Holocaust Revisionists Only Validate “The Narrative”

I don’t care about the holocaust. I don’t care whether it happened or not. I don’t care if it was three million Jews or six million Jews. I don’t care how many Gypsies and Polish were added to the mix. I don’t care.

Some of my in-real-life friends think I harp on what a massive exaggeration the holocaust is. They think it is an obsession.

The point isn’t whether or not the holocaust happened, because I don’t actually care. The point is that it’s one of those few topics in history you aren’t allowed to question. Which would make me want to honestly question the holocaust, except I don’t care about the holocaust. Therefore the only way to make the holocaust not matter is to make fun of it.

And this is part of the problem with holocaust revisionists (since deniers are almost non-existent). They want to take down the narrative, and of course I’m all for honest inquiry. But they make it such a life mission that all it does is validate how the holocaust is the most important thing ever and the only genocide that’s ever happened.

Yes the holocaust was bad. So was the Armenian genocide. So was the time of troubles in Ulster. So was southern slavery and scrip mining and the Hawaiian annexation.

So what? Why is someone trying to get me to feel anger? I’m being coerced into feeling an emotion that isn’t relevant to my life. Your attempt to defy the system only validates the system.

I’ve made this point a little before, that I don’t even really care about the Civil War. The Rebel flag is more of a libertarian thing. Except I’m not really a libertarian, so really it’s just a means of angering the moral busybodies who are trying to give me their anger. I only wear it because you told me I can’t.

I didn’t care about the Confederacy until you told me it was Evil and that I should definitely not do anything to associate with it because it’s the epitome of Hatred and Racism and Oppression and totally deserved every bit of unmeasured justice done against it. The Confederacy was Lex Luthor, so of course the Union and Lincoln could take any Avengers measure necessary.

Might there be an agenda in that? Perhaps a means of excusing government over reach for the greater good? And neo-confederates have tried arguing against these people for 150 years, but it doesn’t do any good, so just wear the stars and bars and give them the middle finger. And while you’re at it, do the same for the Crusades and Rhodesia.

There’s some value to arguing seriously against these people, but if that’s all you do, then you take them seriously and only seriously. The best way to argue against those who can’t be argued with is to just make fun of them. If you insult their intelligence, it deals a much greater blow.

Because that’s all they have. The social justice brigade doesn’t care about facts or truth. They care about feeling superior to you.

It’s why I use “fag” so casually and make fun of any gay pride identity pandering I see. What, am I supposed to take gay pride seriously?

Scott Alexander explained this general concept extremely well, though admittedly he would hate this blog.

It’s the reverse of the 1950s. Assume you’re a hip young intellectual in the 1950s. You see all these stodgy conservatives around you – I don’t even know what “stodgy” means, I just know I’m legally obligated to use it to describe 1950s conservatives. You see Mrs. Grundy, chattering to her grundy friends about how scandalous it is that some people read books about sex, lecturing to the school board on how they had better enforce her values on the children or she will have some very harsh words to say to them.

And you think “Whatever else I am, I’m not going to be a mediocrity like Mrs. Grundy. I’m not going to conform.” Which, in the 1950s, meant you became a leftist, and talked about how stodgy society was fundamentally oppressive, and how you were going to value different things, and screw what Mrs. Grundy thought.

And gradually this became sufficiently hip that even the slightly less hip intellectuals caught on and started making fun of Mrs. Grundy, and then people even less hip than that, until it became a big pileup on poor Mrs. Grundy and anyone who wanted even the slightest claim to intellectual independence or personal integrity has to prove themselves by giving long dissertations on how terrible Mrs. Grundy is.

But when Mrs. Grundy herself joins the party, what then?

I mean, take that article on Dartmouth. A group of angry people, stopping just short of violence, invade a school building and make threats against the president unless he meets their demands. Every student must be forced to attend moral instruction classes inculcating their (the protesters’) values. Offensive terms must be removed from the library. And the school must take care to admit people of the right race. When was the last time you could hear a story like that and have it be even slightly probably that the mob was rightist?

It’s hard to argue that Mrs. Grundy is not a proud leftist by now, still chattering about how scandalous it is that people read books with the wrong values, still giving her terminally uncool speeches to the school board about how they had better enforce her values on the children (and if she can get the debate society on board as well, so much the better).

There must be overwhelming temptation among hip intellectuals to differentiate themselves from Mrs. Grundy by shifting rightward.

