If anybody can use more of these peer reviewed red pills (or get them into the hands of prominent people to disseminate them) let me know. I have a bunch of them.
My favorite was a study where they showed participants one of two made-up news headlines. Headline A claimed a study had found that white people have higher IQ. Headline B claimed a study had found that black people have higher IQ.
They’d show a participant one headline, then ask them if it was credible. Then they’d say “just kidding, the opposite is true - do you think it’s credible now?”
Leftists were far, far more likely to believe blacks had higher IQ in both scenarios. Think about it: you show a Leftist a headline that says “white people are smart” and they say “I don’t believe that” then you tell them, “just kidding it’s blacks” and they say “oh okay, well now I believe it”
That was just amazing to me.
The problem with this plan is, who decides you’ve violated the constitution?
If you’re about to say a judge decides, stop and think: what happens when a judge says that Trumps border wall violates the constitution? What happens when a judge says that restricting abortion violates the constitution?
They voted
The elections are all fraudulent so who really knows what they voted for.
The bigger question for me is, how could this possibly be beneficial to the elites? How is this better for the elites than a peaceful society of high-IQ whites?
For sure. There’s a twitter account that posts examples of threats being made against trump and conservatives/republicans in general. People literally calling for all conservatives to be locked up.
Honestly it feels like we are actually in a civil war already. You know how wars change - they weren’t ready for trenches in wwi. They weren’t ready for the blitz in wwii. They weren’t ready for gorillas in Vietnam. The Cold War was unprecedented. It’s not much of a stretch to think the next war is fought through institutions/corporations and lawfare.
There were some reddit financial leaks that proved those orgs are running the website.
One crazy thing I remember is when Hillary collapsed trying to get into a van after a campaign appearance. For several hours, anyone who posted the video got banned, then suddenly, all the political subreddits seemed to be unmoderated - even to the point that threads in support of Trump would show up.
Someone figured it out: there must have been an "all hands" meeting where they tried to figure out their strategy with regard to the collapse video.
For several hours, we got an organic reddit ...then the meeting ended and the ghestapo returned. It was crazy.
I often wonder what it would be like if "the good guys" exerted that level of control.
I was hoping they would turn on white women.
So many white women will submit to it though. They'll prostrate themselves and say "yes, yes, you're right, I am privileged and I do deserve the violence I'm subjected to - and really, it's white men's fault that these black men are beating me"
That's different though because white people are a mindless pathogen that spreads and kills.
See, Starship Troopers is "fascist" because they dehumanize the gentile Arachnid refugees, and dehumanization is wrong!
BTW, never forget that white people have a virus in their brain
/s if it's needed.
As usual, leftists are the fascists here, by their own definitions.
The censorship on reddit is so fucked up now. There are a number of subreddits where certain word combinations are automatically and silently deleted. If you get past that hurdle, the mods will delete anything that goes against the narrative.
I just caught a ban in a thread about some random white guy saying something racist. I posted prominent, powerful, influential people saying the exact same thing about whites (because, if it's wrong to say "kill all jews" then it should be wrong to say "kill all whites") and they banned me.
...but, it took the mods two whole days, so a few people got to see my counterexample. In the future, the AI will ban me immediately.
And what's scary is that it creates this bubble where leftists have no fucking clue what the counterarguments are to their ideology.
worlds that you don't understand (and you subsequently damage)
This reminds me of a story I heard that illustrates one difference between a progressive and a conservative:
A progressive and a conservative are walking together through the woods. They come upon an open field. Running through the middle of the field is a fence, with a gate to one side.
They pause for a moment and try to figure out why this field would be partitioned this way. There appears to be no livestock or crops. Neither of them can see a reason for the field to exist. They both shrug their shoulders over the mystery.
The conservative then turns and walks toward the gate. He opens the gate, walks through, and closes it behind him. The progressive sets about demolishing the fence.
The moral of the story is that a progressive is too quick to destroy a thing. Their assumption is that it serves no valid purpose, or even that it's intentionally harmful - product of the "patriarchy" or whatever.
There’s definitely a critical mass below which a political commentator cannot survive without the big platforms (YouTube or a TV network). Molyneux was below the threshold.
One scary implication of this face is that it’s in the best interests of the leftist establishment to crush newcomers before they reach the threshold. I’m sure they’ve figured this one. I wonder how many great people were spotted by the algorithm as having a sharp upward trajectory and preemptively banned and the rest of us never know they existed.
“Authoritative sources” are the primary means of controlling the narrative. A black guy can mow down a crowd of peas while shouting “I’m doing this because I hate white people” and you won’t be able to mention that on Wikipedia even though you have the video. No “authoritative source” will mention it
Can you cite any cases where the cops have their guns trained on a guy, and yet the guy is fast enough to produce a weapon and get the first shot off?
I get what you’re saying about the general case: cops are holstered and a dude draws and fires before the cop can draw and fire. But once you’ve got a gun trained on them, I don’t see how you’d get the first shot off.
So what I’m saying is that the cops were safe and could have reacted more slowly
It's pretty much exactly what you said. But, what's interesting is that liberal whites are the only group with a negative in-group bias.
That is to say, it's totally normal for everyone to have some bias for people who look like them. But liberal whites are unique in that they're the only group who hates themselves.
https://files.catbox.moe/9cbo9s.jpg