fired!


You might recognize this bit as a nearly verbatim exchange between Ted and the Hitchhiker in There's Something About Mary.

Here, check it out. It might be the funniest few minutes of dialogue in any movie. Ever.



Why hasn't Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller ever appeared in a movie together?  I suspect it has something to do with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (hint: they're both jooos), but that's a blog post for another day.

By someone else.

Like a Trumpkin.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if you are still with me, you are not a Trump supporter or you are on the fence, watching a camel being loaded with straw one piece at a time, by well restrained Arab men, who normally enjoy the pleasures of lusty camels at night, on Thursdays, all cross the Middle East... if they can't find a similar smelling man to love.

I've never seen a guiltier looking pair of Muslim men on a cheap Asian motorbike. With a goat. On Thursday--NTTIAWTT.

STRAWS AND CAMELS!


Stay with me, here.  Ignore the sexy animal.

When Donald Trump first announced his candidacy last July, I kept an open mind.  I really enjoyed the GOP establishment's squirming and hysterics.  I didn't know much about Trump politically, but had heard him speak often on Fox and Friends and he seemed like a very knowledgeable and decent guy.

I LOVED how the Establishment folks were decrying Trump in a strange panic and confusion, writing column after column, echoing the same things the Progressive media were. Man, it was like proof of how ideologically similar the GOP Establishment and the Left has become.

He quickly became a potential choice for me to support, after Cruz, Perry, Fiorina, and Rubio... and maybe ahead of Rubio and Fiorina.  Like everyone else, I didn't think he was serious, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt and defended him quite a bit early on.  Here's the proof; I was clearly evaluating him and having some fun evaluating him.


Jenna is right. I was in full joke mode while she saw specific lack of knowledge in any POTUS as a serious problem.








So What Happened to My Trump Support?


A few things.  Early on in my bemusement and appreciation for Trump's candidacy, I started seeing the Trumpkins (and I hated this term, by the way) popping up, and was mildly "targeted" after I tweeted this:




A Texas Twitter friend,  (account since suspended), was defensive and Tweeted back something like "It doesn't look anything like his hair."

I replied with:


And then Lil Miss Prepper jumps in:
















I had no idea who this chick was or what she is talking about. She's clearly having a different conversation than I.  I suppose she thought at the time any Trump alternative was a "muzzie appeaser," but who knows. She supports Cruz these days, and I have no idea what my OJ reference was to.


The Humps, The Humps, My Lovely Camel's Humps



I loved that Trump and Cruz were kind of playing nice with each other, because after Perry dropped out, I went almost all in on a Cruz-Carly ticket.

So, I cringed when it came out that Trump made the "just look at that face" Carly comment in a semi-private campaign moment.

That was a straw, I later found out, being loaded on my sexy camel's back.

Another straw was at, perhaps, the next debate, when Trump said Carson was an "OK doctor" and was "pathological."  I mean, come on, dude.  I cringed, as another straw went on a growing pile.

Trump seems to insult people a lot, but I didn't let that sway me too much. He usually insulted people I wanted him to like Jeb?! Bush.  When I heard him speak, he continued to sound gracious and I heard glimmers of the nice person he seemed to be, despite all the insults.

Then I started to realize something.  He isn't actually a very good person--or he has a pathological need to insult people, or I guess that's just how he was raised--#NewYorkValues, and all that jazz.  On Broadway.

Then Trump called Cruz a "maniac." I didn't think that was such a big deal, but count it as a straw.

As my camel got heavier, I increasingly drew comfort from Ted Cruz's poll numbers in Iowa.  I was convinced that Trump supporters--like me--would begin to wane in their desire for Trump to do well, and Cruz's master strategy was working as planned.

And then the Canadian birther issue came up.  My God, what a heavy straw that was for my poor camel to hump along with the others.  I asked myself: can Trump literally BELIEVE Cruz wasn't eligible?  I mean, I thought--only a true dumbass would not think Cruz was an eligible American citizen.

And then, boom--"Cruz is a nasty guy."  Another straw.

Another straw mounted my smoking hot camel's backside at the Jan 14th South Carolina GOP Debate, where Trump finally took the gloves off and stood on the backs of 3,000 dead Americans killed in New York on 9/11 to defend "#NewYorkValues."

