Title, as he hasn't posted in 3 days and the man almost lives on the site
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (75)
sorted by:
No, he got banned for declaring that women (an entire demographic) were working as a cabal to control the world. Not just one, not just feminists, not just female teachers. All of those would have been fine. But, he didn't choose to do that, and focused on declaring an enemy class as an enemy cabal.
It's easy not to violate the rule, plenty of people know exactly how to avoid it because they do it all the time. In fact, Imp knows exactly how to do it, and actively refuses. That's his choice.
If he said 99.9% of women were in such a cabal, or 99.8%, or 99.7%... when does that go from violating this """""""""rule""""""""", to being in the clear?
If it's so important and so dependent on his naming ALL women, specifically every single woman, then lets ask him if my mom is not involved. If he says no, would you not either have to unban him, or else, admit to at least some degree the utter gatekeeping foolishness of the rule?
I say this knowing full well he might condemn my mother, but you understand the point I'm trying to make
I do understand the point your trying to make, but this isn't about perfect quantity, it's about declaring women to be a bourgeoisie, and the need for a sectarian class war against them.
That traps people in the identitarian framework which perpetuates the Leftist metanarrative. Sticking to specifics, rather than an applied historical dialectic means no rule gets violated, and you stay out of they hyper-reality of ideological sectarianism that the Left always exploits.
I have to keep bitching, I don't mean to be outright disrespectful to you in a personally attacky sort of way but separately I very much mean to treat your arguments that way. I think much of what you have mentioned here is illogical, amoral, or a philosophical dead end of one kind or another.
First it seems you are encouraging people to use double speak and avoiding saying what they actually mean, specifically as a show of compliance. I could spend all day giving this the "leftist metawhatever" treatment that you have presented me regarding Imp but I'll just say this is morally reprehensible in my opinion because I associate it with the USSR which I am biased against.
Next, it sounds to me like you are arguing the hypothetical suggestion of the existence or operation of any class of wealthy people in general is leftist metanarrative, and that on this basis, we have a social responsibility not to discuss the possibility. That is morally wrong and also factually incorrect. It is objectively true that wealthy people exist, and that each person has an identity, and that people within identity groups express in-group preference.
Even more nextly... do you reckon any of us can name an actual left wing forum where Imp would be welcome to attack all women on the basis you've presented here? (Being that since "woman" is an identity, and attacks on identity are sectarian, and leftists exploit this, it is therefore fundamentally leftist)?
My last bit of bitching is: does left wing thought exceed the limits of free speech on KIA2? In order to communicate here, should we only say right wing things? But not tooo right wing, since that's actually leftist again? Is there a chart somewhere to help miscreant posters identify the allowable portion of the spectrum of human thought?
Feel free.
("First") I'm not actually insinuating that they use double-speak, but they normally do, it's just not super relevant to most removals. I know the regulars opinions on certain issues, and I also know when they are intentionally clouding their language to appear more moderate. So yeah, it happens, but when they moderate, it doesn't typically violate the rules.
Hell, for some reason ConPro et all still come here and say "they" and (((them))) as if they can't just say jews. It's a little goofy.
("Next") No, but I can see your confusion because you're probably not understanding what I mean by an applied Marxist metanarrative. There's a structure to it:
Rule 16 is designed to hit most if not all of those simultaneously.
More over, those last four are literally always false. They are never true. No cabal encompasses an entire demographic, no matter what demographic you are using: race, age, ethnicity, religion, nationality, class, wealth, sex, etc. No demographic is united under a single collectivist mindset. It can't be, people are simply not mental slaves to inter-temporal and abstract collectivism: a rich man in Nigeria today, and rich man in 14th century England do not think the same. They do not have what the left calls "class solidarity". No demographic is innately evil. Pick any demographic, no demographic exists which is inherently morally repugnant. Being a billionaire is not immoral. That demographic is not the cause of your personal problems. You're car didn't fail to start this morning because of The Patriarchy.
And none of those meet that meta-narrative. For example, even though white Americans have the lowest in-group preference of any American Racial demographic, there are still whites that hate themselves and do not want the white race to continue. The White Supremacist Cisheteronormative Patriarchy is the cabal those whites are accused of supporting. It is not true, but the accusation is made that they are racist, well past the point of their death. Simultaneously, black Americans have the highest in-group preference. But this is not evidence of a black cabal. Even black racialists themselves engage in in-fighting and target black 'race traitors' who are not succumbing to a cabal that they are trying to create.
("Even More Nextly") Leftism seeks conquest and changes itself to fit new environments. Imp would be welcome in a Leftist environment if they had one that worked like that at the moment. In previous decades, and in other areas, his attitude was much closer to the normal. There was an ad for a candy bar in Romania (which under Communism was the only candy bar allowed). They had a woman dressed up like Misty from Pokemon, and all of the sudden Nicolae Ceaușescu walks in and condemns her dress for being counter-revolutionary. She is abducted by the state, forced to dress in Communist Youth clothing, and thrown into the street. Leftism is in favor of acting like a slut in our country, and in our time, but that will change. There is no consistent principles within Leftism.
