The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Moral Support for Suicide by Race
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The following results are unsurprising, especially upon realizing that “others” includes American Indians. As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.

Percentages who deem doctor-assisted suicide to be “morally acceptable”, by race:

Nothing happens to any man that he is not fitted by nature to bear. We get a hundred years to live if we’re lucky. Find joy in them. You have until the end of time to be dead.

If you’re going to take the easy way out, though, you may as well enlist the aid of a physician. It’s less messy than a bullet to the brain.

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Ideology, Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Death, Polling 
Hide 130 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I don’t know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I’m not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don’t make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can’t accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to “grow” – primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn’t much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn’t result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren’t very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn’t happen. All that wealth and technology didn’t really make anyone happier.

    So whites don’t have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one – Eastern philosophies teach that life isn’t headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly – life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn’t yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @Richard B
    It's hilarious to read someone talk about an entire race as if they have one head, one body, two arms and two legs.

    The technical term is hypostatization or reification. To treat a high-level abstraction as if it were a concrete reality. It's a form of magical thinking. The kind the children do. Or, in this case, adult-children. Lot of that going around.

    In any event, it's called a fallacy for a reason.

    But mostly, it's just lazy thinking and a form of prejudice.

    In short, it's a piece of stupidity.

    A piece of stupidity, moreover, written in an all-knowing tone of voice.

    Now who is in the habit of thinking that way about Whites, and not just Whites?

    Leaving that question aside, what Nietzsche said about woman applies to AaronB's comment.

    It's not even shallow.

    , @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    You're overthinking it lol. Whites are just more socially liberal, and "tolerant" than those other black and brown groups. It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage.

    And your comment is talking about how whites are ok with suicide because of despair while eastern people have a balanced view - yet asians practically have the same view of suicide as whites.

    Your comment screams "pseudo intellectual".
    , @nymom
    Well, of course, they were 'content' to be poor and broke because they didn't imagine anything else existed. Western (or White) Civilization demonstrated that everyone could have a reasonable life; maybe not rich but middle class and people are very happy with that. Actually I discovered after visiting the Dominican Republic a few years back that even our so-called working class lives mostly at the same standard as the elite in that country. I suspect that is the case in many other countries as well.

    I don't think millions of people are fighting to get into Europe, Australia, New Zealand or the US because they are content with the places they are in right now.

    Additionally, we not only gave millions of our citizens a decent standing of living but we also managed to significantly clean up our environment even in the midst of industrialization and not over-populate our part of the world.

    The West has much to be proud of...
    , @Colin Wright
    '... For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to “grow” – primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized...'

    There is the minor difficulty that this doesn't fit the data. It's not like white suicide rates started to rise with the closing of the frontier or something.

    We're not ruling all and realizing there's nothing more to be had. That's not the problem.

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    What Colin Wright said. It's only over the last 30-odd years, since the Thatcher-Reagan years, that the life chances for white Americans and Britons have been diminishing - and even then, the Reagan and Thatcher eras look like a golden age compared with today.

    The boomers were better off than their parents, who in their turn were better off than the boomers' grandparents. That's all stopped, and children now are likely to be worse off than their parents.

    In the US, real male median wages reached a peak in 1971 to which they've never returned.

    In the UK, real male median wages are lower than they were in 1997 (I've not gone further back), while real house prices are 250% higher.

    Real GDP is massively higher in both countries, but only a small proportion of super-wealthy have benefited.

    The basics for a good life, once available to nearly every American, are increasingly unaffordable.

    If "the goal being realised" was the cause, then the 1950s would have been a time of anomie. Don't know about the US, but surveys show the Brits as being most happy around 1957, the years of "you've never had it so good".

    , @Audacious Epigone
    In Rome, suicide was acceptable as a means of bearing full responsibility for failure and defeat. I'm less sure about Japan, but I think the concept was broadly the same--though less individualized, with retainers having to kill themselves if their lords died even if not on account of any failure on the retainers' part.
  2. When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    I used to think that was an unhealthy attitude they should snap out of, but I am impressed by the tenacity of their clinging to disillusion, and realize I have to respect that. I now think it is a healthy instinct and something they know on some level they have to go through.

    If you don’t let yourself become thoroughly disillusioned, you won’t find new values. So right now disillusion and despair are healthy, and not something that should be fought. To end it prematurely would prevent moving on to something better.

    • Replies: @Ash Williams

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.
     
    Perhaps they are (((white commenters)))?
    , @iffen
    It hurts to the core that you didn't give me a shout-out as a thoughtful white commenter. :)

    Putting my past spiritual blasphemies aside, I would like to have your opinion on a question that poses the possiblity of the spiritual.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth's eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?

    , @dfordoom

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.
     
    What intrigues me is the fact that so many on the Dissident Right are gloomy and despairing about things that seem to me to be nonsensical. For example there is constant wailing and gnashing of teeth over the idea that the Republicans will never win another election ever all because of immigration, just as there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in Britain over the fact that the massive immigration under Tony Blair's government guaranteed a permanent Labour majority.

    But in fact the Tories in Britain have just won four straight elections. Labour is in chaos and looks unlikely to have any chance of winning an election at any time in the foreseeable future. In the US the Democrats are in complete disarray. Never before in history has the Right enjoyed such complete political ascendancy.

    Where I differ from the Dissident Right is that I think that the ascendancy of the Right is a very bad thing. That's why I'm gloomy and despondent. But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.

    The idea that immigration has made it impossible for Republicans or Tories to win elections is clearly nonsense.
    , @dfordoom

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them.
     
    I'm not gloomy and despairing about the things that worry most dissident rightists. I'm not worried by demographic collapse. I think it's real and I don't think there's any way it can be stopped but the only people with cause to worry about it are megacorporations who think their profits must go on increasing forever. I don't care about corporate profits.

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about the failure of immigrants to assimilate because I think they will assimilate and are assimilating. It's just that I think that the culture to which they're assimilating is worthless and destructive. I like diversity. I like living on a planet with lots of different cultures. Within another couple of generations there will be a single global culture. It will be a culture more ghastly than anything ever seen before. Assimilation is happening, the entire planet is being assimilated to American trash culture, and assimilation is the worst idea in history.

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about climate change because anthropogenic climate change is utter nonsense.

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about the imminent demise of Christianity because I'm not a Christian. I think the collapse of Christianity has had some very bad side-effects but I have no desire to live in a Christian theocracy (or any other theocracy).

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about imminent economic collapse because I don't see it happening.
  3. Nothing happens to any man that he is not fitted by nature to bear.

    Platitudes are a poor reason to insist that some people keep suffering unbearable pain.

    Although I’m scared of death as any man, the one good thing about it is that it means the end of all suffering.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    Indeed.
    Where Dr. assisted suicide exists, there are many thresholds, including the person must be suffering from a terminal illness; that there is no chance of recovery; the person is lucid at the time of the request; and signs a document witnessed by independent people not part of the medical system.

    I was opposed to medically assisted suicide, until I saw the horrible suffering that family members endured. The feeling of uselessness in being able to help, is profound.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    That includes death. The quote is the great stoic's--not a mere platitude!
  4. If you think doctor assisted suicide is immoral don’t have a doctor assisted suicide. My doctor assisted suicide is none of your business.

    • Agree: Fluesterwitz
    • Replies: @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    If you think doctor assisted suicide is immoral don’t have a doctor assisted suicide. My doctor assisted suicide is none of your business.
     
    Ah, the classic libertarian insta-response to laws against any objectionable action. Broadly speaking, this kind of "appeal to selfishness" had two fatal flaws:
    1) People often make very poor decisions for themselves, (e.g. injecting heroin for the first time) which anyone with a shred of compassion would want to prevent in order to avoid misery or regret among their neighbors.
    2) You don't live in a bubble. Every action and decision has an infinite number of consequences which affect others. This especially applies to the normalization of undesirable behavior.

    In this particular case, I can think of various reasons why legalizing suicide is a bad idea:
    a) It would prevent anyone from being administered help if they don't agree to it at a specific time. For example, many people with depression benefit massively from certain medications or counseling. This is done without their consent in the aftermath of a suicide attempt, but would be impossible without a legal justification. Similar to how addicts are legally required to attend rehab for their own good, and if they recover, are glad they were forced to do so.
    b) It would be extremely dysgenic: more intelligent and reflective people are more likely to kill themselves, thus worsening society in the long run.
    c) Normalization would lead to pressure encouraging suicide, e.g. from greedy family members.
    d) Raises huge questions about medical power of attorney, competency, consent, etc. This is especially applicable because many of the people suicide-advocated claim to want to help (those in severe pain) are the same people who would be incapable of making clear their own decision.

    And these aren't even considering the various, very valid, philosophical objections to killing.
  5. I think the disparity of results is primarily a trust issue. Black people are more likely to believe that the doctors are trying to kill them off for their own convenience. White people are more likely to treat the doctors like valets with stethoscopes who should feel gratified to help ease the passing of one so illustrious as they.

    • Replies: @Not My Economy
    >White people are more likely to treat the doctors like valets with stethoscopes who should feel gratified to help ease the passing of one so illustrious as they.

    This is the correct attitude to have toward doctors for the most part
  6. Another instance of a survey question that needs a stricter definition.

    Here in Australia, “doctor-assisted suicide” is generally assumed to mean “euthanasia,” with a further assumption that the patient is terminally ill, with perhaps days or even hours left to live. Surveys her have found strong support for this among the general public, sometimes around 80%.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @West Reanimator

    Here in Australia, “doctor-assisted suicide” is generally assumed to mean “euthanasia,” with a further assumption that the patient is terminally ill, with perhaps days or even hours left to live.
     
    I believe this is what most Americans associate it with, as well. So I don’t get why AE is making the leap that this survey question reflects an opinion about suicides of despair. There doesn’t seem to be any basis to make that leap at all.
  7. I think the “Other” category primarily includes Asians.

    • Agree: West Reanimator
    • Replies: @Some Guy
    Yeah, there's about 4.5 times more Asians than Native Americans in the US.
  8. As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.

    I very very strongly disagree. Sailer is wrong because he can’t get beyond his obsession with race.

    That might apply to the white working class, and it also applies to the working class in general. It does not apply to whites in general because whites are not a monolithic entity.

    How many white CEOs and corporate lawyers and senior bureaucrats and publishers and academics are behaving like defeated peoples? The answer is none. They’re behaving like conquerors.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they’re down.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @Ash Williams

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they’re down.
     
    It's more complicated than that, but the absence of "noblesse oblige" in our time is a yuge factor.
    , @Richard B

    he can’t get beyond his obsession with race.
     
    It's so typical of people who object to any discussion of race to call an interest in it an "obsession."

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    Like the rest of your comment it deserves to be laughed at, but not taken seriously.

    , @obwandiyag
    Class not race.

    Exactly.

    This whole divide-and-rule website is a sheepdog for sweeping up peripheral wingers and ensuring that they keep whingeing on about irrelevancies and never ever get near the true and only issue, "Wha de money went?"

    And as soon as you mention the goddam rich who belong a la lanterne and nowhere else, they get all snippy with you in their little childish ways. They think the rich are their buddies. It's sweet. They're so loving.

    Because they simply do not know on which side their stupid bread is buttered.
    , @Bill Jones
    But when the Mainly White bosses strive to help the poor downtrodden brown people (at the cost of the poor downdtrodden white people)
    Brown people die.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-28/boeing-s-737-max-software-outsourced-to-9-an-hour-engineers

    Ah! What's a mainly white rich guy to do?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Are they behaving like conquerors relative to how they were behaving a generation ago? There seems to have been a lot of anecdotal evidence of 1%er suicide (white, not black) as of late and the Xanaxed SWPL woman has become a stereotype in the last decade. I know that's a suboptimal way to gather impressions to put it mildly, so disabuse me of the notion.
  9. @AaronB
    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    I used to think that was an unhealthy attitude they should snap out of, but I am impressed by the tenacity of their clinging to disillusion, and realize I have to respect that. I now think it is a healthy instinct and something they know on some level they have to go through.

    If you don't let yourself become thoroughly disillusioned, you won't find new values. So right now disillusion and despair are healthy, and not something that should be fought. To end it prematurely would prevent moving on to something better.

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    Perhaps they are (((white commenters)))?

  10. @dfordoom

    As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.
     
    I very very strongly disagree. Sailer is wrong because he can't get beyond his obsession with race.

    That might apply to the white working class, and it also applies to the working class in general. It does not apply to whites in general because whites are not a monolithic entity.

    How many white CEOs and corporate lawyers and senior bureaucrats and publishers and academics are behaving like defeated peoples? The answer is none. They're behaving like conquerors.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they're down.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they’re down.

    It’s more complicated than that, but the absence of “noblesse oblige” in our time is a yuge factor.

  11. @JohnnyWalker123
    I think the "Other" category primarily includes Asians.

    Yeah, there’s about 4.5 times more Asians than Native Americans in the US.

  12. @AaronB
    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    I used to think that was an unhealthy attitude they should snap out of, but I am impressed by the tenacity of their clinging to disillusion, and realize I have to respect that. I now think it is a healthy instinct and something they know on some level they have to go through.

    If you don't let yourself become thoroughly disillusioned, you won't find new values. So right now disillusion and despair are healthy, and not something that should be fought. To end it prematurely would prevent moving on to something better.

    It hurts to the core that you didn’t give me a shout-out as a thoughtful white commenter. 🙂

    Putting my past spiritual blasphemies aside, I would like to have your opinion on a question that poses the possiblity of the spiritual.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth’s eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?

    • Replies: @AaronB
    But iffen, you are not gloomy or pessimistic enough to make my list - no matter how thoughtful you are.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth’s eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?
     
    Definitely you connecting to a larger spiritual reality. People who once lived somewhere can give that place a spiritual quality that can have an impact on you.
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    Remember, the ultimate value of any experience---positive or negative, mundane or numinous, natural or supernatural---is not in the content of the experience but in how you decide to act upon it as a moral and rational being. Spiritual consolations are great, but they are usually provided by God at the beginning of the conversion process in order to help the infant Christian along. The more mature you are, the more desolation, difficulty, perplexity, and pangs of conscience you are likely to have.

    Does God then forsake just those who serve Him best? Well, He who served Him best of all said, near His tortured death, “Why hast thou forsaken me?”‘When God becomes man, that Man, of all others, is least comforted by God, at His greatest need. There is a mystery here which, even if I had the power, I might not have the courage to explore. Meanwhile, little people like you and me, if our prayers are sometimes granted, beyond all hope and probability, had better not draw hasty conclusions to our own advantage. If we were stronger, we might be less tenderly treated. If we were braver, we might be sent, with far less help, to defend far more desperate posts in the great battle.

    ---C.S. Lewis
     
    , @Father O'Hara
    Somebody slipped some ecstasy into your oatmeal.
  13. @AaronB
    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    I used to think that was an unhealthy attitude they should snap out of, but I am impressed by the tenacity of their clinging to disillusion, and realize I have to respect that. I now think it is a healthy instinct and something they know on some level they have to go through.

    If you don't let yourself become thoroughly disillusioned, you won't find new values. So right now disillusion and despair are healthy, and not something that should be fought. To end it prematurely would prevent moving on to something better.

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    What intrigues me is the fact that so many on the Dissident Right are gloomy and despairing about things that seem to me to be nonsensical. For example there is constant wailing and gnashing of teeth over the idea that the Republicans will never win another election ever all because of immigration, just as there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in Britain over the fact that the massive immigration under Tony Blair’s government guaranteed a permanent Labour majority.

    But in fact the Tories in Britain have just won four straight elections. Labour is in chaos and looks unlikely to have any chance of winning an election at any time in the foreseeable future. In the US the Democrats are in complete disarray. Never before in history has the Right enjoyed such complete political ascendancy.

    Where I differ from the Dissident Right is that I think that the ascendancy of the Right is a very bad thing. That’s why I’m gloomy and despondent. But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.

    The idea that immigration has made it impossible for Republicans or Tories to win elections is clearly nonsense.

    • Replies: @iffen
    The Dissident Right correctly contends that the conventional right is just SJW totalitarianism in slow motion, so your contention that "the Right" is ascendant and in control is meaningless.
    , @silviosilver

    But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.
     
    Dissident rightists are despondent because immigration diminishes rightwing parties' prospects of winning on ethnonationalist platforms. It's technically still possible they could, but they lack the will to even try and time is fast running out; by the time they get their act together - if they ever do - it could well be too late.

    Winning elections of itself doesn't mean much. As Buchanan put it nearly fifty years ago, "conservative votes, liberal victories."
    , @Audacious Epigone
    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be... uncorrelated.
  14. @AaronB
    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.

    I used to think that was an unhealthy attitude they should snap out of, but I am impressed by the tenacity of their clinging to disillusion, and realize I have to respect that. I now think it is a healthy instinct and something they know on some level they have to go through.

    If you don't let yourself become thoroughly disillusioned, you won't find new values. So right now disillusion and despair are healthy, and not something that should be fought. To end it prematurely would prevent moving on to something better.

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them.

    I’m not gloomy and despairing about the things that worry most dissident rightists. I’m not worried by demographic collapse. I think it’s real and I don’t think there’s any way it can be stopped but the only people with cause to worry about it are megacorporations who think their profits must go on increasing forever. I don’t care about corporate profits.

    I’m not gloomy and despairing about the failure of immigrants to assimilate because I think they will assimilate and are assimilating. It’s just that I think that the culture to which they’re assimilating is worthless and destructive. I like diversity. I like living on a planet with lots of different cultures. Within another couple of generations there will be a single global culture. It will be a culture more ghastly than anything ever seen before. Assimilation is happening, the entire planet is being assimilated to American trash culture, and assimilation is the worst idea in history.

    I’m not gloomy and despairing about climate change because anthropogenic climate change is utter nonsense.

