Forwarded from Millennial Woes
Some people (only a very few, I emphasise) have taken exception to my defending the Ayatollah yesterday. He had (or has) a relationship with a mixed-race woman, and these people doubt that he is completely white himself.
Here's the thing. Unlike a lot of ideologically immaculate people in this movement, the Ayatollah has never, to my knowledge, harmed me. He has never spread rumours about me, tried to sabotage me, or encouraged others to disavow me. He has got on with his work and I have got on with mine. So when he is publicly attacked by the establishment, why should I not defend him? Because he is not perfect? Well, are we in a position to make "perfect" the enemy of "good"? Do we have that luxury? The answer is no, we do not. Apparently this needs to be spelled out for some people.
Of course, I myself am not immaculate. I have a past - more than half my life ago - that people dredge up to "explain" why I am not an ideological purist. In truth, the reason I am not an ideological purist is that I have a sense of proportion and realism. I recognise that what matters is the goal, and that being too fussy about the means will stop us from achieving the ends. Yes, there are going to be people who don't conform to the ideal, and there are going to be people with less-than-perfect pasts. Get over it and join the adult world: this is how life is.
The alternative is that all such people must be disavowed. That includes me, of course. I am - or least was - one of the most prominent people in this movement, someone trusted by many, someone who is (though I say so myself) productive and useful to this community. Yet, according to these spergs, I should be driven out. Really, how clueless and self-sabotaging can you be...?
There are people who join this movement but come to regret it, because of the exact antisocial attitude being demonstrated by a few voices over the last 24 hours. It's a purity-spiralling contingent of people who look for any reason to disavow others - like crabs in a bucket sniping at each other while our enemy watches and laughs. This antisocial attitude produces a nasty atmosphere that ordinary people find repugnant and demoralising. They are driven away, leaving the spergs to attack each other over which of them is the best Aryan incel. Just fucking nauseating.
These men no doubt consider themselves masculine, but their behaviour is very feminine. The goal is forgotten in favour of obsessing, like a prissy schoolgirl or a crazed menopausal schoolmarm, over a consensus and whether everyone is conforming to it. Men, which you aspire to be, do not behave like this.
The best example is Fuhrerious. In my chat, he declared he would never stop attacking the Ayatollah, and challenged me to ban him. I banned him. Even though he was still following me on multiple platforms and therefore clearly found my posts worthwhile, he took revenge by making several posts attacking me and my credibility. Again, very feminine behaviour - emotional, vengeful and inconsistent. This lack of self-reflection results in a person who is a liability, and I have learned to avoid such people like the plague.
I don't know what the Ayatollah's ethnic background is, and I don't much care. His work clearly benefits our cause and our community. Given those factors, he could be as black as the ace of spades and I would still support him. The very idea that somebody should work for our cause and then, when they are publicly mauled for doing so, we should punish them further by throwing them under the bus... is just so gormless I can hardly believe it.
What on earth are you people thinking? The penalty for being involved in our movement is already very high, but you want to make it even higher by denying people support from within the movement as well? Are you insane? Just how many useful people do you want to turn away? Just how antisocial an atmosphere do you want in this, a social enterprise? Just how much failure and dysfunction will you engender before you wise up? Get back in your mothers' basements, you fucking morons.
Here's the thing. Unlike a lot of ideologically immaculate people in this movement, the Ayatollah has never, to my knowledge, harmed me. He has never spread rumours about me, tried to sabotage me, or encouraged others to disavow me. He has got on with his work and I have got on with mine. So when he is publicly attacked by the establishment, why should I not defend him? Because he is not perfect? Well, are we in a position to make "perfect" the enemy of "good"? Do we have that luxury? The answer is no, we do not. Apparently this needs to be spelled out for some people.
Of course, I myself am not immaculate. I have a past - more than half my life ago - that people dredge up to "explain" why I am not an ideological purist. In truth, the reason I am not an ideological purist is that I have a sense of proportion and realism. I recognise that what matters is the goal, and that being too fussy about the means will stop us from achieving the ends. Yes, there are going to be people who don't conform to the ideal, and there are going to be people with less-than-perfect pasts. Get over it and join the adult world: this is how life is.
The alternative is that all such people must be disavowed. That includes me, of course. I am - or least was - one of the most prominent people in this movement, someone trusted by many, someone who is (though I say so myself) productive and useful to this community. Yet, according to these spergs, I should be driven out. Really, how clueless and self-sabotaging can you be...?
There are people who join this movement but come to regret it, because of the exact antisocial attitude being demonstrated by a few voices over the last 24 hours. It's a purity-spiralling contingent of people who look for any reason to disavow others - like crabs in a bucket sniping at each other while our enemy watches and laughs. This antisocial attitude produces a nasty atmosphere that ordinary people find repugnant and demoralising. They are driven away, leaving the spergs to attack each other over which of them is the best Aryan incel. Just fucking nauseating.
These men no doubt consider themselves masculine, but their behaviour is very feminine. The goal is forgotten in favour of obsessing, like a prissy schoolgirl or a crazed menopausal schoolmarm, over a consensus and whether everyone is conforming to it. Men, which you aspire to be, do not behave like this.
The best example is Fuhrerious. In my chat, he declared he would never stop attacking the Ayatollah, and challenged me to ban him. I banned him. Even though he was still following me on multiple platforms and therefore clearly found my posts worthwhile, he took revenge by making several posts attacking me and my credibility. Again, very feminine behaviour - emotional, vengeful and inconsistent. This lack of self-reflection results in a person who is a liability, and I have learned to avoid such people like the plague.
I don't know what the Ayatollah's ethnic background is, and I don't much care. His work clearly benefits our cause and our community. Given those factors, he could be as black as the ace of spades and I would still support him. The very idea that somebody should work for our cause and then, when they are publicly mauled for doing so, we should punish them further by throwing them under the bus... is just so gormless I can hardly believe it.
What on earth are you people thinking? The penalty for being involved in our movement is already very high, but you want to make it even higher by denying people support from within the movement as well? Are you insane? Just how many useful people do you want to turn away? Just how antisocial an atmosphere do you want in this, a social enterprise? Just how much failure and dysfunction will you engender before you wise up? Get back in your mothers' basements, you fucking morons.