Indeed.



I began to feel real internal hostility toward Donald Trump, kept in check by optimism for Cruz's chances, which were getting a little shaky as Iowa numbers began to get a little stronger for Trump, and a little weaker for Cruz.


RIP Tea Party 2008-2016



The final straw for me, when I went from someone who just quietly wished Trump would go away, to someone I would never support, was the "One Two Punch" Cruz received in Iowa on January 19th when Sarah Palin endorsed Trump along with the ethanol lobby under Iowa governor Terry Brandstad.

It was a gut punch for me as well, because it validated what I had feared for sometime now, that the Tea Party movement wasn't as ideologically pure as I thought it was--and we (Inhuman $hields and I) even sung about in defense in our debut video, "Throw Progressives Down the Well."

We were wrong.  The Tea Party wasn't some ideological Constitutional-Fundamentalist movement.  Only part of it was--mostly the part that showed up to the rallies and were peaceful, decent folks.  There was a seething anarchist element that the Progressives tended to emphasize, along with the racist elements that didn't show up in public, but lived in blogs, comments sections, and other social media.

The other crystallizing realization was that all the true conservative voices I've trusted in the past--the Krauthammers, the Kevin Williamsons, the Charles CW Cookes, the Jonah Goldbergs--were right all along for pointing out Trump's inconsistency with conservatism.  It wasn't just whining.

And I wasn't alone.  People I most ideologically align with who had reserved judgement about Trump (Mark Levin, Ace of Spades and other Morons I follow) suddenly felt as I did.

Sum Ting Wong with Trump, we discovered.  Ho Lee Fuk.

No Tea Party person can be OK with government subsidies.

No Tea Party advocate can be OK with lobbyists influencing politics on a massive scale.

If there was ANY ideological purity test for the Tea Party, it was these two issues.

Ted Cruz is the only legitimate Tea Party candidate running.

In one announcement, Sarah Palin proved she was as narcissistic and hypocritical as Barrack Obama and Donald Trump.

Frauds.

Donald Trump, the man who couldn't be bought, was indeed purchased.  He removed all doubt from my mind.  He would say and do anything to get elected.

Actions and words.

Actions and words.









 And these "Trump can't be bought" memes kept floating around after the ethanol purchase.
Yes, Finally.


The March of the Trumpkins


I am very uncomfortable with the Trump cheerleading at one of my favorite websites: Breitbart.  I joined the culture #WAAR because of Andrew.  I wish he was alive today, because I just can't believe he'd be all in the tank for Trump as is his "legacy", and I'd love to know his thoughts.

Breitbart went after The Left.  He rarely made examples of RINOs--in fact, I can't remember a single time.  He knew who the most subversive and existential enemy was.

I listen to these people call in to talk shows--the Trumpkins--and cringe at their reasons for supporting Trump.  They frequently use the word 'brilliant."  One caller used the word 6 times in about 10 seconds.  Another caller touted his building hotels and casinos as evidence of his qualifications to be President.

When Steven K. Bannon, the XM125 Brietbart News Daily host, asked him "so what specifically does Trump bring to the table that you find most qualifying for him to be Commander in Chief?"

The dude doesn't hesitate, and asserts "hotels and casinos" one more time.

A brilliant analysis, right, Steve?

It's a brilliant use of eminent domain to enrich yourself, if you ask me--another Tea Party "red line", by the way--personal property rights.




Check out this brief interplay I received on Twitter recently, after I posted a link to and a quote from the National Review "Against Trump" issue (I post what I think are the best lines at the bottom of this page): 







I see two MILFs, a future MILF, and Brent Bozell--almost the perfect orgy--but no "Pigs."



WTF is Going On, Here, Peetey?!  What's Up With All These Trumpkins?



This is where I lay some shit down.  You've probably already heard or thought of the next thought, but Trump 2016 is a rightward leaning version of Obama 2008.  It's Cult of Personality all over again--the very lesson we said we learned from the current douchbag, we didn't.





Psychologically speaking, there are a few things going on here.  I think it's clear that humans gravitate toward celebrity and authoritarian leadership.  As an evolutionary biologist, I theorize that this tendency is hardwired behavior, and most of our behavior is actually so hard wired we have no idea how robotic we actually are.