    I’m not gloomy and despairing about the imminent demise of Christianity because I’m not a Christian. I think the collapse of Christianity has had some very bad side-effects but I have no desire to live in a Christian theocracy (or any other theocracy).

    I’m not gloomy and despairing about imminent economic collapse because I don’t see it happening.

    • Replies: @AaronB

    Within another couple of generations there will be a single global culture. It will be a culture more ghastly than anything ever seen before.
     
    This is kind of what I'm talking about :)

    I think it comes from basic philosophic assumptions. You actually think one side can "win". You think bad can win, and good can lose. You think it's possible for a bad trend to continue indefinitely, until its all that's left. So you take this stuff very seriously.

    This idea is Western, and derives from Christianity. It's basic dualism.

    My philosophic assumptions, influenced by the East, are different. I think there can't be an up without a down, there can't be male without female, and neither side can permanently win, because they depend on each other.

    So I am not particularly apprehensive about the future, nor despondent about the present. I don't take history quite so seriously. I think times of disintegration are as necessary as times of creation.

    But I think the way to optimism is to follow disillusionment to the end, to where it can't be pushed any further. And you are doing that, so it's healthy.
  15. It would be much more interesting to see a breakdown by class. I’m guessing that middle-class people overwhelmingly support doctor-assisted suicide (and probably hope it will encourage more working-class people to kill themselves).

    And I’m guessing that working-class people would be mostly opposed to doctor-assisted suicide, seeing it (correctly) as likely to be used to encourage them to kill themselves.

    Another issue that has no real connection at all with race.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Less than $50k: 48% support
    $50k-$100k: 61% support
    $100k+: 66% support

    That's not broken down by race, either, so a lot of the explanation is racial but probably not all of it.
  16. @dfordoom

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.
     
    What intrigues me is the fact that so many on the Dissident Right are gloomy and despairing about things that seem to me to be nonsensical. For example there is constant wailing and gnashing of teeth over the idea that the Republicans will never win another election ever all because of immigration, just as there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in Britain over the fact that the massive immigration under Tony Blair's government guaranteed a permanent Labour majority.

    But in fact the Tories in Britain have just won four straight elections. Labour is in chaos and looks unlikely to have any chance of winning an election at any time in the foreseeable future. In the US the Democrats are in complete disarray. Never before in history has the Right enjoyed such complete political ascendancy.

    Where I differ from the Dissident Right is that I think that the ascendancy of the Right is a very bad thing. That's why I'm gloomy and despondent. But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.

    The idea that immigration has made it impossible for Republicans or Tories to win elections is clearly nonsense.

    The Dissident Right correctly contends that the conventional right is just SJW totalitarianism in slow motion, so your contention that “the Right” is ascendant and in control is meaningless.

  17. @dfordoom

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.
     
    What intrigues me is the fact that so many on the Dissident Right are gloomy and despairing about things that seem to me to be nonsensical. For example there is constant wailing and gnashing of teeth over the idea that the Republicans will never win another election ever all because of immigration, just as there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in Britain over the fact that the massive immigration under Tony Blair's government guaranteed a permanent Labour majority.

    But in fact the Tories in Britain have just won four straight elections. Labour is in chaos and looks unlikely to have any chance of winning an election at any time in the foreseeable future. In the US the Democrats are in complete disarray. Never before in history has the Right enjoyed such complete political ascendancy.

    Where I differ from the Dissident Right is that I think that the ascendancy of the Right is a very bad thing. That's why I'm gloomy and despondent. But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.

    The idea that immigration has made it impossible for Republicans or Tories to win elections is clearly nonsense.

    But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.

    Dissident rightists are despondent because immigration diminishes rightwing parties’ prospects of winning on ethnonationalist platforms. It’s technically still possible they could, but they lack the will to even try and time is fast running out; by the time they get their act together – if they ever do – it could well be too late.

    Winning elections of itself doesn’t mean much. As Buchanan put it nearly fifty years ago, “conservative votes, liberal victories.”

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Dissident rightists are despondent because immigration diminishes rightwing parties’ prospects of winning on ethnonationalist platforms.
     
    Rightwing parties have zero interest in running on ethnonationalist platforms. Ethnonationalism is not a viable political strategy because white people have little or no interest in it. They have no interest in it because there's no such thing as "white people" as a discrete category. There are various groups that happen to be predominantly white but they're focused on other issues.

    Middle-class whites are focused on their own economic interests and couldn't care less about ethnonationalism (in fact they're hostile to it). Working-class whites just want the factory jobs to come back. Christian whites are hostile to ethnonationalism becaue it isn't nice and it isn't inclusive. Evangelical whites only care about a few narrow issues, mostly Israel. They don't care about ethnonationalism.

    Ethnonationalism appeals to a tiny minority of whites. Ethnonationalism is dead in the water because it's an ideology that has overwhelmingly lost white support.
  18. imo it’s a somewhat weird interpretation to link this to the opioid-related “white death”, support for doctor-assisted suicide is more of an ultra-liberal, secular stance (therefore probably more common among affluent whites for whom individual agency is the prime value)…think of the Netherlands and Belgium where such systems actually exist. Not surprising then that “others” also support it, which will include many non-Christian Asians.
    Would be interesting to see how much this correlates with support for abortion.
    More controversially, one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there…

    • Troll: MikeatMikedotMike
    • Replies: @iffen
    American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated.



    Seriously, German_reader?
    , @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    See my comment #23.
    , @Kratoklastes
    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia), and abortion, and eugenics, while being adamantly opposed to state policies regarding extermination of undesirables.

    Anyone who is not in favour of eugenics needs to explain why they think that the socially-optimal reproductive strategy for humans is just to let the genetic chips fall where they may: we don't do that with domesticated animals, and undomesticated humans are capable of very significant society-wide damage.

    I should also make clear that I'm not talking about government policy-based 'capital-E' Eugenics - as advocated by that 20th century government that everyone knows about... that one that was dominated at the very highest levels - political, legal and intellectual [sic] - by arrogant racist asshole cunts who were in favour of forced sterilisation and doing experiments on the politically disfavoured.

    You know..., the US.

    So not their 'Eugenics', nor the copycat version of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

    I'm talking about whether people ought to be encouraged to have some set of reproductive standards, and to do basic smart things like aborting fucked foetuses. Raising a fucked kid is a financially-crippling thing, and is socially costly (assuming the fucked-up kid outlives the parents)., and no self-delusion on the part of the parents will change that.

    The world already has a vast number of retards (and it's made worse by dysgenic subsidies to bottom-quintile reproduction, via the welfare system).


    Better that 1000 divvies get aborted, than 1 extended family's life is ruined by having to care for a person whose quality of life will not objectively exceed that of a house-plant.
    , @Kratoklastes
    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia), and abortion, and eugenics, while being adamantly opposed to state policies regarding extermination of undesirables.

    Anyone who is not in favour of eugenics needs to explain why they think that the socially-optimal reproductive strategy for humans is just to let the genetic chips fall where they may: we don't do that with domesticated animals, and undomesticated humans are capable of very significant society-wide damage.

    I should also make clear that I'm not talking about government policy-based 'capital-E' Eugenics - as advocated by that 20th century government that everyone knows about... that one that was dominated at the very highest levels - political, legal and intellectual [sic] - by arrogant racist asshole cunts who were in favour of forced sterilisation and doing experiments on the politically disfavoured.

    You know..., the US.

    So not their 'Eugenics', nor the copycat version of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

    I'm talking about whether people ought to be encouraged to have some set of reproductive standards, and to do basic smart things like aborting fucked foetuses. Raising a fucked kid is a financially-crippling thing, and is socially costly (assuming the fucked-up kid outlives the parents)., and no self-delusion on the part of the parents will change that.

    The world already has a vast number of retards (and it's made worse by dysgenic subsidies to bottom-quintile reproduction, via the welfare system).


    Better that 1000 divvies get aborted, than 1 extended family's life is ruined by having to care for a person whose quality of life will not objectively exceed that of a house-plant.
    , @dfordoom

    one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there…
     
    Middle-class whites would love to see the weak and sick exterminated (or ideally encouraged to exterminate themselves) but don't worry, it will be done in a non-racist way. Exterminating particular races would be wrong, but surely there's nothing wrong with getting rid of nasty poor people?

    And middle-class people don't want to do it directly (because that wouldn't be nice). They'd prefer to just let the poor starve, or die off from drug and alcohol problems. More doctor-assisted suicides would be a way to achieve the objective whilst making middle-class people feel humane and virtuous. Those awful poor people are better off dead aren't they?

    But certainly it's understandable that blacks and Hispanics are suspicious.

    OK, I'm exaggerating the class hatred of middle-class people. Slightly.
  19. @German_reader
    imo it's a somewhat weird interpretation to link this to the opioid-related "white death", support for doctor-assisted suicide is more of an ultra-liberal, secular stance (therefore probably more common among affluent whites for whom individual agency is the prime value)...think of the Netherlands and Belgium where such systems actually exist. Not surprising then that "others" also support it, which will include many non-Christian Asians.
    Would be interesting to see how much this correlates with support for abortion.
    More controversially, one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there...

    American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated.

    Seriously, German_reader?

    • Replies: @German_reader
    Not really seriously, that part was meant more as a joke.
    I really do think AE's interpretation is flawed though, imo this is more of an issue linked to class and religiosity. The poor whites dying off en masse are probably the ones least likely to support doctor-assisted suicide (some might even suspect such programmes could be a scheme to get rid of them).
  20. @AaronB
    I don't know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I'm not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don't make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can't accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to "grow" - primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn't much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn't result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren't very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn't happen. All that wealth and technology didn't really make anyone happier.

    So whites don't have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one - Eastern philosophies teach that life isn't headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly - life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn't yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    It’s hilarious to read someone talk about an entire race as if they have one head, one body, two arms and two legs.

    The technical term is hypostatization or reification. To treat a high-level abstraction as if it were a concrete reality. It’s a form of magical thinking. The kind the children do. Or, in this case, adult-children. Lot of that going around.

    In any event, it’s called a fallacy for a reason.

    But mostly, it’s just lazy thinking and a form of prejudice.

    In short, it’s a piece of stupidity.

    A piece of stupidity, moreover, written in an all-knowing tone of voice.

    Now who is in the habit of thinking that way about Whites, and not just Whites?

    Leaving that question aside, what Nietzsche said about woman applies to AaronB’s comment.

    It’s not even shallow.

  21. @iffen
    American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated.



    Seriously, German_reader?

    Not really seriously, that part was meant more as a joke.
    I really do think AE’s interpretation is flawed though, imo this is more of an issue linked to class and religiosity. The poor whites dying off en masse are probably the ones least likely to support doctor-assisted suicide (some might even suspect such programmes could be a scheme to get rid of them).

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @iffen
    Not really seriously, that part was meant more as a joke.

    Ditto my reply.

    I think there is substance to your opinion. The most vociferous opponents of "death panels" were found in this group. I am very reluctant to get into the discussion on the causes of "deaths of despair."
    I don't believe that anyone has a sure handle on it.
  22. @dfordoom

    As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.
     
    I very very strongly disagree. Sailer is wrong because he can't get beyond his obsession with race.

    That might apply to the white working class, and it also applies to the working class in general. It does not apply to whites in general because whites are not a monolithic entity.

    How many white CEOs and corporate lawyers and senior bureaucrats and publishers and academics are behaving like defeated peoples? The answer is none. They're behaving like conquerors.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they're down.

    he can’t get beyond his obsession with race.

    It’s so typical of people who object to any discussion of race to call an interest in it an “obsession.”

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    Like the rest of your comment it deserves to be laughed at, but not taken seriously.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.
     
    This observation applies with perfect accuracy to yourself. You just made an ad hominem, and you are the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    In fact, you are so Dunning-Kruger that you lack the self-awareness to realize that you are appending the predicate "Dunning-Kruger" to someone more perceptive than you are. You have achieved perfect Dunning-Kruger self-symmetry; and that is, as they like to say, "a special kind of stupid."
  23. A little bottle of calibration gas, nitrogen would work very well, plastic trash bag, duct tape. If you need instructions, forget the above; step in front of a bus.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I understand you're just having a little fun with it, but stepping front of a bus is a horrible thing to do. The innocent bus driver didn't do anything to deserve the guilt of having accidentally killed someone. If you're going to take your own life, don't involve anyone else and make it look like an accident.
  24. @AaronB
    I don't know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I'm not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don't make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can't accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to "grow" - primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn't much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn't result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren't very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn't happen. All that wealth and technology didn't really make anyone happier.

    So whites don't have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one - Eastern philosophies teach that life isn't headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly - life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn't yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    You’re overthinking it lol. Whites are just more socially liberal, and “tolerant” than those other black and brown groups. It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage.

    And your comment is talking about how whites are ok with suicide because of despair while eastern people have a balanced view – yet asians practically have the same view of suicide as whites.

    Your comment screams “pseudo intellectual”.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    . It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage
     
    You speak as though these are unrelated phenomena. They are not. They all stem from the same basic assumption: that we are here to enjoy life ("happiness"). It follows that there is no reason to go on living if life is unpleasant, because there is no meaning in the struggle to remain alive, either physically or spiritually.
    , @West Reanimator

    You’re overthinking it lol. Whites are just more socially liberal, and “tolerant” than those other black and brown groups. It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage.
     
    You could have just read the linked survey, which did ask questions about the morality of abortion and homosexual relations (not “marriage “, but whatever). They are not what you think.
  25. @German_reader
    imo it's a somewhat weird interpretation to link this to the opioid-related "white death", support for doctor-assisted suicide is more of an ultra-liberal, secular stance (therefore probably more common among affluent whites for whom individual agency is the prime value)...think of the Netherlands and Belgium where such systems actually exist. Not surprising then that "others" also support it, which will include many non-Christian Asians.
    Would be interesting to see how much this correlates with support for abortion.
    More controversially, one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there...

    See my comment #23.

  26. Suicide is literally the ultimate expression of self-ownership. It might be done for reasons that others consider retarded, and in general kiddies should be encouraged to find someone to help solve whatever’s bugging them…. and everyone has a right to try to talk them out of it.

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.

    If I had a kid, I would rather that they killed themselves as opposed to becoming a career politician or bureaucrat; at least if they off themselves the only harm they are doing is to themselves and those in their immediate circle. Imagine the harm-reduction that would have happened if Churchill had offed himself during the Boer War (or even better, if he had been strangled in his crib).

    • Replies: @German_reader

    Imagine the harm-reduction that would have happened if Churchill had offed himself during the Boer War
     
    This is off-topic, but what harm exactly would that have prevented in your opinion? Churchill was pretty belligerent in 1914, but the key decisions for war were taken in Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany, so there would have been a major war anyway. Churchill and other pro-war British politicians may have turned it from a continental war (which Germany might well have won) into a world war, but who can know for sure they were completely wrong in their reasoning?
    Regarding Churchill's later career the man was very flawed in many ways (his views on India were retrograde even by the standards of 1930s Tories), but it seems to me that more often than not he was reacting to events brought about by others. I can't think of any decision where he alone initiated a disastrous chain of events (like Hitler clearly did with his attack on Poland). So I don't get all the Churchill-hatred, apart from it being an exaggerated reaction to the Churchill myth which does have many pernicious elements (like neoconservatives pretending that it's always 1938, with another Munich just around the corner).
    , @ThreeCranes

    "But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit."
     
    Or, as Camus put it; "There is but one serious philosophical question, and that is suicide."
    , @dfordoom

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.
     
    But we're not talking about disposing of themselves. If someone wants to blow his brains out with a pistol that's certainly his right.

    We're talking about other people being involved in disposing of people. People like doctors (not an especially trustworthy group). And if you have doctor-assisted suicide then inevitably the government is involved. There is paperwork to be filled in. There will be governments rules to be followed. How much do you trust the government?

    The big concern is that pressure might be brought to bear. Now Grandpa, you really are tired of living aren't you? Well this nice doctor is going to help you. And just think how happy your children will be to see your suffering ended, and of course to start carving up your estate.
  27. @Richard B

    he can’t get beyond his obsession with race.
     
    It's so typical of people who object to any discussion of race to call an interest in it an "obsession."

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    Like the rest of your comment it deserves to be laughed at, but not taken seriously.

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    This observation applies with perfect accuracy to yourself. You just made an ad hominem, and you are the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    In fact, you are so Dunning-Kruger that you lack the self-awareness to realize that you are appending the predicate “Dunning-Kruger” to someone more perceptive than you are. You have achieved perfect Dunning-Kruger self-symmetry; and that is, as they like to say, “a special kind of stupid.”

    • Replies: @Richard B
    Yawn Snore. Yet more from the Easily Triggered Adult-Child Peanut Gallery.

    Be specific, as I was. Otherwise, it's just more Denunciation without Refutation.

    And doing so using the very words from the comment you object to.

    Doesn't get lazier and dumber than that.

    P.S. Calling yourself "Intelligent Dasein" simply SCREAMS Dunning-Kruger Effect.
    So full of yourself you can't see how corny and pretentious you are.

    , @obwandiyag
    Nice one. Guy is an idiot. You can tell by his throwing around terms he doesn't understand. And his pot calling the kettle black thing, of course, a dead giveaway of utter unselfaware imbecility.
  28. @Kratoklastes
    Suicide is literally the ultimate expression of self-ownership. It might be done for reasons that others consider retarded, and in general kiddies should be encouraged to find someone to help solve whatever's bugging them.... and everyone has a right to try to talk them out of it.

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don't. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.

    If I had a kid, I would rather that they killed themselves as opposed to becoming a career politician or bureaucrat; at least if they off themselves the only harm they are doing is to themselves and those in their immediate circle. Imagine the harm-reduction that would have happened if Churchill had offed himself during the Boer War (or even better, if he had been strangled in his crib).

