Metaphor In Flesh
Or, The Mao-lings’ Unhappy Id Spills Out In Portland.
“You’re inherently violent,” screams an unhinged blue-and-purple-haired woman named Hannah McClintock, while repeatedly spitting on people and trying to punch them in the face:
Captured on video by Andy Ngo, who, needless to say, has more.
Elsewhere in the video: “I don’t feel safe with you here,” says another of Antifa’s ladies of Cluster-B, while physically harassing the mild-mannered Mr Ngo, and calling for her comrades to do the same. You see, by reporting on Antifa’s behaviour, Mr Ngo is a “fascist,” a “rape apologist,” a “Nazi,” and a “white supremacist.” Albeit one with Vietnamese parents.
There were a few comments above I was tempted to respond to with this link, but I think I’ll just let it stand alone:
https://articles.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2018/07/portland_protest_leader_micah.amp
Regarding Hannah “Fisty” McClintock, a footnote of note.
Bane
The first time I heard the term, and saw it used, was as a belated response to organised mob thuggery.
I *knew* Laurie Penny was going to be in there somewhere. 😀
@Sam
Let it be known – on the sly of course – that the police will be *absent* for hours.
This was the Weimar policy, I believe. Letting Communists and Fascists fight each other in the street did not turn out so well, in the end.
I *knew* Laurie Penny was going to be in there somewhere. 😀
Yes, Laurie and her peers do rather exemplify the childish moral dysfunction that informs so much else we’ve covered here. For instance, the belief, stated baldly, that if police numbers are insufficient to physically prevent you from indulging in gratuitous criminal behaviour, then that behaviour somehow isn’t criminal and shouldn’t be punished, or even complained about.
And note Laurie’s signature hyperbole and displacement of responsibility, and the claim that mass traffic obstruction – paralysing thousands of commuters, along with emergency services and people trying to get home to their kids – is a glorious, righteous thing – a “global uprising” – and not just an act of supreme selfishness by self-dramatising narcissists.
Apparently, people who are sufficiently leftwing should be able to impose themselves on others, whenever and however they choose, regardless of the cost to the people being imposed upon, and without any risk of personal consequences. The rest of us should just stand there meekly and take it, presumably. As so often, there’s an air of rationalised sociopathy.
and not just an act of supreme selfishness by self-dramatising narcissists.
THAT.
The Establishment, both in Europe and North America, seems quite happy to use Antifa as a cudgel against normal, decent westerners exercising their right to protest peacefully, or ‘Nazis’ as they would have it.
The only way to dampen their enthusiasm is if every time Antifa turn up, a few dozen of them end up being hospitalised but the authorities would never allow it.
“It’s Mean Girls writ large.”
Or maybe 5-year-olds.
‘You have no friends! Nobody likes you!’
Seriously?
Or maybe 5-year-olds.
Well, they are playing dress-up.
Titania McGrath, heir apparent to Godfrey Elfwich (PBUH), sums it up neatly.
The most powerful weapon against Antifa is video. Record them and show the world.
I’m not so sure. As noted above, given that they’re manifestations of narcissistic and anti-social disorder, don’t give them the supply, the NPD’s number one drug of choice. They insist on your involvement in their faux dramas; it’s why they stage them at all. You’re the target and you’re the supply.
Further, the right lost the real game long ago by concentrating not on structuralism and originalism, but on the left. The right’s instinctive reaction to leftwing lunacy is no such support, and it’s not even sufficient to shun the left back to the equivalent of the political lunatic asylum.
I say throw the misfits from ordered society. Concentrate on taking back the institutions. Reform the social order and restore culture instead of accepting its popular, televised wreckage.
That’s not to say it shouldn’t be exposed, but to what end? The left took nothing it wasn’t given – it’s a fringe movement that somehow gained a coequal place in things, the things it will forever ruin and wreck. Why indulge it?
Apparently, people who are sufficiently leftwing should be able to impose themselves on others, whenever and however they choose, regardless of the cost to the people being imposed upon, and without any risk of personal consequences. The rest of us should just stand there meekly and take it, presumably. As so often, there’s an air of rationalised sociopathy.