You’re telling me that whites robbed blacks of their culture and should pay them money? Lol-ercoaster. Am I really supposed to take you seriously? You think Muslims can assimilate into Western society in mass or that socialism won’t end in death camps and a crashed economy?

It’s like facts don’t matter at all to these people. You could almost make the argument that they love lies for the sake of lying.

Yeah I’m going to make fun of Black Lives Matter. It’s the best way to delegitimize it.

Why is holocaust denial linked with being a Neo-Nazi? Is that saying that people who believe the holocaust is a lie wishes it were true? Like, “I think Hitler was totally innocent and would never kill an innocent civilian, but man I really wish he had put the Jews into the gulag.” One would think holocaust denial is the opposite of being pro-Nazi.

Nazis, klansmen, and white supremacists. These are the goblins that live in the forest. They don’t exist in reality. Even the alt right has been conflated into an actual political movement instead of an umbrella term to describe social dissidents. (I have never identified as alt right, but people think I am anyway.)

They are the monsters under the bed who will steal your children in the night. The boogeymen we have banished into the abyss. We’ve sprinkled salt and garlic all around hoping they won’t come back, not realizing that they are just dumb superstitions.

Advertisements

Music Today Is Soulless

I finally figured out what’s wrong with music today. I mean, we all know music today is terrible. Old people say that millenial music is terrible, but none of us listen to the radio. But it’s hard to vocalize just what’s wrong with it.

Today’s hit music has no soul. And this is true whether pop, country, R&B, or what tattered shreds remain of rock n roll.

Yes, it has rhythm. Too much rhythm, actually. That was the big change with Elvis. Before Elvis, pop music focused on chord changes. After Elvis, the emphasis was on the backbeat.

And today it’s only backbeat. The music industry is swamped with blacks and whites who wish they were black, but nothing has the, well, soul of Al Green’s “Let’s Stay Together.”

See, the emphasis in that song isn’t solely the rhythm. The rhythm drives the song, but it doesn’t dominate everything else.

And I used to think “soul” was a stupid black term reflecting their own hubris. Now I get it. There’s humanity to that. It’s the same humanity in honky ass “real” country music. The only difference being that white people don’t call it “soul” like we should.

Today’s music doesn’t have that heart. It’s bass, fake drums, and someone gurgling into the microphone about their sex life. You can grind to today’s pop music, but you can’t make love.

And you have the Whitney Houston wannabes. White girls and black people can’t sing with actual emotion, so they screw with the melody to appear creative or something. This is especially present with the national anthem, which barely even exists anymore. It’s over-compensation to sound like they have real emotional depth, because they know they could never sound like this:

Or this:

Whenever someone plays a hip hop song that sounds like a blender — of course out loud on their phone despite that there are twenty people around them who don’t want to hear it — I say, “My wife and I danced to this at our wedding.”

“Really?”

“No.”

Wait…The Catholic Church Was Against The Death Penalty?

I normally make a point to not read pope news. There’s a kind of pathology where non-Catholics follow whatever the pope says and does like a celebrity, but all that does is legitimize the Catholic Church. One would think the protestants would have moved on past caring what the pope thinks, but apparently they aren’t as post-Catholic as they think.

I’ve been hearing a lot over the last week that Francis has reversed the Church’s stance on the death penalty and that now the Catholic Church officially teaches that capital punishment is a sin. People are calling it a reversal of Holy Tradition and a betrayal of Timeless Truth One Entrusted To All The Saints. And I’m sure the prots are making snarky comments about infallibility, as though they are just now figuring out that maybe Catholicism changes its beliefs sometimes.

Back up a second. The Catholic Church taught the death penalty was acceptable? Really?

Every in-real-life Catholic I’ve ever talked to about these things says, “The protestants say they are ‘pro-life’, but then they support capital punishment.” Was that not the norm? It seems to me that Francis is just formalizing the teaching they’ve had for a long time — ie, exactly what they claim happened in Vatican I in the late 1800s over papal infallibility.

Even if this reveals Francis as a sacrilegious anti-pope who has betrayed the faith and sold the Church to the devil (and I personally have no firm opinion on that), how is this anything unusual? I have met Catholics who have criticized other Catholics for their support of abortion or homosexuality, but I have never met a Catholic criticizing other Catholics for their condemnation of the death penalty.

Like most Catholics, I’ve never read the 800-page doorstop known as the catechism. Supposedly it was originally made for bishops, because that’s how bureaucratic and dried-out their theology is. Even the people in charge of teaching this don’t and can’t really know what they are supposed to teach.