Early humans who selected powerful tribal leaders prospered and passed their genetic seeds onward.  The stakes were much higher back then to choose a pack leader, and this phenomenon goes even further back in mammalian evolutionary time, so it's buried in the most primitive parts of our mind.

Once humans have their man (or woman, ala Beyonce) selected, they ride that horse hard (hat tip to Jay-Z), often well past when they should have.  See: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Franklin Roosevelt, Emperor Palpatine (I know I'd much rather be riding Padme Amidala) etc., etc., etc.
Padme is excited to meet a real-life Sith.

It's also true when selecting a mate and things go south, but you keep hanging around.  And then the police arrest you for stalking.  And then you make new friends in prison.  And by "friends', I mean unwanted anal sex partners.  But, like Bowe Berghdal being passed around on Man Love Thursdays, you begin to enjoy it over time.

OK, that turned weird.

Where was I?

Oh, right...

Cults of personality and tribal leaders.

As a matter of fact, humans have several innate cognitive biases that reinforce this unfortunate tendency toward hero worship, including anchoring bias, group think, confirmation bias, subjective validation, and conservatism bias (inability to change one's pre-existing beliefs when presented with new, factual information)... and there are many more, but these are the big ones.

What does this look like in person, you ask?

This.



This poor child.  Her Trumpkin mother has ruined her.

Eric Hoffer would character Trumpkins as "True Believers."  Hoffer wrote a classic book in 1951 called The True Believer: Thoughts On The Nature Of Mass Movements.
You'll like Eric Hoffer

Nonconformists travel as a rule in bunches. You rarely find a nonconformist who goes it alone. And woe to him inside a nonconformist clique who does not conform with nonconformity.”  

You see this today with the insanity on college campuses and in the outrage circuses that bring down innocent people for saying things thought police have made punishable.

But on Trumpkins, he might say:

 “It is the true believer’s ability to ‘shut his eyes and stop his ears’ to facts that do not deserve to be either seen or heard which is the source of his unequaled fortitude and constancy. He cannot be frightened by danger nor disheartened by obstacle nor baffled by contradictions because he denies their existence.” 

In a recent The Hill article, Freelance writer and pubic affairs "guy" John Feehery called people like Trumpkins "misinformed voters," which are "...not uninformed. An uninformed voter acknowledges that he or she don’t know the facts and doesn’t express a strong opinion one way or another. "

He writes," The misinformed voter has the facts wrong, and when faced with contradictory evidence, doubles down on his or her own opinion," like Hoffer's True Believers. 

I suspect he would also call someone like me, who is highly informed (and amazingly brilliant, like Trump), a misinformed voter, too, because I wouldn't vote for someone he would (Feehery worked for several hardcore RINOs: the wrestling pedophile Denny Hastert, Dirty Tom DeLay, and Bob Michel), but let's give him the benefit of the doubt, because I don't actually know.  He writes and speaks as a liberal, who himself believes in print media like the New York Times as the gold standard of objectivity in media, which we know is laughable.

Feehery has a point that jives with Eric Hoffer and my own observations. I find hope in this observation, because I don't think most people are like this.

Trumpkins are True Believers who are misinformed, and that is what is going on. Further, these people, like Trump, have no internal ideological convictions.

Trump is a character assassin.  Every single person he lets get under his thin skin he assassinates via insult--even Tucker Carlson back in 2001.  Trump called and left a message on Tucker's phone, telling him, 
"It’s true you have better hair than I do. But I get more pussy than you do."


Tucker had never met or spoken to Trump, but had made a public quip about his hair that got back to Donald.

The Curious Case of the Last straws.  

Everyone has one, and these sorts of straws are getting very heavy.
For Iowan Bryan Moon, it was Trump skipping the Iowa debate, he told the Weekly Standard's Steven Hayes.
"Now I'm seeing what his true temperament is – I obviously don't know him personally – but I've seen him say and do some things that I disagree with but haven't been deal-killers," Moon says. "But the last few hours – over the last day when he decided he wasn't going to debate with the rest of the candidates – that really was the last straw."