    Imagine the harm-reduction that would have happened if Churchill had offed himself during the Boer War

    This is off-topic, but what harm exactly would that have prevented in your opinion? Churchill was pretty belligerent in 1914, but the key decisions for war were taken in Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany, so there would have been a major war anyway. Churchill and other pro-war British politicians may have turned it from a continental war (which Germany might well have won) into a world war, but who can know for sure they were completely wrong in their reasoning?
    Regarding Churchill’s later career the man was very flawed in many ways (his views on India were retrograde even by the standards of 1930s Tories), but it seems to me that more often than not he was reacting to events brought about by others. I can’t think of any decision where he alone initiated a disastrous chain of events (like Hitler clearly did with his attack on Poland). So I don’t get all the Churchill-hatred, apart from it being an exaggerated reaction to the Churchill myth which does have many pernicious elements (like neoconservatives pretending that it’s always 1938, with another Munich just around the corner).

    • Agree: iffen
  29. @German_reader
    imo it's a somewhat weird interpretation to link this to the opioid-related "white death", support for doctor-assisted suicide is more of an ultra-liberal, secular stance (therefore probably more common among affluent whites for whom individual agency is the prime value)...think of the Netherlands and Belgium where such systems actually exist. Not surprising then that "others" also support it, which will include many non-Christian Asians.
    Would be interesting to see how much this correlates with support for abortion.
    More controversially, one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there...

    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia), and abortion, and eugenics, while being adamantly opposed to state policies regarding extermination of undesirables.

    Anyone who is not in favour of eugenics needs to explain why they think that the socially-optimal reproductive strategy for humans is just to let the genetic chips fall where they may: we don’t do that with domesticated animals, and undomesticated humans are capable of very significant society-wide damage.

    I should also make clear that I’m not talking about government policy-based ‘capital-E’ Eugenics – as advocated by that 20th century government that everyone knows about… that one that was dominated at the very highest levels – political, legal and intellectual [sic] – by arrogant racist asshole cunts who were in favour of forced sterilisation and doing experiments on the politically disfavoured.

    You know…, the US.

    So not their ‘Eugenics’, nor the copycat version of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

    I’m talking about whether people ought to be encouraged to have some set of reproductive standards, and to do basic smart things like aborting fucked foetuses. Raising a fucked kid is a financially-crippling thing, and is socially costly (assuming the fucked-up kid outlives the parents)., and no self-delusion on the part of the parents will change that.

    The world already has a vast number of retards (and it’s made worse by dysgenic subsidies to bottom-quintile reproduction, via the welfare system).

    Better that 1000 divvies get aborted, than 1 extended family’s life is ruined by having to care for a person whose quality of life will not objectively exceed that of a house-plant.

    • Replies: @German_reader

    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia)
     
    I'm torn on that subject, because on the one hand I can see the case for assisted suicide (the cult of Christ-like suffering some Christians are promoting is very alien to me), but on the other hand there might well be a slippery slope towards putting pressure on vulnerable people to let themselves be euthanized. Given the demographic problems of all developed countries, it's not hard to imagine a future consensus that the old and the infirm are a burden on society and should have the decency to just die.
    I'm not getting into a discussion about eugenics, have work to do anyway, sorry.
  30. @Intelligent Dasein

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.
     
    This observation applies with perfect accuracy to yourself. You just made an ad hominem, and you are the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    In fact, you are so Dunning-Kruger that you lack the self-awareness to realize that you are appending the predicate "Dunning-Kruger" to someone more perceptive than you are. You have achieved perfect Dunning-Kruger self-symmetry; and that is, as they like to say, "a special kind of stupid."

    Yawn Snore. Yet more from the Easily Triggered Adult-Child Peanut Gallery.

    Be specific, as I was. Otherwise, it’s just more Denunciation without Refutation.

    And doing so using the very words from the comment you object to.

    Doesn’t get lazier and dumber than that.

    P.S. Calling yourself “Intelligent Dasein” simply SCREAMS Dunning-Kruger Effect.
    So full of yourself you can’t see how corny and pretentious you are.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
    I'll prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

    You are as stupid as the day is long.

    Moron.
  31. @Kratoklastes
    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia), and abortion, and eugenics, while being adamantly opposed to state policies regarding extermination of undesirables.

    Anyone who is not in favour of eugenics needs to explain why they think that the socially-optimal reproductive strategy for humans is just to let the genetic chips fall where they may: we don't do that with domesticated animals, and undomesticated humans are capable of very significant society-wide damage.

    I should also make clear that I'm not talking about government policy-based 'capital-E' Eugenics - as advocated by that 20th century government that everyone knows about... that one that was dominated at the very highest levels - political, legal and intellectual [sic] - by arrogant racist asshole cunts who were in favour of forced sterilisation and doing experiments on the politically disfavoured.

    You know..., the US.

    So not their 'Eugenics', nor the copycat version of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

    I'm talking about whether people ought to be encouraged to have some set of reproductive standards, and to do basic smart things like aborting fucked foetuses. Raising a fucked kid is a financially-crippling thing, and is socially costly (assuming the fucked-up kid outlives the parents)., and no self-delusion on the part of the parents will change that.

    The world already has a vast number of retards (and it's made worse by dysgenic subsidies to bottom-quintile reproduction, via the welfare system).


    Better that 1000 divvies get aborted, than 1 extended family's life is ruined by having to care for a person whose quality of life will not objectively exceed that of a house-plant.

    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia)

    I’m torn on that subject, because on the one hand I can see the case for assisted suicide (the cult of Christ-like suffering some Christians are promoting is very alien to me), but on the other hand there might well be a slippery slope towards putting pressure on vulnerable people to let themselves be euthanized. Given the demographic problems of all developed countries, it’s not hard to imagine a future consensus that the old and the infirm are a burden on society and should have the decency to just die.
    I’m not getting into a discussion about eugenics, have work to do anyway, sorry.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Slippery slope indeed. It's supposed to be difficult to be diagnosed with ADHD, or to get physician certification for eligibility under the Family Medical Leave Act. It's not, though, because if you want the diagnosis and Dr. Hibert won't give it to you, you go down the road to Dr. Nick and get it from him.
  32. @WorkingClass
    If you think doctor assisted suicide is immoral don't have a doctor assisted suicide. My doctor assisted suicide is none of your business.

    If you think doctor assisted suicide is immoral don’t have a doctor assisted suicide. My doctor assisted suicide is none of your business.

    Ah, the classic libertarian insta-response to laws against any objectionable action. Broadly speaking, this kind of “appeal to selfishness” had two fatal flaws:
    1) People often make very poor decisions for themselves, (e.g. injecting heroin for the first time) which anyone with a shred of compassion would want to prevent in order to avoid misery or regret among their neighbors.
    2) You don’t live in a bubble. Every action and decision has an infinite number of consequences which affect others. This especially applies to the normalization of undesirable behavior.

    In this particular case, I can think of various reasons why legalizing suicide is a bad idea:
    a) It would prevent anyone from being administered help if they don’t agree to it at a specific time. For example, many people with depression benefit massively from certain medications or counseling. This is done without their consent in the aftermath of a suicide attempt, but would be impossible without a legal justification. Similar to how addicts are legally required to attend rehab for their own good, and if they recover, are glad they were forced to do so.
    b) It would be extremely dysgenic: more intelligent and reflective people are more likely to kill themselves, thus worsening society in the long run.
    c) Normalization would lead to pressure encouraging suicide, e.g. from greedy family members.
    d) Raises huge questions about medical power of attorney, competency, consent, etc. This is especially applicable because many of the people suicide-advocated claim to want to help (those in severe pain) are the same people who would be incapable of making clear their own decision.

    And these aren’t even considering the various, very valid, philosophical objections to killing.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    Very smug and condescending. You don't know much about suffering. Yet.
  33. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    You're overthinking it lol. Whites are just more socially liberal, and "tolerant" than those other black and brown groups. It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage.

    And your comment is talking about how whites are ok with suicide because of despair while eastern people have a balanced view - yet asians practically have the same view of suicide as whites.

    Your comment screams "pseudo intellectual".

    . It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage

    You speak as though these are unrelated phenomena. They are not. They all stem from the same basic assumption: that we are here to enjoy life (“happiness”). It follows that there is no reason to go on living if life is unpleasant, because there is no meaning in the struggle to remain alive, either physically or spiritually.

  34. @dfordoom

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them.
     
    I'm not gloomy and despairing about the things that worry most dissident rightists. I'm not worried by demographic collapse. I think it's real and I don't think there's any way it can be stopped but the only people with cause to worry about it are megacorporations who think their profits must go on increasing forever. I don't care about corporate profits.

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about the failure of immigrants to assimilate because I think they will assimilate and are assimilating. It's just that I think that the culture to which they're assimilating is worthless and destructive. I like diversity. I like living on a planet with lots of different cultures. Within another couple of generations there will be a single global culture. It will be a culture more ghastly than anything ever seen before. Assimilation is happening, the entire planet is being assimilated to American trash culture, and assimilation is the worst idea in history.

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about climate change because anthropogenic climate change is utter nonsense.

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about the imminent demise of Christianity because I'm not a Christian. I think the collapse of Christianity has had some very bad side-effects but I have no desire to live in a Christian theocracy (or any other theocracy).

    I'm not gloomy and despairing about imminent economic collapse because I don't see it happening.

    Within another couple of generations there will be a single global culture. It will be a culture more ghastly than anything ever seen before.

    This is kind of what I’m talking about 🙂

    I think it comes from basic philosophic assumptions. You actually think one side can “win”. You think bad can win, and good can lose. You think it’s possible for a bad trend to continue indefinitely, until its all that’s left. So you take this stuff very seriously.

    This idea is Western, and derives from Christianity. It’s basic dualism.

    My philosophic assumptions, influenced by the East, are different. I think there can’t be an up without a down, there can’t be male without female, and neither side can permanently win, because they depend on each other.

    So I am not particularly apprehensive about the future, nor despondent about the present. I don’t take history quite so seriously. I think times of disintegration are as necessary as times of creation.

    But I think the way to optimism is to follow disillusionment to the end, to where it can’t be pushed any further. And you are doing that, so it’s healthy.

  35. @AaronB
    I don't know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I'm not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don't make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can't accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to "grow" - primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn't much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn't result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren't very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn't happen. All that wealth and technology didn't really make anyone happier.

    So whites don't have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one - Eastern philosophies teach that life isn't headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly - life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn't yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    Well, of course, they were ‘content’ to be poor and broke because they didn’t imagine anything else existed. Western (or White) Civilization demonstrated that everyone could have a reasonable life; maybe not rich but middle class and people are very happy with that. Actually I discovered after visiting the Dominican Republic a few years back that even our so-called working class lives mostly at the same standard as the elite in that country. I suspect that is the case in many other countries as well.

    I don’t think millions of people are fighting to get into Europe, Australia, New Zealand or the US because they are content with the places they are in right now.

    Additionally, we not only gave millions of our citizens a decent standing of living but we also managed to significantly clean up our environment even in the midst of industrialization and not over-populate our part of the world.

    The West has much to be proud of…

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Yeah, and so much room to grow.

    We just kind of gave up. But 1950s style comfy suburban living is not the end of the potential for the white race. It's just the beginning. I think alot of the "despair" comes from that. We're not growing anymore. But the idea that we've reached our pinnacle is totally false.

    If all whites were like me (and had the same mindset from 200 years ago) we would already have white moon colonies and be sending men to Mars. Instead, we are focused on worldly pleasures. Most whites spend their time drinking, doing drugs, playing video games, sleeping around, instead of focusing on advancement.
    , @AaronB
    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn't what's determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    The West has much to be proud of, and the East today is in some ways worse.

    A lot of people are blaming the opioid epidemic, the suicide, and the despair in some parts of America on shrinking economic opportunities. But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Having a decent standard of living is important, but its not the whole story.
  36. @iffen
    It hurts to the core that you didn't give me a shout-out as a thoughtful white commenter. :)

    Putting my past spiritual blasphemies aside, I would like to have your opinion on a question that poses the possiblity of the spiritual.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth's eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?

    But iffen, you are not gloomy or pessimistic enough to make my list – no matter how thoughtful you are.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth’s eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?

    Definitely you connecting to a larger spiritual reality. People who once lived somewhere can give that place a spiritual quality that can have an impact on you.

    • Replies: @iffen
    Thanks, but you didn't actually say that I am thoughtful. :)

    Not just any people, I am not interested in the possible existentence of haints here and about.

    I only feel this way when, for example, standing where I know my father, my grandfather, my great grandfather, and my great-great grandmother stood.
  37. That so many people believe that killing oneself is at all normal is an indicator of the moral degradation in American society.

  38. @iffen
    It hurts to the core that you didn't give me a shout-out as a thoughtful white commenter. :)

    Putting my past spiritual blasphemies aside, I would like to have your opinion on a question that poses the possiblity of the spiritual.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth's eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?

    Remember, the ultimate value of any experience—positive or negative, mundane or numinous, natural or supernatural—is not in the content of the experience but in how you decide to act upon it as a moral and rational being. Spiritual consolations are great, but they are usually provided by God at the beginning of the conversion process in order to help the infant Christian along. The more mature you are, the more desolation, difficulty, perplexity, and pangs of conscience you are likely to have.

    Does God then forsake just those who serve Him best? Well, He who served Him best of all said, near His tortured death, “Why hast thou forsaken me?”‘When God becomes man, that Man, of all others, is least comforted by God, at His greatest need. There is a mystery here which, even if I had the power, I might not have the courage to explore. Meanwhile, little people like you and me, if our prayers are sometimes granted, beyond all hope and probability, had better not draw hasty conclusions to our own advantage. If we were stronger, we might be less tenderly treated. If we were braver, we might be sent, with far less help, to defend far more desperate posts in the great battle.

    —C.S. Lewis

    • Replies: @iffen
    Let's not try and bring God into this. I'd like to keep it within the realm of reality and within what is possible.

    I'm talking about an emotion tied to blood and soil; tied to the resting ground of the bones of my fathers and mothers.

    Could there be an evolutionary produced trait that provides a unique emotional experience when I stand in the exact same spot where my ancestors stood, look at the same landscape, experience mirrored sunrises and sunsets, with the full knowledge that their bones are in the ground less than 1 mile away?
  39. @AaronB
    But iffen, you are not gloomy or pessimistic enough to make my list - no matter how thoughtful you are.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth’s eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?
     
    Definitely you connecting to a larger spiritual reality. People who once lived somewhere can give that place a spiritual quality that can have an impact on you.

    Thanks, but you didn’t actually say that I am thoughtful. 🙂

    Not just any people, I am not interested in the possible existentence of haints here and about.

    I only feel this way when, for example, standing where I know my father, my grandfather, my great grandfather, and my great-great grandmother stood.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Yes, I do think land that many ancestors lived on can imbue it with significance for you. Lots of people report similar feelings.

    There is some sort of connection there, although what the precise mechanism is I cannot say.

    But it is a widely reported phenomenon.
  40. @nymom
    Well, of course, they were 'content' to be poor and broke because they didn't imagine anything else existed. Western (or White) Civilization demonstrated that everyone could have a reasonable life; maybe not rich but middle class and people are very happy with that. Actually I discovered after visiting the Dominican Republic a few years back that even our so-called working class lives mostly at the same standard as the elite in that country. I suspect that is the case in many other countries as well.

    I don't think millions of people are fighting to get into Europe, Australia, New Zealand or the US because they are content with the places they are in right now.

    Additionally, we not only gave millions of our citizens a decent standing of living but we also managed to significantly clean up our environment even in the midst of industrialization and not over-populate our part of the world.

    The West has much to be proud of...

    Yeah, and so much room to grow.

    We just kind of gave up. But 1950s style comfy suburban living is not the end of the potential for the white race. It’s just the beginning. I think alot of the “despair” comes from that. We’re not growing anymore. But the idea that we’ve reached our pinnacle is totally false.

    If all whites were like me (and had the same mindset from 200 years ago) we would already have white moon colonies and be sending men to Mars. Instead, we are focused on worldly pleasures. Most whites spend their time drinking, doing drugs, playing video games, sleeping around, instead of focusing on advancement.

    • Replies: @nymom
    Well we have the luxury to do that now...not in itself a bad thing to have a lot of leisure time it depends upon how you use it...drugging, drinking, spreading STDs all over the place, no. But you could devote it to research in science or medicine, creating art, music, etc.,everybody doesn't have to be a millionaire to do these things.

    Actually I understand many of our advances in fish farming came from hobbyists who own small aquarium setups and breed their own fish for pleasure or sale to others like themselves...

    Additionally we now have a Space Force. It's a small start but I hope to see the US building a research communications/recreational center eventually on the moon (which the tourists flying up there can finance part of) and expanding into space mining and who knows what other industries can open up.

    So we still can do much. We haven't reached our pinnacle, as you say, yet. But we will never reach it if people keep talking about us heading into another Dark Ages that we might or might not recover from in 1,000 or so years.
  41. @Intelligent Dasein
    Remember, the ultimate value of any experience---positive or negative, mundane or numinous, natural or supernatural---is not in the content of the experience but in how you decide to act upon it as a moral and rational being. Spiritual consolations are great, but they are usually provided by God at the beginning of the conversion process in order to help the infant Christian along. The more mature you are, the more desolation, difficulty, perplexity, and pangs of conscience you are likely to have.

    Does God then forsake just those who serve Him best? Well, He who served Him best of all said, near His tortured death, “Why hast thou forsaken me?”‘When God becomes man, that Man, of all others, is least comforted by God, at His greatest need. There is a mystery here which, even if I had the power, I might not have the courage to explore. Meanwhile, little people like you and me, if our prayers are sometimes granted, beyond all hope and probability, had better not draw hasty conclusions to our own advantage. If we were stronger, we might be less tenderly treated. If we were braver, we might be sent, with far less help, to defend far more desperate posts in the great battle.