But did the catechism really say, “The death penalty is acceptable in some circumstances.”? Is that taught in RCIA?

News outlets are talking about what a monumental change this is and how it could affect the Republican Party and what if Scalia was still alive, etc. My reaction is just a, “Huh. Who knew?”

All Women Save Sex For True Love

Once upon a time, Americans still used the phrase “make love”. Now we just fuck, but twenty years ago there was still a sentiment that you should only have sex if you love someone. I know this because there was an episode of The Cosby Show on it.

We lost our ability to convince people to save sex for marriage (a side effect of not marrying at 15, which is a side effect of modern birth control methods). So we decided, at least don’t have meaningless sex. Make sure it counts. That’s better than a drunken hook up, yes?

Well, yes, it is, but it seems to imply that’s something that needs to be taught or that it can circumvent the problem.

With almost no exception, every woman, even the most liberated feminist vegan, when she loses her virginity, thinks this will be a love that lasts forever and the only boy she ever sleeps with. No woman gives away her virginity and thinks that it’s just a casual fling. As Taylor Swift said, “When you’re fifteen and someone tells you he loves you, you’re going to believe him.”

In the old days, most people saved sex for being engaged, and so there were break of engagement laws. If you promised to marry a woman and then changed your mind, she could sue, because it would be much harder for her to marry if she wasn’t a virgin.

But then the sexual revolution happened in the 20s and guys started taking girls out in their hot rod cars to the clifftop to look at the city lights and fathers had no problem with this, so we decided it didn’t matter anymore.

The sexual revolution began in the 1920s in New York City and slowly spread to rural America. Having cramped apartments tends to cause young adults to move out on their own, which creates the lack of supervision that gave rise to the dance hall culture and then the hot rod culture, which spread to rural America through mass media. The notion of teenager being a certain phase of life began during this time.

Anyway, it’s not enough to tell young women to only have sex with someone they really love, because they already do that. And then after having their hearts broken two or three times, they turn into reprobate whores. Only a strict “no sex until marriage” code of ethics will keep the young women of America in line and thus building stable families.

And don’t send your daughter to college. Seriously. What’s the matter with you?

In Praise Of McDonald’s

Here at the BN Blog, I do a lot of cynical criticism and alarmism, frankly because it makes for better writing. But the point in dropping a deuce on America is to encourage people to be great again, and therefore we should commend those who see the signs of the times and adjust accordingly.

For a few decades now, McDonald’s has been the boogeyman of the food world. Kind of unfair, because every fast food restaurant does all the same things and McDonald’s was always the first to adapt, but their food was pretty much inedible for most of my life. You eat at McDonald’s because it’s convenient, not because you want to eat at McDonald’s.

Within ten years, fast food as we understand it will be dead. I can go to Five Guys or Firehouse Subs or Moe’s Southwest Grill and get a far better product than the mass franchises for just a few dollars more. And I’ve noticed sit-down franchises like Applebee’s are trying to tap into the budget burger market, with the 12 minutes $7.99 lunch.

The problem with fast food is that they assume that once they have a monopoly on the market, they don’t have to do anything that made them successful in the first place. People don’t eat at Taco Bell because it’s good. They eat there because it’s fast and cheap. Except they raised the prices, now you wait ten minutes to just order and another ten to get your food.

And that’s fantastic. Fast food ruined American cuisine. Let it die. And America deserves to be obese for subsidizing it instead of the local diner.

*****

When McDonald’s announced the all-day breakfast in 2015, I thought it was the death knell. Most fast food restaurants aren’t set up to run breakfast and lunch all day, and you just know McDonald’s isn’t going to properly staff their stores. Most fast food restaurants have three people doing the jobs of eight. At the time I had read somewhere that McDonald’s had posted losses every quarter for the last three years.

Personally I don’t care about breakfast, though their steak bagel is amazing. But around that time and since, they’ve made major improvements. They had been gradually ditching the plastic red benches and moving to a more lounge dining type area. Granted, sometimes they go too avantgarde and it’s uncomfortable, but it’s still an improvement. And — get this — they actually wipe down the tables and chairs. You can easily find a table that doesn’t have someone else’s crumbs on it.

I’ve also noticed the employees are more friendly and care about their jobs. Maybe they are getting paid more? (They also hire much fewer ghetto rats.) I’ve never gotten such friendly service at 3am anywhere else.

The move to the coffeeshop menu was very smart, especially since Starbucks had peaked. Granted, you can’t build a restaurant empire off of a $2 cup of coffee, but it’s something. It doesn’t take much effort and will draw more people in.