Exactly. Time to stop that. One can analyze the entire leftist order, such as it is. It’s built on the pillars of dysfunction:
Redistribution – intolerant force. Their narcissistic “principles and values”, forever undefined, are for you to support and fund
Projection – you’re morally wrong to reject this choice put upon you
Pathological dishonesty – left is right, up is down, and any social element or truth is immediately subject to revision
Gaslighting – you’re automatically defective for questioning the bullshit dujour, fascist. Sit down and take it for it is good
Appearances-centrism – everything is cloaked in inverted aspects and again, your appearance is naturally wrong and theirs is inherently right
Yeah, they’re nuts, and I do not limit that to the radical physical players because it applies to the entire left-side ideology. So why play?
That’s not to say it shouldn’t be exposed, but to what end? The left took nothing it wasn’t given – it’s a fringe movement that somehow gained a coequal place in things, the things it will forever ruin and wreck. Why indulge it?
This. When the exposing becomes promotion. Look at that video. Who appears to be the strong horse and who is cowering in fear of a purple haired woman? Not everyone who sees this understands the principles. I would argue only a minority. Which side do you think the typical person would be afraid of? It is extremely unpopular to say so but it is a truth none the less that fear is a powerful motivator. Especially in games of power and control.
THAT.
It’s a conceit that, in almost any other context, would be recognised as reprehensible and pathologically self-involved. But hey, that’s who they are. And we are just props and furniture in their self-flattering psychodrama.
Not everyone who sees this understands the principles. I would argue only a minority. Which side do you think the typical person would be afraid of?
Another favorite online destination of mine is Wrath of Gnon. (GNON = God of Nature Or Nature.) Its upshot is that postmodernism has lost hundreds of years of philosophy, reason, culture, and society, and with them the arts, architecture, civilization, urbanism, the home, and the family.
https://twitter.com/wrathofgnon
I probably became aware of WoGnon here…
Modern conservatism’s principle fault hinges in it forgetting where it came from and at what cost.
The most powerful weapon against Antifa is video. Record them and show the world.
Show their family, neighbors, employers, etc?
The first time I heard the term, and saw it used, was as a belated response to organised mob thuggery.
Thanks, David. That fits with what I expected, but it’s always good to check.
“My wife said firmly and politely, ‘You do realise that riding your bicycle on the pavement is illegal and dangerous.’ Result: an avalanche of vile abuse”
A lot of cyclists where I live have started cycling anywhere they like, on pavements, through red lights – trying to get to and from work at a record time. If a pedestrian says “Please could you not crash into me” these characters become more than mildly aggrieved – to the point of behaving in a not dissimilar way to our purple-haired gangsta-ette (I like the little swagger she does).
Try and reason with cycling-activists about this on the internet (where they can’t smack you) and right away they start explaining how motorists kill far more cyclists than cyclists kill pedestrians – which… well it’s exactly the style of argument I’d expect from someone who calls you a “Brexit-loving fascist bastard” when you remonstrate with them about their dangerous decision-making.
Cyclists (for some reason using the pavement) try to mow parents and kids down on the school run every day. Sometimes they’re other parents who’ve got on their bike and done a transformation much like Dr Jekyll’s. Sometimes I get stroppy with them but one has to calculate fairly carefully where the situation is heading 🙂 Finally, in Oxford, I daily watch PCSOs and council workers regularly soak up invective from cyclists surprised to find themselves fined a pathetic sum for, well, breaking the law, right?
I’m not generalising, of course *cough* but what is going on with cyclists?
I’m not generalising, of course *cough* but what is going on with cyclists?
I suspect that, in some cases, it’s much the same self-flattery – and the same consequent prickliness. I’m sure I’ve previously mentioned trips into Derbyshire, on winding country roads, where groups of these higher beings insist on cycling two, three, even four-abreast, making overtaking either dangerous or impossible, clearly enjoying this fact, and therefore doing it for as long as it can be done, often several minutes, while ignoring the massive tailback of other road users, and presumably feeling superior.
Some, of course, are very considerate and will wave drivers by when a chance to overtake appears. But not, I think, a majority.
Submitted for your consideration…Bill Burr’s guide to driving etiquette…via Ace…
https://youtu.be/ex7zPyOWWmE
Meanwhile in Canada, speaking of obnoxious bicyclists (BIRM)…
A special thanks to Judith Butler, Andrea Dworkin, Simone de Beauvoir, Valerie Solanas, Adrienne Rich and all the other great feminist “thinkers” for creating these cretins.