    ---C.S. Lewis
     

    Let’s not try and bring God into this. I’d like to keep it within the realm of reality and within what is possible.

    I’m talking about an emotion tied to blood and soil; tied to the resting ground of the bones of my fathers and mothers.

    Could there be an evolutionary produced trait that provides a unique emotional experience when I stand in the exact same spot where my ancestors stood, look at the same landscape, experience mirrored sunrises and sunsets, with the full knowledge that their bones are in the ground less than 1 mile away?

  42. @dfordoom

    As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.
     
    I very very strongly disagree. Sailer is wrong because he can't get beyond his obsession with race.

    That might apply to the white working class, and it also applies to the working class in general. It does not apply to whites in general because whites are not a monolithic entity.

    How many white CEOs and corporate lawyers and senior bureaucrats and publishers and academics are behaving like defeated peoples? The answer is none. They're behaving like conquerors.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they're down.

    Class not race.

    Exactly.

    This whole divide-and-rule website is a sheepdog for sweeping up peripheral wingers and ensuring that they keep whingeing on about irrelevancies and never ever get near the true and only issue, “Wha de money went?”

    And as soon as you mention the goddam rich who belong a la lanterne and nowhere else, they get all snippy with you in their little childish ways. They think the rich are their buddies. It’s sweet. They’re so loving.

    Because they simply do not know on which side their stupid bread is buttered.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Just as there are the deserving and the undeserving poor, there are the deserving and the undeserving rich.
  43. @Intelligent Dasein

    Just another ad hominem from the Dunning-Kruger mob.
     
    This observation applies with perfect accuracy to yourself. You just made an ad hominem, and you are the Dunning-Kruger mob.

    In fact, you are so Dunning-Kruger that you lack the self-awareness to realize that you are appending the predicate "Dunning-Kruger" to someone more perceptive than you are. You have achieved perfect Dunning-Kruger self-symmetry; and that is, as they like to say, "a special kind of stupid."

    Nice one. Guy is an idiot. You can tell by his throwing around terms he doesn’t understand. And his pot calling the kettle black thing, of course, a dead giveaway of utter unselfaware imbecility.

  44. @Kratoklastes
    Suicide is literally the ultimate expression of self-ownership. It might be done for reasons that others consider retarded, and in general kiddies should be encouraged to find someone to help solve whatever's bugging them.... and everyone has a right to try to talk them out of it.

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don't. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.

    If I had a kid, I would rather that they killed themselves as opposed to becoming a career politician or bureaucrat; at least if they off themselves the only harm they are doing is to themselves and those in their immediate circle. Imagine the harm-reduction that would have happened if Churchill had offed himself during the Boer War (or even better, if he had been strangled in his crib).

    “But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.”

    Or, as Camus put it; “There is but one serious philosophical question, and that is suicide.”

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    As a philosopher, Camus was a pretty decent writer.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Sisyphus had a reason to live. If he'd have understood that, he could've been content.
  45. @Richard B
    Yawn Snore. Yet more from the Easily Triggered Adult-Child Peanut Gallery.

    Be specific, as I was. Otherwise, it's just more Denunciation without Refutation.

    And doing so using the very words from the comment you object to.

    Doesn't get lazier and dumber than that.

    P.S. Calling yourself "Intelligent Dasein" simply SCREAMS Dunning-Kruger Effect.
    So full of yourself you can't see how corny and pretentious you are.

    I’ll prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

    You are as stupid as the day is long.

    Moron.

    • Replies: @Richard B
    You're using an ad hominem as "proof" and calling me a "Moron"?

    Unhinged Triggered Trolls are what make the Internet so entertaining.

    The more seriously they take themselves the funnier they are.

  46. @silviosilver

    Nothing happens to any man that he is not fitted by nature to bear.
     
    Platitudes are a poor reason to insist that some people keep suffering unbearable pain.

    Although I'm scared of death as any man, the one good thing about it is that it means the end of all suffering.

    Indeed.
    Where Dr. assisted suicide exists, there are many thresholds, including the person must be suffering from a terminal illness; that there is no chance of recovery; the person is lucid at the time of the request; and signs a document witnessed by independent people not part of the medical system.

    I was opposed to medically assisted suicide, until I saw the horrible suffering that family members endured. The feeling of uselessness in being able to help, is profound.

  47. @German_reader
    Not really seriously, that part was meant more as a joke.
    I really do think AE's interpretation is flawed though, imo this is more of an issue linked to class and religiosity. The poor whites dying off en masse are probably the ones least likely to support doctor-assisted suicide (some might even suspect such programmes could be a scheme to get rid of them).

    Not really seriously, that part was meant more as a joke.

    Ditto my reply.

    I think there is substance to your opinion. The most vociferous opponents of “death panels” were found in this group. I am very reluctant to get into the discussion on the causes of “deaths of despair.”
    I don’t believe that anyone has a sure handle on it.

  48. @iffen
    Thanks, but you didn't actually say that I am thoughtful. :)

    Not just any people, I am not interested in the possible existentence of haints here and about.

    I only feel this way when, for example, standing where I know my father, my grandfather, my great grandfather, and my great-great grandmother stood.

    Yes, I do think land that many ancestors lived on can imbue it with significance for you. Lots of people report similar feelings.

    There is some sort of connection there, although what the precise mechanism is I cannot say.

    But it is a widely reported phenomenon.

    • Replies: @iffen
    imbue it with significance for you

    Not what I'm talking about. I must be honest. As a "spiritual" advisor, I find you completely inadequate.
  49. @nymom
    Well, of course, they were 'content' to be poor and broke because they didn't imagine anything else existed. Western (or White) Civilization demonstrated that everyone could have a reasonable life; maybe not rich but middle class and people are very happy with that. Actually I discovered after visiting the Dominican Republic a few years back that even our so-called working class lives mostly at the same standard as the elite in that country. I suspect that is the case in many other countries as well.

    I don't think millions of people are fighting to get into Europe, Australia, New Zealand or the US because they are content with the places they are in right now.

    Additionally, we not only gave millions of our citizens a decent standing of living but we also managed to significantly clean up our environment even in the midst of industrialization and not over-populate our part of the world.

    The West has much to be proud of...

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    The West has much to be proud of, and the East today is in some ways worse.

    A lot of people are blaming the opioid epidemic, the suicide, and the despair in some parts of America on shrinking economic opportunities. But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Having a decent standard of living is important, but its not the whole story.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.
     
    I don't think this is exactly true. A minimally decent standard of living is, to some extent, determined by the larger society, and that limits a person's choices in life. These third-world people often live in dwellings that would be illegal here.
    , @Dumbo

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.
     
    You know, strange at it sounds, I'm going to agree with Aaron B on that one. Material riches, after a certain level, don't really make people happier. I could link studies, but, it's just common sense really. Of course achieving a certain level of comfort is good, but in a way it's liberating to find out quite how much you can live without.

    It's true that poor people in the slums tend to be happier and more optimistic than middle-class fellows, but that may be a) because they are dumber, or b) because they don't live the dilemma of the middle-class: constantly afraid to fall down and get poor, but knowing they will never be really rich.

    The West has much to feel proud of, but current tech-consumerist culture is not one of those things.

    Also, I used to be a doom and gloom type, but now I think this way: the West is dead. Its decadence went from the French Revolution until the First World War. The rest (Second World War, 60s, multiculturalism) were just the spasm of a dying man.

    Now, accepting that it is dead is liberating in a way. You don't need to "fight for the survival of the West", which seems like a desperate cause. Instead, you can create the roots for something. Keep the good and throw out the bad. Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn't mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead.
    , @Toronto Russian

    But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.
     
    Top 20 countries by suicide rate (bold - Africa, italic - India and places with big Indian diasporas):
    1. Guyana
    2. Lesotho
    3. Russia
    4. Lithuania
    5. Suriname
    6. Ivory Coast
    7. Kazakhstan
    8. Equatorial Guinea
    9. Belarus
    10. South Korea
    11. Uganda
    12. Cameroon
    13. Zimbabwe
    14. Ukraine
    15. Nigeria
    16. Latvia
    17. Eswatini
    18. Togo
    19. India
    20. Uruguay
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
    , @nymom
    "If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness."

    Whatttttttt???
  50. @AaronB
    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn't what's determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    The West has much to be proud of, and the East today is in some ways worse.

    A lot of people are blaming the opioid epidemic, the suicide, and the despair in some parts of America on shrinking economic opportunities. But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Having a decent standard of living is important, but its not the whole story.

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    I don’t think this is exactly true. A minimally decent standard of living is, to some extent, determined by the larger society, and that limits a person’s choices in life. These third-world people often live in dwellings that would be illegal here.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Sure, obviously at this point we cannot be happy with Third World living conditions. I'm just making the point that the modest reduction in living standards Americans are experiencing does not inevitably lead to depression or despair and suicide.

    It can if up till now, you thought growing wealthier was the whole point of life, but if you had a different value system, you wouldn't care.

    So what's happening is, America's old goals are no longer viable, but we haven't transitioned to different goals yet. So there's lots of depression and suicide and alcoholism as Americans despair of achieving their old goals.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Careful not to set the libertarians loose on this one. There are a lot of regulations in the West that putatively exist for the benefit of the poor but that actually make their standard of living much worse.
  51. @AaronB
    Yes, I do think land that many ancestors lived on can imbue it with significance for you. Lots of people report similar feelings.

    There is some sort of connection there, although what the precise mechanism is I cannot say.

    But it is a widely reported phenomenon.

    imbue it with significance for you

    Not what I’m talking about. I must be honest. As a “spiritual” advisor, I find you completely inadequate.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Lol, I know, I'm pretty awful at it. I don't even understand your question.

    If it's about evolution, I'm probably the wrong guy to be asking. I can give my opinion on spiritual things, but as far as I understand you don't believe in such things.
  52. Is there a significant positive correlation between this and the lack of religiosity? I believe that you previously posted some GSS data that showed that blacks are more religious than other US racial and ethnic groups–so, it would make sense for blacks to be more anti-suicide than other US racial and ethnic groups are.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    This survey doesn't include data on religiosity but that is probably correct (though it doesn't hold on abortion--blacks are more religious and also more pro-choice than whites).
  53. @Rosie

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.
     
    I don't think this is exactly true. A minimally decent standard of living is, to some extent, determined by the larger society, and that limits a person's choices in life. These third-world people often live in dwellings that would be illegal here.

    Sure, obviously at this point we cannot be happy with Third World living conditions. I’m just making the point that the modest reduction in living standards Americans are experiencing does not inevitably lead to depression or despair and suicide.

    It can if up till now, you thought growing wealthier was the whole point of life, but if you had a different value system, you wouldn’t care.

    So what’s happening is, America’s old goals are no longer viable, but we haven’t transitioned to different goals yet. So there’s lots of depression and suicide and alcoholism as Americans despair of achieving their old goals.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    I’m just making the point that the modest reduction in living standards Americans are experiencing does not inevitably lead to depression or despair and suicide.
     
    I certainly agree with you there. It's not about the stuff and never was about the stuff. I think Americans are actually willing to accept a reduced standard of living, but TPTB won't allow it, for whatever reason. A lot of it has to do with NIMBYISM. People don't want high-density housing in their neighborhoods. Even vacation communities have ridiculous minimum square footage covenants, so forget about that tiny house in the mountains.

    Of course, the racial problem aggravates all this. It's one thing to live in close quarters with neighbors like yourself, another altogether if your neighbors are radically different from you.
  54. @iffen
    imbue it with significance for you

    Not what I'm talking about. I must be honest. As a "spiritual" advisor, I find you completely inadequate.

    Lol, I know, I’m pretty awful at it. I don’t even understand your question.

    If it’s about evolution, I’m probably the wrong guy to be asking. I can give my opinion on spiritual things, but as far as I understand you don’t believe in such things.

  55. @German_reader
    imo it's a somewhat weird interpretation to link this to the opioid-related "white death", support for doctor-assisted suicide is more of an ultra-liberal, secular stance (therefore probably more common among affluent whites for whom individual agency is the prime value)...think of the Netherlands and Belgium where such systems actually exist. Not surprising then that "others" also support it, which will include many non-Christian Asians.
    Would be interesting to see how much this correlates with support for abortion.
    More controversially, one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there...

    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia), and abortion, and eugenics, while being adamantly opposed to state policies regarding extermination of undesirables.

    Anyone who is not in favour of eugenics needs to explain why they think that the socially-optimal reproductive strategy for humans is just to let the genetic chips fall where they may: we don’t do that with domesticated animals, and undomesticated humans are capable of very significant society-wide damage.

    I should also make clear that I’m not talking about government policy-based ‘capital-E’ Eugenics – as advocated by that 20th century government that everyone knows about… that one that was dominated at the very highest levels – political, legal and intellectual [sic] – by arrogant racist asshole cunts who were in favour of forced sterilisation and doing experiments on the politically disfavoured.

    You know…, the US.

    So not their ‘Eugenics’, nor the copycat version of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

    I’m talking about whether people ought to be encouraged to have some set of reproductive standards, and to do basic smart things like aborting fucked foetuses. Raising a fucked kid is a financially-crippling thing, and is socially costly (assuming the fucked-up kid outlives the parents)., and no self-delusion on the part of the parents will change that.

    The world already has a vast number of retards (and it’s made worse by dysgenic subsidies to bottom-quintile reproduction, via the welfare system).

    Better that 1000 divvies get aborted, than 1 extended family’s life is ruined by having to care for a person whose quality of life will not objectively exceed that of a house-plant.

  56. @AaronB
    Sure, obviously at this point we cannot be happy with Third World living conditions. I'm just making the point that the modest reduction in living standards Americans are experiencing does not inevitably lead to depression or despair and suicide.

    It can if up till now, you thought growing wealthier was the whole point of life, but if you had a different value system, you wouldn't care.

    So what's happening is, America's old goals are no longer viable, but we haven't transitioned to different goals yet. So there's lots of depression and suicide and alcoholism as Americans despair of achieving their old goals.

    I’m just making the point that the modest reduction in living standards Americans are experiencing does not inevitably lead to depression or despair and suicide.

    I certainly agree with you there. It’s not about the stuff and never was about the stuff. I think Americans are actually willing to accept a reduced standard of living, but TPTB won’t allow it, for whatever reason. A lot of it has to do with NIMBYISM. People don’t want high-density housing in their neighborhoods. Even vacation communities have ridiculous minimum square footage covenants, so forget about that tiny house in the mountains.

    Of course, the racial problem aggravates all this. It’s one thing to live in close quarters with neighbors like yourself, another altogether if your neighbors are radically different from you.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Large houses are a status symbol in America. It's part of the national psyche. Sailer awhile back was upset that an Indian immigrant was promoting high density housing in California, and suggested it was another way immigrants were trying to ruin America by making it more like the Old World. There is real psychological resistance on the part of Americans to this.

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.

    I think he's right. I was never happier than living in cramped apartments in Asia or New York near a ton of food and entertainment and cool people. Although I love spending time in the mountains, a tent, an RV, or a small cabin is all I want - I have no need for those mountain palaces you see.

    I think the American love of big houses ties into the old goal, now collapsing, of constantly trying to grow bigger and richer.
  57. Try correlating with income and education. As I remember suicide rates are one of the few things that doesn’t go down with increasing social class–poor people are more inured to deprivation. Poor guy loses his cashier job and starts looking for another one, upper-middle-class guy gets canned from his high-powered executive job that he’s worked so long to get to and starts eyeing the nearest bridge.

  58. @Intelligent Dasein
    I think the disparity of results is primarily a trust issue. Black people are more likely to believe that the doctors are trying to kill them off for their own convenience. White people are more likely to treat the doctors like valets with stethoscopes who should feel gratified to help ease the passing of one so illustrious as they.

    >White people are more likely to treat the doctors like valets with stethoscopes who should feel gratified to help ease the passing of one so illustrious as they.

    This is the correct attitude to have toward doctors for the most part

  59. @silviosilver

    But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.
     
    Dissident rightists are despondent because immigration diminishes rightwing parties' prospects of winning on ethnonationalist platforms. It's technically still possible they could, but they lack the will to even try and time is fast running out; by the time they get their act together - if they ever do - it could well be too late.

    Winning elections of itself doesn't mean much. As Buchanan put it nearly fifty years ago, "conservative votes, liberal victories."

    Dissident rightists are despondent because immigration diminishes rightwing parties’ prospects of winning on ethnonationalist platforms.

    Rightwing parties have zero interest in running on ethnonationalist platforms. Ethnonationalism is not a viable political strategy because white people have little or no interest in it. They have no interest in it because there’s no such thing as “white people” as a discrete category. There are various groups that happen to be predominantly white but they’re focused on other issues.

    Middle-class whites are focused on their own economic interests and couldn’t care less about ethnonationalism (in fact they’re hostile to it). Working-class whites just want the factory jobs to come back. Christian whites are hostile to ethnonationalism becaue it isn’t nice and it isn’t inclusive. Evangelical whites only care about a few narrow issues, mostly Israel. They don’t care about ethnonationalism.

    Ethnonationalism appeals to a tiny minority of whites. Ethnonationalism is dead in the water because it’s an ideology that has overwhelmingly lost white support.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  60. @Rosie

    I’m just making the point that the modest reduction in living standards Americans are experiencing does not inevitably lead to depression or despair and suicide.
     
    I certainly agree with you there. It's not about the stuff and never was about the stuff. I think Americans are actually willing to accept a reduced standard of living, but TPTB won't allow it, for whatever reason. A lot of it has to do with NIMBYISM. People don't want high-density housing in their neighborhoods. Even vacation communities have ridiculous minimum square footage covenants, so forget about that tiny house in the mountains.

    Of course, the racial problem aggravates all this. It's one thing to live in close quarters with neighbors like yourself, another altogether if your neighbors are radically different from you.