I think all the stores are 24/7 and offer free wifi, which is a big plus because I’m too cheap to pay for internet and I’m up at odd hours of the night. I’ll buy a coffee milkshake (yeah, go ahead and judge me) and use their internet for four hours.

And now they’ve gone to the 100% fresh beef. Sounds like a gimmick, but their beef actually tastes like beef. It even has pink in the middle. It’s an actual hamburger.

It’s an insane theory. If your restaurant is failing, offer food people want to eat in an atmosphere that isn’t depressing. Wait six months and they’ll start sliding again and revert to the mystery meat burgers.

You Get The Spouse You Deserve

This is, what, the third Manosphere-type article in the last few months?

Probably the worst lie taught by Disney movies is that there’s someone perfect out there for you if you just wait long enough. Really, it’s far more than just Disney. Almost every movie regardless of genre shoves a romantic subplot into it.

“There’s a lid for every pot.”

Then explain the epidemic of loneliness.

That’s something we don’t really think about. Have you noticed how many people have almost no friends? It seems almost everyone I know under 35 is cripplingly lonely. I think part of it is that our major social circle comes from school, and so when you get a little farther into adulthood you don’t know where to meet people.

But anyway, I see a lot of people in terrible marriages or long term relationships. And it’s pathetic and disgusting. You think, Why put up with that? Why don’t they find something better?

And it’s because they can’t. People stay with horrible humans because they don’t want to be alone and they don’t think that they can do any better.

And then they resent the other person because they realize the other person only stays with them because that person has no options either.

Two many pronouns? Okay, put it like this.

Nick and Edith. I had known Nick since high school. One of those white trash kids who tries to be a pretentious hipster but doesn’t know how. Somehow he ends up in Hawaii with this morbidly obese creature who just looks like she hates herself. Not just because she’s covered in tattoos, but because a woman that overweight could not help but understand that she doesn’t deserve love. And Nick goes dumpster diving and falls in love with Edith. And of course she resents him for it. If he’s so pathetic that she’s the best he can do, then that means she’s so worthless that she’s stuck with a guy that pathetic.

Finally I got so revolted watching this and pretending it was something organic and tender-hearted that I ended the friendship after almost a decade (though there were many other issue at play). You become like the friends you keep.

You usually get the spouse you deserve. If you’re a 7, you’ll probably get someone in the 6 to 8 range. If you marry someone, it’s because you believe this is the best you can do. After all, why marry someone if you think there are better options?

And this is the key point of the red pill (before everyone co-opted the term to be about Jews and Blacks). If you work on yourself and become a better man, you will attract better women.

True love? No. You settle for the one who settles for you.

Email from January 2015

By far the most touching email from a reader I ever received. And the only one I kept. This was extremely moving. I am sharing it with you all here, I suppose just out of interest. I received this in January 2015 about midway through my time at Return Of Kings. I’ll also post my response. I have decided it would be best to omit his name.

I’m not saying that my reply was good. I’m just posting it out of interest. He didn’t reply, though he messaged me a few times later on if I remember correctly.

*****

I want to thank you for the consistently well thought-out articles you’ve been posting on ROK. I’ve found everyone of them to be very insightful. While I enjoy their more click-baity articles, yours have caused me to reflect on Christianity in a way I haven’t before.

This might get long, but I have the feeling you are not phased by several paragraphs unlike most of my generation.

 

My parent’s raised me as a Christian and in the church since I was a young boy. I witnessed – unknowingly at the time – the effects of feminism on the church, specifically in the charismatic denomination which my Mom devoted herself to.

My Dad was an Evangelical at the time my mom was devoting an incredible amount of time to going to meetings, services almost 3 days a week, and these prayer gatherings that often lasted late into the night. I could never understand why the people in attendance were 80% women until now.

It’s safe to say that the amount of time my mom spent at her meetings my parents marriage. (They are married.) About 8 years ago, my Dad encountered alot of Reformed doctrine and teaching which I somewhat dismissed originally because of how ingrained my presuppositions were.

At the time one man my dad and his church group were studying was alot of material by Doug Wilson who made the point that there was masculine and feminine worship and that the church has essentially ignored masculine worship. (Not necessarily high liturgy and such.)

 

I don’t know if I can call myself a Christian right now, even though I still hold a Christian worldview, but one thing that struck me about your recent article was the lack of an environment where this kind of call to avoid fornication and pre-marital sex can exist within the church.