Monday Will be a Moment a Great Clarity for Our Camel

We'll find out after Iowa not only who won, but who will and should stay.  Myself, I'm full of hope, and it's all I have right now.  

There is little we know right now.

Santorum will finally drop out, I'm pretty sure of that, and his several hundred supporters will head over to Cruz and Rubio. 

I hope Dr. Carson will likewise bow out after a poor showing; I watched the man with eager anticipation, but he has to realize his best hope to serve America in government is as HHS head.  

I hope the weather is bad and discourages Trump voters.  


I likewise hope Trump's ground game is poorly organized and isn't able to get people in a distributed fashion to all the causcus sites to stump.  


And I hope that the ones who do are mis-informed meme-mongers who can do nothing more than shout insults like a terrible Tourette's tick 
("Trump's brilliant, you fuck head!"), and repeatedly mumble about his hotel and casino qualifications.

If Trump wins Iowa, it doesn't look good for Cruz (or America, for that matter; neither Hillary nor Sanders are viable candidates, and any GOP nominee would win in a landslide in a normal election.  With Trump's tremendously yuge negatives and third party threats, enough people might stay home like they did for Romney in 2012).

If Trump is the GOP nominee I'm not going to vote for him; I'm going to vote against the Democrat nominee and keep hoping for the best--it just happens thatI have to fill in the circle beside someone's name I feel does not share my American values, but who has antithetical #NewYorkValues.  The Establishment built this Tea Party monster because they didn't listen to the Tea Party when they had the chance.  And now they may pay--along with all of us--for ignoring us.  


Interesting times, unfortunately.  


Dangerous times.

I end this epic blog post with one of my all-time favorite songs, Cult of Personality. 





Addendum: The "Against Trump" National Review Symposium Quotes


First, I thought the NR editor's op-ed was "it" at first.  And I thought, man this thing sucks and reads like a bunch of Establishment whiners.

Why didn't they have some of their best writers make a case individually in one article?!

Well, they did, as I found out.  And it's pretty good. I'm taking out the author's names because I don't want to bias the reader against it. I didn't include Glenn Beck's, though, so rejoice in that knowledge.

 "We can talk about whether he is a boor (“My fingers are long and beautiful, as, it has been well documented, are various other parts of my body”), a creep (“If Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her”), or a louse (he tried to bully an elderly woman, Vera Coking, out of her house in Atlantic City because it stood on a spot he wanted to use as a garage). But one thing about which there can be no debate is that Trump is no conservative..."
"The case for constitutional limited government is the case against Donald Trump. To the degree we take him at his word — understanding that Trump is a negotiator whose positions are often purposefully deceptive..."
In a 60 Minutes interview with Scott Pelley, Trump aggressively supported universal health care, saying, “This is an un-Republican thing for me to say. . . . I’m going to take care of everybody. . . . The government’s going to pay for it.” He supported the prosecution of hate crimes. He favored wealth-confiscation policies. He supported abortion rights."
He doesn’t know the Constitution, history, law, political philosophy, nuclear strategy, diplomacy, defense, economics beyond real estate, or even, despite his low-level-mafioso comportment, how ordinary people live." 
"...his “[Conservative] conversion” raises serious questions. Trump wrote in his book The America We Deserve that he supported a ban on “assault weapons.” Not until last year did he apparently reverse his position. As recently as a couple of years ago, Trump favored the liberal use of eminent-domain laws." 
"Worst of all, Trump’s brawling, blustery, mean-spirited public persona serves to associate conservatives with all the negative stereotypes that liberals have for decades attached to their opponents on the right. According to conventional caricature, conservatives are selfish, greedy, materialistic, bullying, misogynistic, angry, and intolerant." ...later mentions "racist."
"Trump has made millions off a casino industry that, as social conservatives have rightly argued, not only exploits personal vice but destroys families."
"Trump is an unbalanced force. He is the politicized American id. Should his election results match his polls, he would be, unquestionably, the worst thing to happen to the American common culture in my lifetime."
"What is even more remarkable is that, after seven years of repeated disasters, both domestically and internationally, under a glib egomaniac in the White House, so many potential voters are turning to another glib egomaniac to be his successor. "