    Large houses are a status symbol in America. It’s part of the national psyche. Sailer awhile back was upset that an Indian immigrant was promoting high density housing in California, and suggested it was another way immigrants were trying to ruin America by making it more like the Old World. There is real psychological resistance on the part of Americans to this.

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.

    I think he’s right. I was never happier than living in cramped apartments in Asia or New York near a ton of food and entertainment and cool people. Although I love spending time in the mountains, a tent, an RV, or a small cabin is all I want – I have no need for those mountain palaces you see.

    I think the American love of big houses ties into the old goal, now collapsing, of constantly trying to grow bigger and richer.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    I think the American love of big houses ties into the old goal, now collapsing, of constantly trying to grow bigger and richer.
     
    There's certainly quite a bit of truth to this, too, but it's undeniable that the well-off use restrictive covenants to economically segregate themselves while they sneer down their noses at those who can't afford to do so.


    Sailer awhile back was upset that an Indian immigrant was promoting high density housing in California, and suggested it was another way immigrants were trying to ruin America by making it more like the Old World.
     
    And I don't necessarily fault him for that. Americans should be deciding for ourselves how we will live, not having new ways imposed on us by foreigners.

    Still, I think there is much truth in what you say. You see the same thing with vehicles. Some guys are self- aware enough to have a sense of humor about it.



    https://bullsballs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/garysballs.jpg
    , @Liza

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.
     
    Just a minute. This is not an issue of lots of giant houses VS smaller, more sensible, human scale houses. The point is that no native born white American wants to live cheek by jowl, like ants in an ant hill, the way they do in all those third world countries many of whose residents appear to want to run here for some reason or other. Gee, I wonder what that reason could be. If you yourself are happy in a cramped apartment, near all that hipness and vibrancy, that's fine with me.

    And no, being from the farm and still living on a smaller one now, I don't want to live close to others. Half a mile to the nearest neighbor is okay with me.

    Entertainment? This culture of entertainment is doing us in.

  61. @German_reader
    imo it's a somewhat weird interpretation to link this to the opioid-related "white death", support for doctor-assisted suicide is more of an ultra-liberal, secular stance (therefore probably more common among affluent whites for whom individual agency is the prime value)...think of the Netherlands and Belgium where such systems actually exist. Not surprising then that "others" also support it, which will include many non-Christian Asians.
    Would be interesting to see how much this correlates with support for abortion.
    More controversially, one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there...

    one might also argue that this shows a hidden tendency among American whites in favour of eugenics and euthanasia and a belief that the weak and sick should be exterminated. Maybe blacks and Hispanics are afraid that such programmes might not stop there…

    Middle-class whites would love to see the weak and sick exterminated (or ideally encouraged to exterminate themselves) but don’t worry, it will be done in a non-racist way. Exterminating particular races would be wrong, but surely there’s nothing wrong with getting rid of nasty poor people?

    And middle-class people don’t want to do it directly (because that wouldn’t be nice). They’d prefer to just let the poor starve, or die off from drug and alcohol problems. More doctor-assisted suicides would be a way to achieve the objective whilst making middle-class people feel humane and virtuous. Those awful poor people are better off dead aren’t they?

    But certainly it’s understandable that blacks and Hispanics are suspicious.

    OK, I’m exaggerating the class hatred of middle-class people. Slightly.

  62. @Kratoklastes
    Suicide is literally the ultimate expression of self-ownership. It might be done for reasons that others consider retarded, and in general kiddies should be encouraged to find someone to help solve whatever's bugging them.... and everyone has a right to try to talk them out of it.

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don't. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.

    If I had a kid, I would rather that they killed themselves as opposed to becoming a career politician or bureaucrat; at least if they off themselves the only harm they are doing is to themselves and those in their immediate circle. Imagine the harm-reduction that would have happened if Churchill had offed himself during the Boer War (or even better, if he had been strangled in his crib).

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.

    But we’re not talking about disposing of themselves. If someone wants to blow his brains out with a pistol that’s certainly his right.

    We’re talking about other people being involved in disposing of people. People like doctors (not an especially trustworthy group). And if you have doctor-assisted suicide then inevitably the government is involved. There is paperwork to be filled in. There will be governments rules to be followed. How much do you trust the government?

    The big concern is that pressure might be brought to bear. Now Grandpa, you really are tired of living aren’t you? Well this nice doctor is going to help you. And just think how happy your children will be to see your suffering ended, and of course to start carving up your estate.

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian

    The big concern is that pressure might be brought to bear. Now Grandpa, you really are tired of living aren’t you? Well this nice doctor is going to help you. And just think how happy your children will be to see your suffering ended, and of course to start carving up your estate.
     
    Hindu widows were pressured to burn themselves alive, then the British colonial administration began to hang those who pressured them and it stopped.

    Euthanasia applicants must be evaluated by psychologists, and I think it's difficult to convincingly lie that you want to die when you really don't. If lying is disclosed punish asshole relatives, that's it.
  63. @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    If you think doctor assisted suicide is immoral don’t have a doctor assisted suicide. My doctor assisted suicide is none of your business.
     
    Ah, the classic libertarian insta-response to laws against any objectionable action. Broadly speaking, this kind of "appeal to selfishness" had two fatal flaws:
    1) People often make very poor decisions for themselves, (e.g. injecting heroin for the first time) which anyone with a shred of compassion would want to prevent in order to avoid misery or regret among their neighbors.
    2) You don't live in a bubble. Every action and decision has an infinite number of consequences which affect others. This especially applies to the normalization of undesirable behavior.

    In this particular case, I can think of various reasons why legalizing suicide is a bad idea:
    a) It would prevent anyone from being administered help if they don't agree to it at a specific time. For example, many people with depression benefit massively from certain medications or counseling. This is done without their consent in the aftermath of a suicide attempt, but would be impossible without a legal justification. Similar to how addicts are legally required to attend rehab for their own good, and if they recover, are glad they were forced to do so.
    b) It would be extremely dysgenic: more intelligent and reflective people are more likely to kill themselves, thus worsening society in the long run.
    c) Normalization would lead to pressure encouraging suicide, e.g. from greedy family members.
    d) Raises huge questions about medical power of attorney, competency, consent, etc. This is especially applicable because many of the people suicide-advocated claim to want to help (those in severe pain) are the same people who would be incapable of making clear their own decision.

    And these aren't even considering the various, very valid, philosophical objections to killing.

    Very smug and condescending. You don’t know much about suffering. Yet.

    • Replies: @Elmer's Washable School Glue
    Maybe try understanding the other point of view instead of an immediate ad hominem next time? But since you brought it up, I know someone who did, a long time ago, attempt suicide, and agrees with me, thus proving my first concern. So not a point of differentiation. Try a different fallacy.
  64. @AaronB
    Large houses are a status symbol in America. It's part of the national psyche. Sailer awhile back was upset that an Indian immigrant was promoting high density housing in California, and suggested it was another way immigrants were trying to ruin America by making it more like the Old World. There is real psychological resistance on the part of Americans to this.

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.

    I think he's right. I was never happier than living in cramped apartments in Asia or New York near a ton of food and entertainment and cool people. Although I love spending time in the mountains, a tent, an RV, or a small cabin is all I want - I have no need for those mountain palaces you see.

    I think the American love of big houses ties into the old goal, now collapsing, of constantly trying to grow bigger and richer.

    I think the American love of big houses ties into the old goal, now collapsing, of constantly trying to grow bigger and richer.

    There’s certainly quite a bit of truth to this, too, but it’s undeniable that the well-off use restrictive covenants to economically segregate themselves while they sneer down their noses at those who can’t afford to do so.

    Sailer awhile back was upset that an Indian immigrant was promoting high density housing in California, and suggested it was another way immigrants were trying to ruin America by making it more like the Old World.

    And I don’t necessarily fault him for that. Americans should be deciding for ourselves how we will live, not having new ways imposed on us by foreigners.

    Still, I think there is much truth in what you say. You see the same thing with vehicles. Some guys are self- aware enough to have a sense of humor about it.

    [MORE]

    • LOL: AaronB
  65. i want to cry but i cant ,the tears have been frozen for a long time.

  66. @ThreeCranes

    "But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit."
     
    Or, as Camus put it; "There is but one serious philosophical question, and that is suicide."

    As a philosopher, Camus was a pretty decent writer.

  67. @AaronB
    I don't know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I'm not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don't make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can't accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to "grow" - primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn't much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn't result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren't very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn't happen. All that wealth and technology didn't really make anyone happier.

    So whites don't have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one - Eastern philosophies teach that life isn't headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly - life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn't yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    ‘… For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to “grow” – primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized…’

    There is the minor difficulty that this doesn’t fit the data. It’s not like white suicide rates started to rise with the closing of the frontier or something.

    We’re not ruling all and realizing there’s nothing more to be had. That’s not the problem.

  68. @dfordoom

    As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.
     
    I very very strongly disagree. Sailer is wrong because he can't get beyond his obsession with race.

    That might apply to the white working class, and it also applies to the working class in general. It does not apply to whites in general because whites are not a monolithic entity.

    How many white CEOs and corporate lawyers and senior bureaucrats and publishers and academics are behaving like defeated peoples? The answer is none. They're behaving like conquerors.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they're down.

    But when the Mainly White bosses strive to help the poor downtrodden brown people (at the cost of the poor downdtrodden white people)
    Brown people die.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-28/boeing-s-737-max-software-outsourced-to-9-an-hour-engineers

    Ah! What’s a mainly white rich guy to do?

  69. @iffen
    It hurts to the core that you didn't give me a shout-out as a thoughtful white commenter. :)

    Putting my past spiritual blasphemies aside, I would like to have your opinion on a question that poses the possiblity of the spiritual.

    If I go and stand in the very spot that many of my ancestors stood, some 4 and 5 generations back, and I look at the very same mountains or down into the valleys that they saw, and knowing that their final resting places are within 10 miles of that very spot, and I feel a tranquility, a feeling of at being at ease that can only be described as feeling as if I am a cosmically perfect raindrop in the earth's eternal water cycle, is that my imagination, or do you think that it is a supernatural force that is impacting my physicality?

    Somebody slipped some ecstasy into your oatmeal.

  70. @WorkingClass
    Very smug and condescending. You don't know much about suffering. Yet.

    Maybe try understanding the other point of view instead of an immediate ad hominem next time? But since you brought it up, I know someone who did, a long time ago, attempt suicide, and agrees with me, thus proving my first concern. So not a point of differentiation. Try a different fallacy.

  71. @obwandiyag
    I'll prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

    You are as stupid as the day is long.

    Moron.

    You’re using an ad hominem as “proof” and calling me a “Moron”?

    Unhinged Triggered Trolls are what make the Internet so entertaining.

    The more seriously they take themselves the funnier they are.

  72. “As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.” (and obesity?????)

    Nonsense! I have just been assured by you and 216 in the following blog post that cultural subversion in the US is not effective! YT has just, out of nowhere, become lazy and stupid within the last 100 years for no discernible reason!

  73. Similar to how addicts are legally required to attend rehab for their own good, and if they recover, are glad they were forced to do so.

    I wonder if there are any statistics on the long-term success of forced rehab. Is it even recovery if you are forced into it – and how long might that new cleaned-up state even last? Sometimes I think that rehab is just another business. When it’s run by the govt, it’s bureaucrats increasing the size of their project and the importance that goes along with it; and when privately run, it’s just another business.

    Maybe forcing people into so called rehab just makes the rest of us feel relieved for a little while.

    It’s a bit like adults who as children were relentlessly, repeatedly thrashed with belts, wooden spoons, etc. Then when they grow up, they say that any good qualities they possess today were due to that kind of mistreatment. Dig a little deeper and you will find some mighty disturbed people.

  74. @AaronB
    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn't what's determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    The West has much to be proud of, and the East today is in some ways worse.

    A lot of people are blaming the opioid epidemic, the suicide, and the despair in some parts of America on shrinking economic opportunities. But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Having a decent standard of living is important, but its not the whole story.

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.

    You know, strange at it sounds, I’m going to agree with Aaron B on that one. Material riches, after a certain level, don’t really make people happier. I could link studies, but, it’s just common sense really. Of course achieving a certain level of comfort is good, but in a way it’s liberating to find out quite how much you can live without.

    It’s true that poor people in the slums tend to be happier and more optimistic than middle-class fellows, but that may be a) because they are dumber, or b) because they don’t live the dilemma of the middle-class: constantly afraid to fall down and get poor, but knowing they will never be really rich.

    The West has much to feel proud of, but current tech-consumerist culture is not one of those things.

    Also, I used to be a doom and gloom type, but now I think this way: the West is dead. Its decadence went from the French Revolution until the First World War. The rest (Second World War, 60s, multiculturalism) were just the spasm of a dying man.

    Now, accepting that it is dead is liberating in a way. You don’t need to “fight for the survival of the West”, which seems like a desperate cause. Instead, you can create the roots for something. Keep the good and throw out the bad. Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn’t mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Good comment, very much in line with my general thoughts on the subject.

    A culture, a civilization, has to be constantly renewing itself and reinventing itself. All organisms do. It has to go through small deaths all the time.

    The old culture had died inside - the events of the post-50s merely pushed a rotten structure to the ground. If it had any life left in it, it never would have been pushed over so easily.

    Christian ideals were no longer practiced under the old Christian forms - so the old Christian institutions had to die, so that the ideals can live again. They had to be liberated, so to speak.

    But these deaths are not something we should try and prevent, because they are natural events. Rather, we should learn to better spot when a culture, an institution, is rotten and can no longer be reformed, and abandon it.
    , @nymom
    "Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn’t mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead."

    The problem with that kind of thinking is it disregards the Dark Ages that the West fell into for almost 1,000 years from about the 5th century until the 15th...People even forgot how to read and write. That's why so much of Christianity's founding stories could only be illustrated through stained glass windows in church since no one could understand or articulate these things to people who fell into illiteracy when they went into essential survivalist mode...

    Not to mention that we might simply die out this go around as there are no guarantees we are going to come out of another complete collapse again.

    The entire world could be dominated through the 5,000 year old civilizations that are still hanging around today overpopulating their parts of the world and essentially giving their people not much in the way of representative government or prosperity. They will now have the tools, created by us in the West, instant internet/cell phone communications, air travel, electricity, etc., to impose themselves upon the entire world.

    It doesn't sound like a very bright future ahead for most of mankind, my friend.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I find a convenient shorthand of our civilization is Greece->Rome->Christendom->Enlightenment->Whatever comes next.
  75. @Dumbo

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.
     
    You know, strange at it sounds, I'm going to agree with Aaron B on that one. Material riches, after a certain level, don't really make people happier. I could link studies, but, it's just common sense really. Of course achieving a certain level of comfort is good, but in a way it's liberating to find out quite how much you can live without.

    It's true that poor people in the slums tend to be happier and more optimistic than middle-class fellows, but that may be a) because they are dumber, or b) because they don't live the dilemma of the middle-class: constantly afraid to fall down and get poor, but knowing they will never be really rich.

    The West has much to feel proud of, but current tech-consumerist culture is not one of those things.

    Also, I used to be a doom and gloom type, but now I think this way: the West is dead. Its decadence went from the French Revolution until the First World War. The rest (Second World War, 60s, multiculturalism) were just the spasm of a dying man.

    Now, accepting that it is dead is liberating in a way. You don't need to "fight for the survival of the West", which seems like a desperate cause. Instead, you can create the roots for something. Keep the good and throw out the bad. Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn't mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead.

    Good comment, very much in line with my general thoughts on the subject.

    A culture, a civilization, has to be constantly renewing itself and reinventing itself. All organisms do. It has to go through small deaths all the time.

    The old culture had died inside – the events of the post-50s merely pushed a rotten structure to the ground. If it had any life left in it, it never would have been pushed over so easily.

    Christian ideals were no longer practiced under the old Christian forms – so the old Christian institutions had to die, so that the ideals can live again. They had to be liberated, so to speak.

    But these deaths are not something we should try and prevent, because they are natural events. Rather, we should learn to better spot when a culture, an institution, is rotten and can no longer be reformed, and abandon it.

  76. @Nodwink
    Another instance of a survey question that needs a stricter definition.

    Here in Australia, "doctor-assisted suicide" is generally assumed to mean "euthanasia," with a further assumption that the patient is terminally ill, with perhaps days or even hours left to live. Surveys her have found strong support for this among the general public, sometimes around 80%.

    Here in Australia, “doctor-assisted suicide” is generally assumed to mean “euthanasia,” with a further assumption that the patient is terminally ill, with perhaps days or even hours left to live.

    I believe this is what most Americans associate it with, as well. So I don’t get why AE is making the leap that this survey question reflects an opinion about suicides of despair. There doesn’t seem to be any basis to make that leap at all.

    • Agree: Toronto Russian
  77. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    You're overthinking it lol. Whites are just more socially liberal, and "tolerant" than those other black and brown groups. It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage.

    And your comment is talking about how whites are ok with suicide because of despair while eastern people have a balanced view - yet asians practically have the same view of suicide as whites.

    Your comment screams "pseudo intellectual".

    You’re overthinking it lol. Whites are just more socially liberal, and “tolerant” than those other black and brown groups. It would be the same result if you asked about abortion or homosexual marriage.

    You could have just read the linked survey, which did ask questions about the morality of abortion and homosexual relations (not “marriage “, but whatever). They are not what you think.

  78. @AaronB
    Large houses are a status symbol in America. It's part of the national psyche. Sailer awhile back was upset that an Indian immigrant was promoting high density housing in California, and suggested it was another way immigrants were trying to ruin America by making it more like the Old World. There is real psychological resistance on the part of Americans to this.

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.

    I think he's right. I was never happier than living in cramped apartments in Asia or New York near a ton of food and entertainment and cool people. Although I love spending time in the mountains, a tent, an RV, or a small cabin is all I want - I have no need for those mountain palaces you see.