I’m 26 now, but it was in march of 2014 that I simply couldn’t wait any longer. I lost my virginity and up to now have slept with 6 different girls. I stumbled upon the idea of “game” back in July and its one of the reasons I’ve had the amount of sex I’ve had.

I haven’t really been to Church since I lost my virginity. I felt like I was living two different lifestyles and recently I’ve contemplated if I have any faith left at all. I have no interest in replacing Christianity with a worldview with no ethical and moral foundations – Athiesm for instance – but I feel like a hypocrite consistently.

Currently, I attend a private Christian University – where I have free tuition – so I’m around a Christian environment constantly. Even so, I feel like I’ve become an apostate. I honestly have no idea what to do.

I want to be proud of my “notches”, but I’m not so sure I am. It feels hollow. Alot of TRP community doesn’t want anything to do with marriage for many reasons I can understand. However, I still want to get married. I want kids.

The pool of marriageable women in the church seems to be appalling small – I’ve seen some exceptions in the homeschooling community – and it doesn’t help that I don’t make much money. I’m not exactly what every Father dreams of when they think of a man being able to provide their daughter with financial stability. I’ve got some limited trades experience, but as you said, that’s not exactly “a prime attraction”

My father, while a good and able parent who has tried to raise me as a man, never taught me anything about game, how to approach girls, ect. It took me till maybe a few years ago when I realized that I was actually attractive, and that if I groomed myself, I would fare much better.

However, I still find dating in Christian circles to be incredibly hard. I’m constantly under the microscope. I’d love to find a traditional Christian wife at this point, but I don’t know if I’m worthy considering my current lack of faith.

 

Thank you for your writing and work. It gives me hope that there are people out there who have somewhat experienced and are experiencing what I have – which for some reason gives me comfort.

Sincerely,

[omitted]

 

*****

[omitted],

Thank you for writing. I understand your frustrations. I was labelled
the ever-virgin loser growing up. I had a hard enough time making
friends with other guys. The idea that a girl would be interested in
me was a foreign concept. And of course the only advice I had was the
1950s “Compliment and pay for shit” model. But I didn’t develop
emotionally or socially as a child after my parents’ divorce.

My father was a Baptist pastor who left my mother for another pastor’s
wife. When I was 20, I converted to the Eastern Orthodox Church, which
tends to have more traditional-minded people. Much more resistant to
modernism, although there are certainly exceptions. But dating as an
Orthodox Christian can be hard, since there aren’t many others and
outsider Christians think you’re too Catholic.

http://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2010/10/28/why-orthodox-men-love-church/

The reformed/ regulative principle Christians are also supposed to be
very traditional.

As for dating being difficult as a Christian, this is very true. Most
Christian girls are so obsessed with being a princess that they are
unable to consider what they themselves may have to offer. Christian
Mingle won’t help much, although there seems to be some quality
catches on there. But online dating is hard since most of seduction is
non-verbal.

You wrote, “I’d love to find a traditional Christian wife at this
point, but I don’t know if I’m worthy considering my current lack of
faith.”

Don’t think that way. Having a small notch count usually won’t hold
you back much with Christian girls as long as you don’t have kids or
diseases, although some girls are very picky. That being said, there
is no such thing as male virginity. For women, a man’s prior sexual
history says more about his ability to commit than about his ability
to bond.

Focus on growing your alpha traits (charisma, physical strength,
mechanical knowledge) and gaining the necessary beta qualities (a
skill that can provide stable finances, maybe a few other
characteristics). Roosh has written that he’s noticed in more
traditional countries, what we consider to be beta characteristics is
what turns on women, not alpha cockiness. With American Christian
girls of wife-quality, I’ve found that you need a good cocktail of
both in a way that neither are negated.

As for loss of faith, there’s not a whole lot I can say about that.
But there are traditional-minded girls who are non-Christians out in
rural areas. Really, most marriageable girls are in the country. But
it takes a lot of hard work to find the marriageable girl. You have to
approach it like a part-time job. Christian university sounds like
absolutely hell, but if you approach enough, you should be able to
find someone.

The blue collar trades are more attractive to women than people think,
since there’s something very masculine about them. The stigma in them
goes away as you get older (I’m 24 years old) since the economy is so
bad. Also, the stigma is only around in certain circles.

More ROK articles to check out for what you’re looking for:

http://www.returnofkings.com/48367/feed-a-western-woman-the-red-pill

http://www.returnofkings.com/47540/5-lines-that-potential-wives-cannot-cross

Thank you for writing,
Blair