Only such that it does not violate Rule 16. It's a fucking major stumbling block to their argumentation. It's 4"x4"x10' strip of concrete in the middle of the walkway. They're forced to argue around their claims, but their central claims would very likely violate Rule 16. Rule 16 means they can never argue the White Supremacist Cisheteronormative Patriarchy, or even just The Patriarchy. They are forced to argue only at topical levels about 'men needing to be taught not to rape', and having those specific topical issues challenged directly. They can't defer to The Patriarchy as an avenue of escape when the conversation doesn't go their way, and they can be called out for being the bigoted trash they are with an embarrassing removal.
We don't see it here on Scored that much, but I have had to do it on Reddit, and it really throws them for a fucking loop. Their fundamental presuppositions are axiomatically rejected, and they typically don't have any counter. Even if they did, the counter is not tolerated. So, they channelized back into the topical argument, or they have to abandon the whole thing altogether. When given that choice, they typically just give the ground and don't come back. It actually works. All that's left are the Haterjuiced style trolls who continue to operate within the rules, and make for excellent engagement with opposing views because they are constantly stuck on-topic.
And to be clear, I hold the losest opinion on "Id Pol" than basically anyone who's done anything with KIA. The old moderators on half-kia would have fucking purged the place going anywhere near one-tenth of what I allow. So, this is a departure from what KIA and KIA2 allowed because it's more lenient.
Nah, it's more the thing where Imp talks about women the same way the 1488 people talk about minorities, which is the same way that leftists talk about white people, which I get why Dom doesn't want any of that shit around, Imp's thing is different from the other two, and at least while people may disagree with how he views things, I can actually see the problems he states in modern society (TRP is literally founded on being a more sane version of Imp, and Imp used to use TRP until he himself decided trying to sleep with women isn't worth it because false accusations). Lefties hating white people is the problem with modern society and I can't tell if all the 1488 people are feds or not.
But why the fuck is it the rule? That's the reason people are complaining. Honestly, we should have a weekly stickied thread where rule 16 doesn't exist and it's a free for all
Because a right-wing space is either explicitly right-wing, or it subverts to left-wing.
Rule 16 denies the application of a Marxist historical dialectic as part of an argument. The Left have always blamed some enemy class "bourgeoise" for the "oppression" of some victim class "proletariat". This manufactured hyper-reality generates the necessary sectarianism for a forceful revolution against the standards. The fundamental purpose of that narrative is to overthrow the order to establish a new Leftist one in it's place.
The Left uses it against any chosen group: the rich, the kulaks, the peasants, the rurals, the whites, the men, the jews, the blacks, the christans, the foreign, the indigenous, the whomever. It doesn't matter how, but as long as the dialectic is applied, it allows for the sectarians to howl that there is oppression, and such oppression must be met with violence and the imposition of a new socialist standard that brings "justice" for the victim class that are represented by the vangaurd, whom assume the role of a dictatorship of the proletariat.
This happens 100% of the time.
It's not going to be a free for all. And it's also not going to be containment of Leftism. It is going to be a thread where anyone who doesn't agree with the narrative, will get berated out, and then they will complain horrifically that the thread is an evil containment vessel.
The purpose of rescinding Rule 16 is to attack the users and forum slide until this forum is also kept as the personal container for Leftist racialists. They have their own forums, and I've explicitly refused to engage in any sort of tit for tat with them on their turf. They do not want to leave anyone alone. They want conquest. They have no intention of an honest dialogue. Frankly, I suspect that a good portion of them are Useful Idiots of the Left, if not Leftists LARPing as Nazis anyway.
I honestly don't care about the 1488 dummies, as while I get why the ones who aren't feds believe what they do, I just think as you said, because the only way to get their way to a white ethnostate is using the power of the government to kick hundreds of millions of people out of the country, it'll just devolve into leftist authoritarianism in the end anyway.
I just feel like it's really fucking stupid that Imp keeps getting banned for the same shit over and over again when people here frequently say the exact same shit about "them" and get nothing. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that a large portion of the most passionate leftists are white women, Imp calls this out constantly and the 1488 people get in a rage about it and report him.
I personally would never report him because I think while he's way too extreme in his personal view, refusing to acknowledge that a massive portion of liberals are white women, simply because they're white is pretty bullshit. Those same 1488 people have a lot more in common with black conservatives than they do with white female liberals simply due to how they grew up, and I get that some of them think giving a liberal woman the dick is gonna cure the liberalism, if that was the case 100% of the time, the issue of trans kids wouldn't be a thing at all because it's the mothers that push it on their children most of the time.
IDK, I'm just annoyed that Imp's gone for another week just because either a liberal troll or a mad 1488er decided to report him on shit that isn't even that bad, and they regularly say worse and don't get reported for it.
TL;DR: I get why Rule 16 exists, I just think it's pretty fucking stupid to have to enforce it the way it is if it's really to prevent liberals from spamming how much they hate white people/their chosen oppressors, considering Haterjuiced and Jester don't post here anymore.