    I think the American love of big houses ties into the old goal, now collapsing, of constantly trying to grow bigger and richer.

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.

    Just a minute. This is not an issue of lots of giant houses VS smaller, more sensible, human scale houses. The point is that no native born white American wants to live cheek by jowl, like ants in an ant hill, the way they do in all those third world countries many of whose residents appear to want to run here for some reason or other. Gee, I wonder what that reason could be. If you yourself are happy in a cramped apartment, near all that hipness and vibrancy, that’s fine with me.

    And no, being from the farm and still living on a smaller one now, I don’t want to live close to others. Half a mile to the nearest neighbor is okay with me.

    Entertainment? This culture of entertainment is doing us in.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    What about Medieval towns and villages. They always struck me as ideal environments minus some of the more extreme filth.

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments - not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.

    I can see wanting to live in a farmhouse between the town and the wilderness, and regularly visit both - and perhaps that would be my own preference, at least now.

    But the American way seems to go against human nature. Have you ever been to Europe or Asia? What did you think, if yes? It may be hard to appreciate what living in a so called ant hill would be like if you haven't experienced it.
  79. @Liza

    But Nassim Taleb thinks that rich people in America who buy big, lonely, empty houses are fools, and that we all secretly most enjoy living in small houses in a human scale in close proximity to others and to food and entertainment.
     
    Just a minute. This is not an issue of lots of giant houses VS smaller, more sensible, human scale houses. The point is that no native born white American wants to live cheek by jowl, like ants in an ant hill, the way they do in all those third world countries many of whose residents appear to want to run here for some reason or other. Gee, I wonder what that reason could be. If you yourself are happy in a cramped apartment, near all that hipness and vibrancy, that's fine with me.

    And no, being from the farm and still living on a smaller one now, I don't want to live close to others. Half a mile to the nearest neighbor is okay with me.

    Entertainment? This culture of entertainment is doing us in.

    What about Medieval towns and villages. They always struck me as ideal environments minus some of the more extreme filth.

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments – not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.

    I can see wanting to live in a farmhouse between the town and the wilderness, and regularly visit both – and perhaps that would be my own preference, at least now.

    But the American way seems to go against human nature. Have you ever been to Europe or Asia? What did you think, if yes? It may be hard to appreciate what living in a so called ant hill would be like if you haven’t experienced it.

    • Replies: @Liza
    I would suggest that one reason Americans came to have the values they did (for a while, anyway) was that even poor people in the towns had some kind of a back yard (and front yard too) for growing produce, fruit trees, keeping chickens and other small livestock, and so on. And this came about because there was no overpopulation problem (as today) or neurotic desires to live in ugly giant houses brought about by a twisted, artificial economic system.

    It is doubtful that the cities and towns which you describe as being desirable would provide for the above described self sufficiency in food for the most part.

    Yes, 35 years ago I stayed in northern England for several weeks in row housing. Those people used their teeny tiny back yards as vegetable gardens (maybe 8X8). I feel quite confident in saying that if they had the money for a larger yard, it would have been full of plants for food.

    Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity.
     

    Market gardens are a faut de mieux, not what most stuffed-in-apartments white people would want. When I was there, the markets were not run by the farmers themselves, but by middlemen. The people I was living with offered me information about the cultural background of these vegetable sellers.

    If I have to live ant-hill-like, I will kill myself. It will not happen. If third worlders (and some Europeans) are happy living that way, it is because they are biologically different from normal whites.

    , @dfordoom

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments – not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.
     
    Which just goes to show that everyone has a different idea of paradise.

    I personally detest small houses. For me it's just not possible for a house to be too big.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Even today, most Americans identify "small town" as the community type they'd most ideally like to live in.
  80. Again Audacious, I must congratulate you on your success in attracting this webzine’s faithful horde of communists, militant atheists, blank-slaters, Jewish chauvinists, assorted Euro-trash from the peanut gallery, and generally anti-heritage American types. It’s really quite a discussion now: What’s the fastest way to get rid of YT!

    Keep it coming boys, we need to figure this thing out!

    • Replies: @iffen
    Kind of makes you feel out of place, huh Mikey?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Into the fray come also pro-lifers, nationalists, libertarians, heritage Americans, and Stoics.

    This is what the elusive marketplace of ideas is supposed to look like.
  81. @AaronB
    What about Medieval towns and villages. They always struck me as ideal environments minus some of the more extreme filth.

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments - not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.

    I can see wanting to live in a farmhouse between the town and the wilderness, and regularly visit both - and perhaps that would be my own preference, at least now.

    But the American way seems to go against human nature. Have you ever been to Europe or Asia? What did you think, if yes? It may be hard to appreciate what living in a so called ant hill would be like if you haven't experienced it.

    I would suggest that one reason Americans came to have the values they did (for a while, anyway) was that even poor people in the towns had some kind of a back yard (and front yard too) for growing produce, fruit trees, keeping chickens and other small livestock, and so on. And this came about because there was no overpopulation problem (as today) or neurotic desires to live in ugly giant houses brought about by a twisted, artificial economic system.

    It is doubtful that the cities and towns which you describe as being desirable would provide for the above described self sufficiency in food for the most part.

    Yes, 35 years ago I stayed in northern England for several weeks in row housing. Those people used their teeny tiny back yards as vegetable gardens (maybe 8X8). I feel quite confident in saying that if they had the money for a larger yard, it would have been full of plants for food.

    Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity.

    Market gardens are a faut de mieux, not what most stuffed-in-apartments white people would want. When I was there, the markets were not run by the farmers themselves, but by middlemen. The people I was living with offered me information about the cultural background of these vegetable sellers.

    If I have to live ant-hill-like, I will kill myself. It will not happen. If third worlders (and some Europeans) are happy living that way, it is because they are biologically different from normal whites.

  82. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Again Audacious, I must congratulate you on your success in attracting this webzine's faithful horde of communists, militant atheists, blank-slaters, Jewish chauvinists, assorted Euro-trash from the peanut gallery, and generally anti-heritage American types. It's really quite a discussion now: What's the fastest way to get rid of YT!

    Keep it coming boys, we need to figure this thing out!

    Kind of makes you feel out of place, huh Mikey?

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    As always, thank you Exhibit A for entering yourself into evidence as one of the more obtuse neoprogressive morphodites that brighten this blog's doorstep.

    Funny how you and a few others often found here won't go near Sailer's blog, were the commentary there would eat you alive.
  83. @AaronB
    I don't know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I'm not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don't make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can't accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to "grow" - primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn't much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn't result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren't very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn't happen. All that wealth and technology didn't really make anyone happier.

    So whites don't have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one - Eastern philosophies teach that life isn't headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly - life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn't yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    What Colin Wright said. It’s only over the last 30-odd years, since the Thatcher-Reagan years, that the life chances for white Americans and Britons have been diminishing – and even then, the Reagan and Thatcher eras look like a golden age compared with today.

    The boomers were better off than their parents, who in their turn were better off than the boomers’ grandparents. That’s all stopped, and children now are likely to be worse off than their parents.

    In the US, real male median wages reached a peak in 1971 to which they’ve never returned.

    In the UK, real male median wages are lower than they were in 1997 (I’ve not gone further back), while real house prices are 250% higher.

    Real GDP is massively higher in both countries, but only a small proportion of super-wealthy have benefited.

    The basics for a good life, once available to nearly every American, are increasingly unaffordable.

    If “the goal being realised” was the cause, then the 1950s would have been a time of anomie. Don’t know about the US, but surveys show the Brits as being most happy around 1957, the years of “you’ve never had it so good“.

  84. @AaronB
    I don't know, the very healthy Romans and Japanese in their prime thought suicide was morally justified, so I'm not sure if this is a good indicator of feeling defeated.

    But in general I agree with you. Whites do feel defeated, because they can no longer do what they used to do. The old goals don't make sense anymore.

    If you think life has a purpose, but you can't accomplish it anymore, of course you will feel defeated. You will feel despair. For the past several hundred years, whites thought the purpose of life was, in a word, to "grow" - primarily physically. Get richer, control nature more, conquer other peoples and continents, and spread their ideas and values.

    But this goal has largely been realized. There really isn't much more to do in this area anymore. Worse, it didn't result in the anticipated paradise. Whites weren't very happy during the centuries of growth, but they had a sense of purpose. They thought they would become happy at the end of the journey. But it didn't happen. All that wealth and technology didn't really make anyone happier.

    So whites don't have a sense of purpose anymore, but still think life needs a purpose. You will only suffer from a lack of purpose if you think you need one - Eastern philosophies teach that life isn't headed in any particular direction and has no purpose, that life is perfect as it is if you can see it correctly - life is not perfect only at the end of some process in the distant future.

    This philosophy produced cheerful, contended people who saw the beauty in day to day life. The divinity in day to day life. And they focused on making everyday life beautiful and divine, and not on happiness in the distant future.

    White civilization is disillusioned with its old goal, but hasn't yet learned to see the beauty in everyday life. So everyone is in despair. But that is a necessary stage in the process of transitioning to a civilization that is not based on finding happiness at the end of a long journey in the distant future. First you have to go through a period of disillusionment. But disillusionment is needed to break through ignorance.

    Whites are in despair because economic conditions are getting worse. This will indeed be depressing to someone who thinks the purpose of life is to get richer. But whites who visited Asia a hundred years ago were shocked to see how cheerful and happy people were living in poverty. It all depends on your values. Linh Dinh has an essay on this up right now on this site.

    In Rome, suicide was acceptable as a means of bearing full responsibility for failure and defeat. I’m less sure about Japan, but I think the concept was broadly the same–though less individualized, with retainers having to kill themselves if their lords died even if not on account of any failure on the retainers’ part.

  85. @silviosilver

    Nothing happens to any man that he is not fitted by nature to bear.
     
    Platitudes are a poor reason to insist that some people keep suffering unbearable pain.

    Although I'm scared of death as any man, the one good thing about it is that it means the end of all suffering.

    That includes death. The quote is the great stoic’s–not a mere platitude!

  86. @AaronB
    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn't what's determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    The West has much to be proud of, and the East today is in some ways worse.

    A lot of people are blaming the opioid epidemic, the suicide, and the despair in some parts of America on shrinking economic opportunities. But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Having a decent standard of living is important, but its not the whole story.

    But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Top 20 countries by suicide rate (bold – Africa, italic – India and places with big Indian diasporas):
    1. Guyana
    2. Lesotho
    3. Russia
    4. Lithuania
    5. Suriname
    6. Ivory Coast
    7. Kazakhstan
    8. Equatorial Guinea
    9. Belarus
    10. South Korea
    11. Uganda
    12. Cameroon
    13. Zimbabwe
    14. Ukraine
    15. Nigeria
    16. Latvia
    17. Eswatini
    18. Togo
    19. India
    20. Uruguay
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Thanks, I can't say I'm entirely surprised. Many places in Africa are pretty awful.

    I guess my point is only that poverty isn't necessarily incompatible with happiness, and for that to be true, there has to exist a decent number of poverty stricken communities that are happy and optimistic.

    And field reports and anthropological studies have turned up lots of communities like that. My own travels in the Himalaya did also. I've spent time in very poor and basic villages in Ladakh where the people were happy.

    But yes, poor places can be miserable too.
  87. @Toronto Russian

    But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.
     
    Top 20 countries by suicide rate (bold - Africa, italic - India and places with big Indian diasporas):
    1. Guyana
    2. Lesotho
    3. Russia
    4. Lithuania
    5. Suriname
    6. Ivory Coast
    7. Kazakhstan
    8. Equatorial Guinea
    9. Belarus
    10. South Korea
    11. Uganda
    12. Cameroon
    13. Zimbabwe
    14. Ukraine
    15. Nigeria
    16. Latvia
    17. Eswatini
    18. Togo
    19. India
    20. Uruguay
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

    Thanks, I can’t say I’m entirely surprised. Many places in Africa are pretty awful.

    I guess my point is only that poverty isn’t necessarily incompatible with happiness, and for that to be true, there has to exist a decent number of poverty stricken communities that are happy and optimistic.

    And field reports and anthropological studies have turned up lots of communities like that. My own travels in the Himalaya did also. I’ve spent time in very poor and basic villages in Ladakh where the people were happy.

    But yes, poor places can be miserable too.

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian
    It's interesting. The bottom of the list is mostly Muslim, but the very lowest with almost-zero rate are black Caribbean British subjects. Stereotype confirmed:
    https://youtu.be/vdB-8eLEW8g

    So the most deadly combinations seem to be: poverty + Hinduism, poverty + African independence experiments, and communist rule + vodka (former commies who drink mostly wine/rakija aren't even in the top 100).
  88. @AaronB
    What about Medieval towns and villages. They always struck me as ideal environments minus some of the more extreme filth.

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments - not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.

    I can see wanting to live in a farmhouse between the town and the wilderness, and regularly visit both - and perhaps that would be my own preference, at least now.

    But the American way seems to go against human nature. Have you ever been to Europe or Asia? What did you think, if yes? It may be hard to appreciate what living in a so called ant hill would be like if you haven't experienced it.

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments – not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.

    Which just goes to show that everyone has a different idea of paradise.

    I personally detest small houses. For me it’s just not possible for a house to be too big.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    In a good society peoples all quirks and peculiarities would be accommodated. There would be no one fits all solution.

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing. Some people like to work really hard, and some like to live a more contemplative life.

    If large chunks of the population can't live the life they want, you get perpetual revolt and unrest of some kind.

    I think pre-modern societies were much better at accommodating the full range of human types, from monk to soldier, hermit to rich merchant.

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind. I suspect you would change your mind at least somewhat.

    But maybe not - people really are different, and that's fine.
  89. @dfordoom

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments – not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.
     
    Which just goes to show that everyone has a different idea of paradise.

    I personally detest small houses. For me it's just not possible for a house to be too big.

    In a good society peoples all quirks and peculiarities would be accommodated. There would be no one fits all solution.

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing. Some people like to work really hard, and some like to live a more contemplative life.

    If large chunks of the population can’t live the life they want, you get perpetual revolt and unrest of some kind.

    I think pre-modern societies were much better at accommodating the full range of human types, from monk to soldier, hermit to rich merchant.

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind. I suspect you would change your mind at least somewhat.

    But maybe not – people really are different, and that’s fine.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Most people in preindustrial society were peasant farmers. I cannot believe for a second that such societies did a better job of accommodating the full range of human types.

    Imagine how phenomenally boring life must have been in some medieval village. I understand those people had a lot of free time (more than is commonly imagined, anyway). That's great, but what could you really do with it?

    In our own day, we have almost endless activities, and many of them either essentially free or eminently affordable. If it weren't for the looming threat of having ten times the existing amount of worthless negroidal 'diversity' dumped on our heads, this would undoubtedly be the greatest time ever to be alive.

    , @dfordoom

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind.
     
    I've had that chance. And I hated every minute of it.

    But of course it's possible that I'm just really strange!
    , @Liza

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing
     
    I don't want any such thing. They would be too much work to maintain and clean, etc. and is a waste of natural resources to build in the first place. You and I disagree as to what constitutes human-scale, that's all. It sounds to me like you want people stuffed cheek by jowl into tiny apartments so long as they can also have that vibrant entertainment, art, squares, plazas and "culture" nearby. And let's not forget the funky shops and coffee joints.

    No back and front yard, no vegetable garden, no bit of grass, no trees, no small animals? That's my idea of hell.

    Your idea of human-scale is necessitated by overpopulation, not any normal person's first choice. Of course, I'd never prevent anyone living the way you say is best. Only that I don't want the government telling me I can't have a few acres for my family and me with tax breaks for leaving a portion of the property completely alone as a home for wildlife and native plant growth.
  90. @AaronB
    In a good society peoples all quirks and peculiarities would be accommodated. There would be no one fits all solution.

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing. Some people like to work really hard, and some like to live a more contemplative life.

    If large chunks of the population can't live the life they want, you get perpetual revolt and unrest of some kind.

    I think pre-modern societies were much better at accommodating the full range of human types, from monk to soldier, hermit to rich merchant.

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind. I suspect you would change your mind at least somewhat.

    But maybe not - people really are different, and that's fine.

    Most people in preindustrial society were peasant farmers. I cannot believe for a second that such societies did a better job of accommodating the full range of human types.

    Imagine how phenomenally boring life must have been in some medieval village. I understand those people had a lot of free time (more than is commonly imagined, anyway). That’s great, but what could you really do with it?

    In our own day, we have almost endless activities, and many of them either essentially free or eminently affordable. If it weren’t for the looming threat of having ten times the existing amount of worthless negroidal ‘diversity’ dumped on our heads, this would undoubtedly be the greatest time ever to be alive.

  91. @AaronB
    In a good society peoples all quirks and peculiarities would be accommodated. There would be no one fits all solution.

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing. Some people like to work really hard, and some like to live a more contemplative life.

    If large chunks of the population can't live the life they want, you get perpetual revolt and unrest of some kind.

    I think pre-modern societies were much better at accommodating the full range of human types, from monk to soldier, hermit to rich merchant.

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind. I suspect you would change your mind at least somewhat.

    But maybe not - people really are different, and that's fine.

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind.

    I’ve had that chance. And I hated every minute of it.

    But of course it’s possible that I’m just really strange!

  92. A 2016 Johns Hopkins study reported that 250,000 die every year as a result of medical negligence. This is the third-leading cause of death. It is therefore “doctor-assisted suicide“ (Russian Roulette version) to place oneself or a loved one under the care of inept doctors and inept trainee-doctors. When it is an emergency, or physician choice is geographically constrained, these are of course not cases of voluntary Russian Roulette physician-assisted suicide. I will add this aspect: As escape from crime mandates white flight to remote areas, whites are also distancing themselves from first-tier medical centers, thus increasing the medical-suicide risk.

  93. @iffen
    Kind of makes you feel out of place, huh Mikey?

    As always, thank you Exhibit A for entering yourself into evidence as one of the more obtuse neoprogressive morphodites that brighten this blog’s doorstep.

    Funny how you and a few others often found here won’t go near Sailer’s blog, were the commentary there would eat you alive.

    • Thanks: iffen
  94. @dfordoom

    But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit.
     
    But we're not talking about disposing of themselves. If someone wants to blow his brains out with a pistol that's certainly his right.

    We're talking about other people being involved in disposing of people. People like doctors (not an especially trustworthy group). And if you have doctor-assisted suicide then inevitably the government is involved. There is paperwork to be filled in. There will be governments rules to be followed. How much do you trust the government?

    The big concern is that pressure might be brought to bear. Now Grandpa, you really are tired of living aren't you? Well this nice doctor is going to help you. And just think how happy your children will be to see your suffering ended, and of course to start carving up your estate.

    The big concern is that pressure might be brought to bear. Now Grandpa, you really are tired of living aren’t you? Well this nice doctor is going to help you. And just think how happy your children will be to see your suffering ended, and of course to start carving up your estate.

    Hindu widows were pressured to burn themselves alive, then the British colonial administration began to hang those who pressured them and it stopped.

    Euthanasia applicants must be evaluated by psychologists, and I think it’s difficult to convincingly lie that you want to die when you really don’t. If lying is disclosed punish asshole relatives, that’s it.

    • Replies: @Liza

    Euthanasia applicants must be evaluated by psychologists,
     
    Maybe by this psychiatrist and others who think like him?

    https://internationalpsychoanalysis.net/on-having-whiteness-with-donald-moss-at-nypsi/

    Excerpt:

    "This presentation will focus on Whiteness as a condition one first acquires and then one has– a malignant, parasitic-like, condition. The condition is malignant because it spreads/metastasizes, targeting an ever-widening sphere of objects. It is parasitic in that it is contagious, passed on by other infected people. "

    Dr. Moss and his followers would undoubtedly find all (white) euthanasia applicants suitable for the launching into eternity.

    Anyone here who's interested in his ideas can sign up for his seminar.
  95. @AaronB
    Thanks, I can't say I'm entirely surprised. Many places in Africa are pretty awful.

    I guess my point is only that poverty isn't necessarily incompatible with happiness, and for that to be true, there has to exist a decent number of poverty stricken communities that are happy and optimistic.

    And field reports and anthropological studies have turned up lots of communities like that. My own travels in the Himalaya did also. I've spent time in very poor and basic villages in Ladakh where the people were happy.

    But yes, poor places can be miserable too.

    It’s interesting. The bottom of the list is mostly Muslim, but the very lowest with almost-zero rate are black Caribbean British subjects. Stereotype confirmed:

    So the most deadly combinations seem to be: poverty + Hinduism, poverty + African independence experiments, and communist rule + vodka (former commies who drink mostly wine/rakija aren’t even in the top 100).

    • Agree: AaronB
    • Replies: @Toronto Russian
    South Korea, then, is a mad pressure cooker where you sit in class 12 hours a day as a kid and teachers beat you for breaking discipline (so you can't develop social skills at the critical age and likely end up lonely), then work 12 hours a day for life. Their suicide rate and "birth strike" are both completely understandable. In comparison, Japanese suicide rate has gone down along with the easing of their workaholic social norms. I've recently seen a PDF of a Japanese survey where "rest and relaxation" occupy ever-bigger share of the average person's day.
    , @Talha

    poverty + Hinduism
     
    That wouldn’t surprise me. I would imagine that a belief in reincarnation would lend itself to an easier approach of; “Well Maude, this truly sucks - let’s press the reset button and respawn!”

    Peace.
  96. @Toronto Russian
    It's interesting. The bottom of the list is mostly Muslim, but the very lowest with almost-zero rate are black Caribbean British subjects. Stereotype confirmed:
    https://youtu.be/vdB-8eLEW8g

    So the most deadly combinations seem to be: poverty + Hinduism, poverty + African independence experiments, and communist rule + vodka (former commies who drink mostly wine/rakija aren't even in the top 100).

    South Korea, then, is a mad pressure cooker where you sit in class 12 hours a day as a kid and teachers beat you for breaking discipline (so you can’t develop social skills at the critical age and likely end up lonely), then work 12 hours a day for life. Their suicide rate and “birth strike” are both completely understandable. In comparison, Japanese suicide rate has gone down along with the easing of their workaholic social norms. I’ve recently seen a PDF of a Japanese survey where “rest and relaxation” occupy ever-bigger share of the average person’s day.

  97. @Toronto Russian
    It's interesting. The bottom of the list is mostly Muslim, but the very lowest with almost-zero rate are black Caribbean British subjects. Stereotype confirmed:
    https://youtu.be/vdB-8eLEW8g

    So the most deadly combinations seem to be: poverty + Hinduism, poverty + African independence experiments, and communist rule + vodka (former commies who drink mostly wine/rakija aren't even in the top 100).

    poverty + Hinduism

    That wouldn’t surprise me. I would imagine that a belief in reincarnation would lend itself to an easier approach of; “Well Maude, this truly sucks – let’s press the reset button and respawn!”

    Peace.

  98. @AaronB
    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn't what's determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.

    The West has much to be proud of, and the East today is in some ways worse.

    A lot of people are blaming the opioid epidemic, the suicide, and the despair in some parts of America on shrinking economic opportunities. But poor people living in slums in India and Africa are often happy and optimistic.

    Having a decent standard of living is important, but its not the whole story.

    “If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.”

    Whatttttttt???

  99. @Dumbo

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.
     
    You know, strange at it sounds, I'm going to agree with Aaron B on that one. Material riches, after a certain level, don't really make people happier. I could link studies, but, it's just common sense really. Of course achieving a certain level of comfort is good, but in a way it's liberating to find out quite how much you can live without.

    It's true that poor people in the slums tend to be happier and more optimistic than middle-class fellows, but that may be a) because they are dumber, or b) because they don't live the dilemma of the middle-class: constantly afraid to fall down and get poor, but knowing they will never be really rich.

    The West has much to feel proud of, but current tech-consumerist culture is not one of those things.

    Also, I used to be a doom and gloom type, but now I think this way: the West is dead. Its decadence went from the French Revolution until the First World War. The rest (Second World War, 60s, multiculturalism) were just the spasm of a dying man.

    Now, accepting that it is dead is liberating in a way. You don't need to "fight for the survival of the West", which seems like a desperate cause. Instead, you can create the roots for something. Keep the good and throw out the bad. Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn't mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead.

    “Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn’t mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead.”

    The problem with that kind of thinking is it disregards the Dark Ages that the West fell into for almost 1,000 years from about the 5th century until the 15th…People even forgot how to read and write. That’s why so much of Christianity’s founding stories could only be illustrated through stained glass windows in church since no one could understand or articulate these things to people who fell into illiteracy when they went into essential survivalist mode…

    Not to mention that we might simply die out this go around as there are no guarantees we are going to come out of another complete collapse again.

    The entire world could be dominated through the 5,000 year old civilizations that are still hanging around today overpopulating their parts of the world and essentially giving their people not much in the way of representative government or prosperity. They will now have the tools, created by us in the West, instant internet/cell phone communications, air travel, electricity, etc., to impose themselves upon the entire world.

    It doesn’t sound like a very bright future ahead for most of mankind, my friend.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    The problem with that kind of thinking is it disregards the Dark Ages that the West fell into for almost 1,000 years from about the 5th century until the 15th…People even forgot how to read and write.
     
    The problem with this is that the ancient world was hardly civilised. Unless you consider the Romans to have been civilised? That's setting the bar pretty low. The Middle Ages were in most ways more civilised than the Roman Empire.

    The 1,000 year Dark Ages is a myth.
  100. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Yeah, and so much room to grow.

    We just kind of gave up. But 1950s style comfy suburban living is not the end of the potential for the white race. It's just the beginning. I think alot of the "despair" comes from that. We're not growing anymore. But the idea that we've reached our pinnacle is totally false.

    If all whites were like me (and had the same mindset from 200 years ago) we would already have white moon colonies and be sending men to Mars. Instead, we are focused on worldly pleasures. Most whites spend their time drinking, doing drugs, playing video games, sleeping around, instead of focusing on advancement.

    Well we have the luxury to do that now…not in itself a bad thing to have a lot of leisure time it depends upon how you use it…drugging, drinking, spreading STDs all over the place, no. But you could devote it to research in science or medicine, creating art, music, etc.,everybody doesn’t have to be a millionaire to do these things.

    Actually I understand many of our advances in fish farming came from hobbyists who own small aquarium setups and breed their own fish for pleasure or sale to others like themselves…

    Additionally we now have a Space Force. It’s a small start but I hope to see the US building a research communications/recreational center eventually on the moon (which the tourists flying up there can finance part of) and expanding into space mining and who knows what other industries can open up.

    So we still can do much. We haven’t reached our pinnacle, as you say, yet. But we will never reach it if people keep talking about us heading into another Dark Ages that we might or might not recover from in 1,000 or so years.

  101. @Toronto Russian

    The big concern is that pressure might be brought to bear. Now Grandpa, you really are tired of living aren’t you? Well this nice doctor is going to help you. And just think how happy your children will be to see your suffering ended, and of course to start carving up your estate.
     
    Hindu widows were pressured to burn themselves alive, then the British colonial administration began to hang those who pressured them and it stopped.

    Euthanasia applicants must be evaluated by psychologists, and I think it's difficult to convincingly lie that you want to die when you really don't. If lying is disclosed punish asshole relatives, that's it.

    Euthanasia applicants must be evaluated by psychologists,

    Maybe by this psychiatrist and others who think like him?

    https://internationalpsychoanalysis.net/on-having-whiteness-with-donald-moss-at-nypsi/

    Excerpt:

    “This presentation will focus on Whiteness as a condition one first acquires and then one has– a malignant, parasitic-like, condition. The condition is malignant because it spreads/metastasizes, targeting an ever-widening sphere of objects. It is parasitic in that it is contagious, passed on by other infected people.

    Dr. Moss and his followers would undoubtedly find all (white) euthanasia applicants suitable for the launching into eternity.

    Anyone here who’s interested in his ideas can sign up for his seminar.

  102. @AaronB
    In a good society peoples all quirks and peculiarities would be accommodated. There would be no one fits all solution.

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing. Some people like to work really hard, and some like to live a more contemplative life.

    If large chunks of the population can't live the life they want, you get perpetual revolt and unrest of some kind.

    I think pre-modern societies were much better at accommodating the full range of human types, from monk to soldier, hermit to rich merchant.

    That being said, I do wonder if you and Liza have had the chance to live for long in the kind of townscapes I have in mind. I suspect you would change your mind at least somewhat.

    But maybe not - people really are different, and that's fine.

    You and Liza can have your big, spacious housing

    I don’t want any such thing. They would be too much work to maintain and clean, etc. and is a waste of natural resources to build in the first place. You and I disagree as to what constitutes human-scale, that’s all. It sounds to me like you want people stuffed cheek by jowl into tiny apartments so long as they can also have that vibrant entertainment, art, squares, plazas and “culture” nearby. And let’s not forget the funky shops and coffee joints.

    No back and front yard, no vegetable garden, no bit of grass, no trees, no small animals? That’s my idea of hell.

    Your idea of human-scale is necessitated by overpopulation, not any normal person’s first choice. Of course, I’d never prevent anyone living the way you say is best. Only that I don’t want the government telling me I can’t have a few acres for my family and me with tax breaks for leaving a portion of the property completely alone as a home for wildlife and native plant growth.

  103. @dfordoom

    As Steve Sailer has noted, the white man and the red man are increasingly behaving like defeated peoples, their existences characterized by rising rates of depression, directionless, substance abuse, and suicide.
     
    I very very strongly disagree. Sailer is wrong because he can't get beyond his obsession with race.

    That might apply to the white working class, and it also applies to the working class in general. It does not apply to whites in general because whites are not a monolithic entity.

    How many white CEOs and corporate lawyers and senior bureaucrats and publishers and academics are behaving like defeated peoples? The answer is none. They're behaving like conquerors.

    For the ten millionth time, everything is not about race. This is about the rich (who are mostly white) kicking poor people when they're down.

    Are they behaving like conquerors relative to how they were behaving a generation ago? There seems to have been a lot of anecdotal evidence of 1%er suicide (white, not black) as of late and the Xanaxed SWPL woman has become a stereotype in the last decade. I know that’s a suboptimal way to gather impressions to put it mildly, so disabuse me of the notion.

  104. @dfordoom

    When I read thoughtful and intelligent white commenters like dfordoom and Intelligent Dasein, I notice the tenacity of their gloomy and despairing outlook, and the way they resist any optimism anyone tries to inject in them. I notice they completely reject my fundamentally optimistic attitude.
     
    What intrigues me is the fact that so many on the Dissident Right are gloomy and despairing about things that seem to me to be nonsensical. For example there is constant wailing and gnashing of teeth over the idea that the Republicans will never win another election ever all because of immigration, just as there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in Britain over the fact that the massive immigration under Tony Blair's government guaranteed a permanent Labour majority.

    But in fact the Tories in Britain have just won four straight elections. Labour is in chaos and looks unlikely to have any chance of winning an election at any time in the foreseeable future. In the US the Democrats are in complete disarray. Never before in history has the Right enjoyed such complete political ascendancy.

    Where I differ from the Dissident Right is that I think that the ascendancy of the Right is a very bad thing. That's why I'm gloomy and despondent. But Dissident Rightists should be overjoyed that the Right just keeps on winning elections.

    The idea that immigration has made it impossible for Republicans or Tories to win elections is clearly nonsense.

    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be… uncorrelated.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be… uncorrelated.
     
    That's because the things that matter to people here (like halting immigration and not fighting endless wars) don't matter at all to 95% of the population.

    Most Americans think Invade the World, Invite the World is a fantastic idea.

    Parties of the Right win elections (and at the moment they win most elections) because they concentrate on the things people actually want - money and war.
  105. I read that as “Moral Support for Race Suicide”

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Oh dear, I've really stepped in it this time!
  106. @nymom
    "Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn’t mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead."

    The problem with that kind of thinking is it disregards the Dark Ages that the West fell into for almost 1,000 years from about the 5th century until the 15th...People even forgot how to read and write. That's why so much of Christianity's founding stories could only be illustrated through stained glass windows in church since no one could understand or articulate these things to people who fell into illiteracy when they went into essential survivalist mode...

    Not to mention that we might simply die out this go around as there are no guarantees we are going to come out of another complete collapse again.

    The entire world could be dominated through the 5,000 year old civilizations that are still hanging around today overpopulating their parts of the world and essentially giving their people not much in the way of representative government or prosperity. They will now have the tools, created by us in the West, instant internet/cell phone communications, air travel, electricity, etc., to impose themselves upon the entire world.

    It doesn't sound like a very bright future ahead for most of mankind, my friend.

    The problem with that kind of thinking is it disregards the Dark Ages that the West fell into for almost 1,000 years from about the 5th century until the 15th…People even forgot how to read and write.

    The problem with this is that the ancient world was hardly civilised. Unless you consider the Romans to have been civilised? That’s setting the bar pretty low. The Middle Ages were in most ways more civilised than the Roman Empire.

    The 1,000 year Dark Ages is a myth.

    • Disagree: iffen
  107. @Audacious Epigone
    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be... uncorrelated.

    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be… uncorrelated.

    That’s because the things that matter to people here (like halting immigration and not fighting endless wars) don’t matter at all to 95% of the population.

    Most Americans think Invade the World, Invite the World is a fantastic idea.

    Parties of the Right win elections (and at the moment they win most elections) because they concentrate on the things people actually want – money and war.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • Replies: @John Arthur
    Agreed dfordoom.
    People may not some wars, and they may not like some immigrants, but overall they want war and immigrants.
    The dissident right has to make a real concerted case, with facts not frogs, but the chance of a politican having the guts to say the truth, articulated well, not like Trump, is rare. So the Dissident right continues to lose.
    However, they have been doing good in Eastern Europe, so perhaps things are improving.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    For five years now, Republicans have consistently listed immigration as the most important issue to them--above the economy, health care, and terrorism. Compared to a decade, the change is astounding.

    Immigration tends to come in third or fourth among the population as a whole. Most Americans want immigration reduced, and when stagflation hits, they're really going to want it reduced.
  108. @dfordoom

    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be… uncorrelated.
     
    That's because the things that matter to people here (like halting immigration and not fighting endless wars) don't matter at all to 95% of the population.

    Most Americans think Invade the World, Invite the World is a fantastic idea.

    Parties of the Right win elections (and at the moment they win most elections) because they concentrate on the things people actually want - money and war.

    Agreed dfordoom.
    People may not some wars, and they may not like some immigrants, but overall they want war and immigrants.
    The dissident right has to make a real concerted case, with facts not frogs, but the chance of a politican having the guts to say the truth, articulated well, not like Trump, is rare. So the Dissident right continues to lose.
    However, they have been doing good in Eastern Europe, so perhaps things are improving.

  109. @dfordoom
    It would be much more interesting to see a breakdown by class. I'm guessing that middle-class people overwhelmingly support doctor-assisted suicide (and probably hope it will encourage more working-class people to kill themselves).

    And I'm guessing that working-class people would be mostly opposed to doctor-assisted suicide, seeing it (correctly) as likely to be used to encourage them to kill themselves.

    Another issue that has no real connection at all with race.

    Less than $50k: 48% support
    $50k-$100k: 61% support
    $100k+: 66% support

    That’s not broken down by race, either, so a lot of the explanation is racial but probably not all of it.

  110. @JImbobla
    A little bottle of calibration gas, nitrogen would work very well, plastic trash bag, duct tape. If you need instructions, forget the above; step in front of a bus.

    I understand you’re just having a little fun with it, but stepping front of a bus is a horrible thing to do. The innocent bus driver didn’t do anything to deserve the guilt of having accidentally killed someone. If you’re going to take your own life, don’t involve anyone else and make it look like an accident.

  111. @German_reader

    It is entirely possible to be in favour of assisted suicide (voluntary euthanasia)
     
    I'm torn on that subject, because on the one hand I can see the case for assisted suicide (the cult of Christ-like suffering some Christians are promoting is very alien to me), but on the other hand there might well be a slippery slope towards putting pressure on vulnerable people to let themselves be euthanized. Given the demographic problems of all developed countries, it's not hard to imagine a future consensus that the old and the infirm are a burden on society and should have the decency to just die.
    I'm not getting into a discussion about eugenics, have work to do anyway, sorry.

    Slippery slope indeed. It’s supposed to be difficult to be diagnosed with ADHD, or to get physician certification for eligibility under the Family Medical Leave Act. It’s not, though, because if you want the diagnosis and Dr. Hibert won’t give it to you, you go down the road to Dr. Nick and get it from him.

  112. @obwandiyag
    Class not race.

    Exactly.

    This whole divide-and-rule website is a sheepdog for sweeping up peripheral wingers and ensuring that they keep whingeing on about irrelevancies and never ever get near the true and only issue, "Wha de money went?"

    And as soon as you mention the goddam rich who belong a la lanterne and nowhere else, they get all snippy with you in their little childish ways. They think the rich are their buddies. It's sweet. They're so loving.

    Because they simply do not know on which side their stupid bread is buttered.

    Just as there are the deserving and the undeserving poor, there are the deserving and the undeserving rich.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
    "Deserving rich"?

    Teehee.

    Kind of like "military intelligence."

    Or "jumbo shrimp"

    Or "happy marriage."

    A nonexistent state invented purely for linguistic symmetry.
  113. @ThreeCranes

    "But at the end of it all, either a person owns themselves, or they don’t. And if they do (own themselves), they can dispose of themselves as they see fit."
     
    Or, as Camus put it; "There is but one serious philosophical question, and that is suicide."

    Sisyphus had a reason to live. If he’d have understood that, he could’ve been content.

  114. @Rosie

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.

    Which makes it a question of values.
     
    I don't think this is exactly true. A minimally decent standard of living is, to some extent, determined by the larger society, and that limits a person's choices in life. These third-world people often live in dwellings that would be illegal here.

    Careful not to set the libertarians loose on this one. There are a lot of regulations in the West that putatively exist for the benefit of the poor but that actually make their standard of living much worse.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @silviosilver
    How often have you checked out opposing points of view on this issue?

    Imagine you read a socialist economic analysis that claimed that claimed welfare not only 'worked' but made everybody richer. Imagine further that, perhaps to your surprise, you found the argument convincing. Would you just leave it that and proclaim agreement with the argument, or would you investigate critiques of it?
  115. @Mr. XYZ
    Is there a significant positive correlation between this and the lack of religiosity? I believe that you previously posted some GSS data that showed that blacks are more religious than other US racial and ethnic groups--so, it would make sense for blacks to be more anti-suicide than other US racial and ethnic groups are.

    This survey doesn’t include data on religiosity but that is probably correct (though it doesn’t hold on abortion–blacks are more religious and also more pro-choice than whites).

    • Replies: @iffen
    blacks are more religious and also more pro-choice than whites).

    Most blacks come from a Protestant tradition and until about 50 years ago or so, most Protestants, black or white, didn't give a flip about abortion.
  116. @Dumbo

    If people can be happy with little until they find out they can get more, that shows that how much they actually have isn’t what’s determining their happiness.
     
    You know, strange at it sounds, I'm going to agree with Aaron B on that one. Material riches, after a certain level, don't really make people happier. I could link studies, but, it's just common sense really. Of course achieving a certain level of comfort is good, but in a way it's liberating to find out quite how much you can live without.

    It's true that poor people in the slums tend to be happier and more optimistic than middle-class fellows, but that may be a) because they are dumber, or b) because they don't live the dilemma of the middle-class: constantly afraid to fall down and get poor, but knowing they will never be really rich.

    The West has much to feel proud of, but current tech-consumerist culture is not one of those things.

    Also, I used to be a doom and gloom type, but now I think this way: the West is dead. Its decadence went from the French Revolution until the First World War. The rest (Second World War, 60s, multiculturalism) were just the spasm of a dying man.

    Now, accepting that it is dead is liberating in a way. You don't need to "fight for the survival of the West", which seems like a desperate cause. Instead, you can create the roots for something. Keep the good and throw out the bad. Ancient Rome died, but something else came after, and in the end some legacy of Rome still remains. The West as we know it is dead. It doesn't mean that Christianity, art, literature, the white people that created it, etc, are dead.

    I find a convenient shorthand of our civilization is Greece->Rome->Christendom->Enlightenment->Whatever comes next.

  117. @AaronB
    What about Medieval towns and villages. They always struck me as ideal environments minus some of the more extreme filth.

    Small, human scale housing, like hobbit houses, lots of squares and plazas, statues and artistic embellishments - not just functionality. Markets that are teeming with life and full of activity. Streets that are winding and narrow and unplanned, small curious alleyways.

    And outside the walls, real countryside, fields and farms, gradually shading into the wild lands, where wolves, foxes, and bears lived.

    Strikes me as paradise.

    I can see wanting to live in a farmhouse between the town and the wilderness, and regularly visit both - and perhaps that would be my own preference, at least now.

    But the American way seems to go against human nature. Have you ever been to Europe or Asia? What did you think, if yes? It may be hard to appreciate what living in a so called ant hill would be like if you haven't experienced it.

    Even today, most Americans identify “small town” as the community type they’d most ideally like to live in.

    • Replies: @Liza
    Even today, most Americans identify “small town” as the community type they’d most ideally like to live in.

    Small size of center doesn't actually indicate community. Community ideally is a grouping of people, living in the same place, who have much in common, particularly ethnic background, religion and language. If that small town you say people prefer is multicultural, multilingual, multiracial - what would be the point.

    However, since that doesn't exist anymore, people desperately cling to whatever other kind of community they can somehow identify with, such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world. For example, diabetes community, transgender community, orchid growing community, softball community, feminist community, impeach Trump community, gunlovers community, poverty community, unhappy & want the government to do something about it community, etc. You get my drift, I am sure. And I know what you meant.
  118. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Again Audacious, I must congratulate you on your success in attracting this webzine's faithful horde of communists, militant atheists, blank-slaters, Jewish chauvinists, assorted Euro-trash from the peanut gallery, and generally anti-heritage American types. It's really quite a discussion now: What's the fastest way to get rid of YT!

    Keep it coming boys, we need to figure this thing out!

    Into the fray come also pro-lifers, nationalists, libertarians, heritage Americans, and Stoics.

    This is what the elusive marketplace of ideas is supposed to look like.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm sure the general contractor for the Tower of Babble had a similar thought when he gazed upon his workforce.
  119. @Hippopotamusdrome
    I read that as "Moral Support for Race Suicide"

    Oh dear, I’ve really stepped in it this time!

  120. @dfordoom

    The right winning elections and the right winning on the things that matter often appear to be… uncorrelated.
     
    That's because the things that matter to people here (like halting immigration and not fighting endless wars) don't matter at all to 95% of the population.

    Most Americans think Invade the World, Invite the World is a fantastic idea.

    Parties of the Right win elections (and at the moment they win most elections) because they concentrate on the things people actually want - money and war.

    For five years now, Republicans have consistently listed immigration as the most important issue to them–above the economy, health care, and terrorism. Compared to a decade, the change is astounding.

    Immigration tends to come in third or fourth among the population as a whole. Most Americans want immigration reduced, and when stagflation hits, they’re really going to want it reduced.

  121. @Audacious Epigone
    This survey doesn't include data on religiosity but that is probably correct (though it doesn't hold on abortion--blacks are more religious and also more pro-choice than whites).

    blacks are more religious and also more pro-choice than whites).

    Most blacks come from a Protestant tradition and until about 50 years ago or so, most Protestants, black or white, didn’t give a flip about abortion.

  122. @Audacious Epigone
    Careful not to set the libertarians loose on this one. There are a lot of regulations in the West that putatively exist for the benefit of the poor but that actually make their standard of living much worse.

    How often have you checked out opposing points of view on this issue?

    Imagine you read a socialist economic analysis that claimed that claimed welfare not only ‘worked’ but made everybody richer. Imagine further that, perhaps to your surprise, you found the argument convincing. Would you just leave it that and proclaim agreement with the argument, or would you investigate critiques of it?

  123. @Audacious Epigone
    Even today, most Americans identify "small town" as the community type they'd most ideally like to live in.

    Even today, most Americans identify “small town” as the community type they’d most ideally like to live in.

    Small size of center doesn’t actually indicate community. Community ideally is a grouping of people, living in the same place, who have much in common, particularly ethnic background, religion and language. If that small town you say people prefer is multicultural, multilingual, multiracial – what would be the point.

    However, since that doesn’t exist anymore, people desperately cling to whatever other kind of community they can somehow identify with, such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world. For example, diabetes community, transgender community, orchid growing community, softball community, feminist community, impeach Trump community, gunlovers community, poverty community, unhappy & want the government to do something about it community, etc. You get my drift, I am sure. And I know what you meant.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    However, since that doesn’t exist anymore, people desperately cling to whatever other kind of community they can somehow identify with, such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world.
     
    Yes, good point.

    So maybe identity politics is to some extent merely a symptom of something that had already gone wrong with our society. Capitalism, industrialisation and urbanisation undermined traditional communities so people were naturally looking for alternatives to give them that sense of belonging.

    such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world. For example, diabetes community, transgender community, orchid growing community, softball community, feminist community, impeach Trump community, gunlovers community, poverty community, unhappy & want the government to do something about it community, etc.
     
    Of course, playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, these alternative models of community are not always necessarily a bad thing. Being a member of the orchid growing community or the softball community might actually be quite healthy. Maybe this process started out as something healthy and innocuous and even positive. The problems arose when identity groups based on grievances started to appear (or were manufactured).

    So artificial identity groups based on common interests may be a good thing, but artificial identity groups based on grievances or political agendas are a bad thing.
  124. @Audacious Epigone
    Into the fray come also pro-lifers, nationalists, libertarians, heritage Americans, and Stoics.

    This is what the elusive marketplace of ideas is supposed to look like.

    I’m sure the general contractor for the Tower of Babble had a similar thought when he gazed upon his workforce.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    If I had to bet, I'd bet the contemporary tower gets destroyed. These discussions are how I pray.
  125. @Liza
    Even today, most Americans identify “small town” as the community type they’d most ideally like to live in.

    Small size of center doesn't actually indicate community. Community ideally is a grouping of people, living in the same place, who have much in common, particularly ethnic background, religion and language. If that small town you say people prefer is multicultural, multilingual, multiracial - what would be the point.

    However, since that doesn't exist anymore, people desperately cling to whatever other kind of community they can somehow identify with, such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world. For example, diabetes community, transgender community, orchid growing community, softball community, feminist community, impeach Trump community, gunlovers community, poverty community, unhappy & want the government to do something about it community, etc. You get my drift, I am sure. And I know what you meant.

    However, since that doesn’t exist anymore, people desperately cling to whatever other kind of community they can somehow identify with, such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world.

    Yes, good point.

    So maybe identity politics is to some extent merely a symptom of something that had already gone wrong with our society. Capitalism, industrialisation and urbanisation undermined traditional communities so people were naturally looking for alternatives to give them that sense of belonging.

    such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world. For example, diabetes community, transgender community, orchid growing community, softball community, feminist community, impeach Trump community, gunlovers community, poverty community, unhappy & want the government to do something about it community, etc.

    Of course, playing Devil’s Advocate for a moment, these alternative models of community are not always necessarily a bad thing. Being a member of the orchid growing community or the softball community might actually be quite healthy. Maybe this process started out as something healthy and innocuous and even positive. The problems arose when identity groups based on grievances started to appear (or were manufactured).

    So artificial identity groups based on common interests may be a good thing, but artificial identity groups based on grievances or political agendas are a bad thing.

    • Replies: @iffen
    but artificial identity groups based on grievances or political agendas are a bad thing.

    It's all a race to be the most victimized.

    We need to go back to ostracizing and blaming the victim. :)
  126. @dfordoom

    However, since that doesn’t exist anymore, people desperately cling to whatever other kind of community they can somehow identify with, such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world.
     
    Yes, good point.

    So maybe identity politics is to some extent merely a symptom of something that had already gone wrong with our society. Capitalism, industrialisation and urbanisation undermined traditional communities so people were naturally looking for alternatives to give them that sense of belonging.

    such as: sufferers of one kind of disease or another, sexual orientation, hobby, or complaint about the world. For example, diabetes community, transgender community, orchid growing community, softball community, feminist community, impeach Trump community, gunlovers community, poverty community, unhappy & want the government to do something about it community, etc.
     
    Of course, playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, these alternative models of community are not always necessarily a bad thing. Being a member of the orchid growing community or the softball community might actually be quite healthy. Maybe this process started out as something healthy and innocuous and even positive. The problems arose when identity groups based on grievances started to appear (or were manufactured).

    So artificial identity groups based on common interests may be a good thing, but artificial identity groups based on grievances or political agendas are a bad thing.

    but artificial identity groups based on grievances or political agendas are a bad thing.

    It’s all a race to be the most victimized.

    We need to go back to ostracizing and blaming the victim. 🙂

  127. Of course, playing Devil’s Advocate for a moment, these alternative models of community are not always necessarily a bad thing. Being a member of the orchid growing community or the softball community might actually be quite healthy. Maybe this process started out as something healthy and innocuous and even positive. The problems arose when identity groups based on grievances started to appear (or were manufactured).

    Oh, I’ve nothing against folks joining clubs, etc. because they have a common interest, such as flower growing or whatever hobby you like. But whether it is something positive like that, or an excuse to get more public funding, my gripe is the use of the word “community”. Use of the word “community” implies that everyone, absolutely everyone, especially when they use that term in the news, who does a certain thing, or has a certain grievance or problem (diabetes/cancer, etc.), thinks in exactly the same way about their field of interest or their claim on the public’s sympathy. I know heaumeaux who have no use for gay pride, for one example, and they don’t like being told they are part of the “gay community”.

    Thanks for replying to my comments. Er…are you and me members of the Online Commenting Community?

    .

    We need to go back to ostracizing and blaming the victim.

    Maybe you were joking, but I hope you are serious. Right now, as we speak, Harvey Weinstein is going to trial. Where there is smoke there is fire so I am sure he has been a real bastard in his approach to females going to him for a job, but those wimminz bear some responsibility as well. Why didn’t they go running to the police after all those rapes and sexual assaults is what I’d like to know. Oh, because they were scared for their careers? Spare me. No one ever told them not to go alone to a man’s hotel room?

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Where there is smoke there is fire so I am sure he has been a real bastard in his approach to females going to him for a job, but those wimminz bear some responsibility as well. Why didn’t they go running to the police after all those rapes and sexual assaults is what I’d like to know. Oh, because they were scared for their careers? Spare me. No one ever told them not to go alone to a man’s hotel room?
     
    Agreed.

    Sometimes victims really are innocent. And sometimes they create their own victimhood through stupidity and short-sightedness. And sometimes they were willing participants who later discovered they could gain something by playing the victim card.
  128. @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm sure the general contractor for the Tower of Babble had a similar thought when he gazed upon his workforce.

    If I had to bet, I’d bet the contemporary tower gets destroyed. These discussions are how I pray.

  129. @Liza

    Of course, playing Devil’s Advocate for a moment, these alternative models of community are not always necessarily a bad thing. Being a member of the orchid growing community or the softball community might actually be quite healthy. Maybe this process started out as something healthy and innocuous and even positive. The problems arose when identity groups based on grievances started to appear (or were manufactured).
     
    Oh, I've nothing against folks joining clubs, etc. because they have a common interest, such as flower growing or whatever hobby you like. But whether it is something positive like that, or an excuse to get more public funding, my gripe is the use of the word "community". Use of the word "community" implies that everyone, absolutely everyone, especially when they use that term in the news, who does a certain thing, or has a certain grievance or problem (diabetes/cancer, etc.), thinks in exactly the same way about their field of interest or their claim on the public's sympathy. I know heaumeaux who have no use for gay pride, for one example, and they don't like being told they are part of the "gay community".

    Thanks for replying to my comments. Er...are you and me members of the Online Commenting Community?

    @iffen.

    We need to go back to ostracizing and blaming the victim.
     

    Maybe you were joking, but I hope you are serious. Right now, as we speak, Harvey Weinstein is going to trial. Where there is smoke there is fire so I am sure he has been a real bastard in his approach to females going to him for a job, but those wimminz bear some responsibility as well. Why didn't they go running to the police after all those rapes and sexual assaults is what I'd like to know. Oh, because they were scared for their careers? Spare me. No one ever told them not to go alone to a man's hotel room?

    Where there is smoke there is fire so I am sure he has been a real bastard in his approach to females going to him for a job, but those wimminz bear some responsibility as well. Why didn’t they go running to the police after all those rapes and sexual assaults is what I’d like to know. Oh, because they were scared for their careers? Spare me. No one ever told them not to go alone to a man’s hotel room?

    Agreed.

    Sometimes victims really are innocent. And sometimes they create their own victimhood through stupidity and short-sightedness. And sometimes they were willing participants who later discovered they could gain something by playing the victim card.

    • Agree: Liza
  130. @Audacious Epigone
    Just as there are the deserving and the undeserving poor, there are the deserving and the undeserving rich.

    “Deserving rich”?

    Teehee.

    Kind of like “military intelligence.”

    Or “jumbo shrimp”

    Or “happy marriage.”

    A nonexistent state invented purely for linguistic symmetry.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS