Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Quiplinks X: Making America Inc. Great Again


I've been reading a lot of twitter feeds lately. I'm still tempted to sign up...but I know myself. I would get addicted to it and spend far more time on it than I should. So I occasionally do Quiplinks here instead.

Since I recently completed some long overdue maintenance to the blogroll, deleting all the dead links and adding a few new bloggers I discovered while surfing the fever swamps, I was thinking it would be a good time to do another Quiplinks post with all these new sources of wit and wisdom.  So here we go with the tenth edition of my favorite way to link to others, by having fun making my own hashtags that I would use if I did have a twitter account.


The Savage Lifestyle blogger and Return of Kings contributor Jack Ronin, offers his advice on one way we can help MAIncGA:


"There exists today many poisonous concepts that have degraded the western mind. Perhaps one of the most ugly and perfidious is the idea that it is somehow righteous, loving and virtuous to praise weakness in others and embody their cancerous ways of thinking and living. The only healthy response when the weak are praised is to savagely mock them."

Chateau Heartiste
regular commenter and brand new blogger WrongSideofHistory, appears quite adept at wielding  poetic shivs against the architects and change agents of America's decline. He makes a great point regarding diversity and it's effects on a formerly high trust society:


"Diversity founded on the premise of equality is full retard.Wildly unequal outcomes is the out-of-tune acoustic guitar always bringing down the Kumbaya session."

Free Northerner notices something else about Diversity:


"Why is it that diversity is only ever achieved by allowing those who don’t make things, unimportant people, and those aren’t involved in the activity equal say to to key players who actually create things?"


Relampigo Furioso, Return of Kings writer and blogger over at The New Modern Man, points out how fakebook and other social media apps amplify all the worst aspects of our modern era:


"Obviously, a nihilistic, materialistic culture of self-comparison and competitive consumption has been worsened by the need to constantly look good online."

"Bad" Billy Pratt over at Kill to Party notes that the filth and depravity of our current culture is part of a silent war, and it has a source. He notes: "In 2016 there is a silent war being waged for who gets to stand atop the stream as the king of the narrative. If Politics are downstream from culture, culture is downstream from Hollywood."

Ah yes, that bastion of propaganda and glamorization of cultural marxism, has spent the last half century helping to turn the American Dream into our current dystopian nightmare. He breaks down the biggest blockbuster movie of the 80's to make his case:


"Instead of the Hollywood movie being reflective of American culture, or existing as a morality tale to strengthen the existing culture, film makers decided to use their influence to guide the culture toward their own interests. This is the true nature of modern propaganda- it isn’t overt with guns and billboards demanding to OBEY, but rather an enthralling light show doling out hits of excitement and shame."

H/T to Deansdale for introducing me to Kill to Party. He also published a great post about the male suicide rate and how it relates to the feminists favorite boogeyman, the "Patriarchy":


"Strangely enough the patriarchy never shows up to help men in tough situations; their male privilege seems to malfunction right when they would need it the most. On the other hand women seem to be immune to most of the aforementioned problems because society is set up in a way that protects their innate privileges and grant them artificial new ones. "

Speaking of the Patriarchy, while most folks out in these fringes of the fever swamps of teh Interwebz recognize the destruction of Male headship was deliberately done by changing marriage and divorce laws to give women all of the power of Government to control the relationship and end it for cash and prizes at her whim, Artisinal Toad is making the case for Biblically sanctioned polygamy as God's original design to give Man dominion over his household. In making his case, he employs a clever analogy:


"What you really like to do is play fetch with the dog because that’s all about you and having your desires met.  Especially when your friends are around to see how the dog tries to please you.  That makes you feel really good.  But, it was too much of a chore to feed him and the dog is starving and doesn’t have the energy or the motivation to play fetch.  So you complain to all your friends about how horrible your dog is and you don’t understand it at all because the dog has such a wonderful home and such a loving master but he won’t fetch the damn ball when you want him to."

Needless to say, Artisanal Toad's use of the Bible to advocate for polygamy, employing prostitutes or banging a widow as all legitimate, non-sinful pursuits for Christian men, has not earned him any goodwill amongst the majority of the Christian MAndrosphere's commentariat, but I find his interpretations of the Bible make for a convincing case ...although I don't plan on bringing home another wife or visiting any of Honolulu's "Happy Ending" massage parlors any time soon.

That being said, I find AT's perspective and interpretations interesting and I think it jibes with Return of King's luminary Quintus Curtius' recent post.


"Any orthodoxy which demands that we prostrate our intellects unquestioningly before it, and deliberately seeks to suppress, shame, or marginalize competing views, is unworthy of our respect.  It should, on the contrary, be attacked that much more vigorously.  Experience has shown that coercion of opinion is a disastrous road for any society to take."

While the Trump campaign theme is to Make America Great Again, Roosh just wants to


"The problem we have today is that men shield themselves from all difficulty and even the experience of life. We now have 21-year-old male students crying on the shoulders of feminists in designated safe spaces on college campuses because they heard mere opinions they didn’t like. Those safe spaces, whether literal or metaphorical, prevents men from becoming masculine."

Another Return of Kings author, Larsen Halleck, who blogs at The Barbaric Gentlemen, had a recent epiphany regarding Feminists and femininity:


"I’ve realized something: feminists embody age-old stereotypes of females to an incredible, almost embarrassing, degree. Just to clarify: by “age old stereotypes of females”, I certainly don’t mean things like beautiful, graceful, nurturing, caring, loving, domestically skilled, gentle, and ‘down to Earth’, absolutely not. I’m referring to the flipside of that coin, the negative stereotypes of women..."
Dalrock points another aspect of feminism that contributes to those negative stereotypes:


"Perhaps the greatest disappointment for feminists is their failure to make men miserable by getting them to do traditionally female roles.  Feminists didn’t understand that their misery came from their own miserly hearts, not from the act of caring for others."

Black Poison Soul, the man with the crap colored glasses, has his own epiphany regarding women:


"Then you stop. You realize something, about all this shit. Good women? Bad women? Nah.

They're just women.

Being pissed off at them is like being pissed off at water for being wet."

Notes From A Red Pill Girl
relates an anecdote about the end results of a woman who follows the feminist STRONG INDEPENDENT WOMAN script:


"Committed to no man, but lover of many, they also found the party came to an abrupt end with age, and many of those who once ruled the social scene and were quite sought after, pampered, and spoiled by their admirers often ended up destitute, alone, and abandoned in the end."

Long time reader and commenter of Chateau Heartiste, PA (OG Roissy in D.C.), started his own blog.


"Folks, I didn’t create the world, I just describe it. For pretty lies, you’re free to look at Old Navy ads. For ugly lies, turn on your television."

Will S. over at Patriactionary also brings up an important question that perhaps may be the answer to breaking the stranglehold that BigPharma has over the practice of medicine:


"Living through a time of great social and/or political change can give one the opportunity to examine things generally left unexamined. Such can cause one, at least one given to introspection and reflection to perhaps an abnormal degree, the chance to see familiar things from a new angle, not previously considered."

The Primal Male breaks down the complex, multi-faceted entity seeking total control of humanity, and identifies it as the "System," which he states is just our civilization gone rogue...


"To understand its immense and complex identity, you must first understand that the System is a complete combination of multiple sub-systems that dominate every aspect of human existence. This includes centralized governments, the banking system, multi-national corporations, the media, the military-industrial complex, and so on. All systems, both visible and invisible, are part of its totality. It is beyond a single nation state, and as a global system, has its influence over nearly all the peoples around the world."


Matthew Peak who blogs at Western Woes, has his own thoughts about how the System and corporations have reduced human relationships down to nothing more than economic transactions:


"And thus we have the main issue behind the modern obsession over equality of the sexes. Men and women are measured by their ability to earn money for corporations and governments, under the guise of earning money for themselves."


The Erudite Knight is one of the few folks on my blog roll who is not on the Trump train and suspects the Trumpster is controlled opposition.


"Its going to get bad, and its the two sides played against each other where the man in the castle just watches the proles kill each other, all to ‘make america great again’.


And finally, to close this one out, here's a quip that comes not from a blog, but lyrics from the newest album by a band I had once considered DONE and incapable of making great metal music any longer...glad to find out I was wrong on that score.

"If you don't like where we're going, than you won't like what's coming next..."




Anonymous said...

That's why AT was outed as a heretic at Dalrock's a couple of months ago. He has an unorthodox reading of Scripture. It is not possible to make such an argument using a contextual reading of Jesus or Paul let alone Genesis 2 and God Himself.

marriedman said...

AT is right about polygamy not being sinful. There is zero teaching in either the Old or the New testaments holding polygamy is sin (well polygyny to be technical).

While he goes off the rails on a few specifics his main point on polygamy is air tight. Which makes it all the more interesting (and sad) to see the reactions against him.

Really, he is striking to the heart of the women worship among the Christian crowd who value tradition and the what others think of them (the cuck impulse) over the truth.

The sad thing is, polygamy would be the perfect agree and amplify tactic for the Christians to strike back in the culture war over control of morality in sex and marriage.

Not only does it look strategically wise, it is prophetically as well (Isaiah 4).

Avraham said...

AT thinks sex with a girl makes one married. This is not true. Otherwise how could many people in the Bible have concubines that were not wives. Start with Lemech. Then Abraham. Then the friend of Joshua, Calev Ben Yefuna. His wives and girl friends were at least two each. Chronicles ch 2 verse 46.
To be married one needs to acquire the wife with two witnesses.

Avraham said...

על כל דבר ערוה every matter involving sexual relationships needs two witnesses. That is anything related to the עריות requires two witnesses. על פי שני עדים יקום דבר "Any matter shall stand on two witnesses." Thus acquiring a wife is not the same as acquiring property. One needs to acquire her in front of two witnesses for the sake of marriage. This is clear in the Bible. Otherwise there could never be a girl friend concubine. This is obvious to anyone who has spend any time learning the Bible seriously AT has simply read a few verses out of context and spun a web out of them.

Artisanal Toad said...

Hey Keoni

I appreciate the shout, but you did make a bit of a mistake. I have not ever advocated any Christian man's use of a prostitute because it's forbidden at 1st Corinthians 6:15-16. I've made that clear over and over again, most recently here:


I would appreciate it if you'd correct that.

As you've noticed, I've upset a lot of people but a surprising thing has happened, in that nobody seems to be able to refute anything I'm saying from Scripture... and you'd better believe they would if they could. Your first commenter says I was "exposed" as a "heretic" on Dalrock's blog. He claims I'm "unorthodox." And I'm literally laughing as I type this. I'm not a believer in the Easter Bunny and surprise, surprise, surprise! They can't back up their Easter Bunny doctrines from Scripture.

And, I'm actually not making a case for polygyny so much as I'm pointing out that the standard for marriage comes from Genesis 2:24 and it's simple: the man gives the woman permanent but non-exclusive commitment no matter how many wives he may take.

In fact, I got so tired of people trying their hardest to twist what I've said that I put everything into a chart, which is linked at the bottom of this page:


I'm frequently accused of "going off the rails" but nobody can ever say just *how* I've misinterpreted Scripture or taken it out of context. The reason is that most have learned that they get treated like your commenter Avraham is about to be treated. Actually, he has an argument so ridiculous that I haven't heard it before, claiming as the standard for marriage that "every matter must be decided by the testimony of 2 witnesses." It's just another Easter Bunny argument (notice he didn't cite where he got that), but, why believe me? Read Deuteronomy 17:6 for yourself and see what it says:

"On the evidence of two witnesses or three witnesses, he who is to die shall be put to death; he shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness."

That sounds like some monogamous marriages, but I'm pretty sure death was not what God had in mind when He created marriage. What about Deuteronomy 19:15?

"A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed."

Nor do I see marriage being described as "iniquity" or "sin" that requires witnesses. Notice how Avraham says "every matter involving sexual relationships needs two witnesses" but that's not what Scripture says at all and he conveniently left out the parts that demonstrate that standard doesn't apply. Dude should be working for the FDA.

When you boil it all down it's sex that initiates marriage every time a marriage occurs. Sex with an eligible virgin makes one one married every time and that's proved by Deuteronomy 22:28-29, in which a woman is raped into marriage. That's explained in the chart I mentioned above.

You might find the chart of value because I tried to hit everything involving Genesis 2:24 and Genesis 3:16. My standard is that I don't want to bitch about how bad things are, I want to provide solutions. As it turns out the Bible provides solutions that don't agree with church teachings for the past 1500 years. The top right hand corner of the chart explains why.

Anonymous said...

i've long acknowledged that Trump could simply be the really deep, controlled opposition.

but if they have that much control then there is no answer for anyone but to run for the hills.

Black Poison Soul said...

#MisogynyFTW! I just about peed myself laughing, Keoni! Then I went and reread my post (as if for the first time?) and just about peed myself again. I have no idea why, it just struck me that way - perhaps my sense of humor (or sense of the ridiculous) is growing back.

Listening to the Megadeth album. Like you, I thought they were gone. I'm enjoying it, thank you for showing that to us.

Keoni G said...

Sorry if I misrepresented your views their AT, I'll fix it ASAP, but it will be a few days as I'm on summer family vacation and don't have my blogger log in password on my phone...I'll get to it as soon as I get back to my home PC in Hawaii.

@ bps - must be the same sense of humor for those of us that live in Oceania. And yeah, I'm hooked on that new Megadeth album. I haven't bought any of their albums since Countdown to Extinction, but my wife bought it for me after a friend of hers told her it was exactly like the Rust in Peace era. Her friend was right!

Artisanal Toad said...

Keoni, don't sweat it, I'm used to this. The only other issue I've ever dealt with that had such a hostile response was using intravenous ascorbic acid (IVAA) to cure cancer. It works on a lot of cell types and I know that from personal experience, but you can't patent a vitamin so there is zero research done in that area.

The similarities between that and what I'm doing now are actually amazing. I can recall a conversation with my favorite toxicologist in which he described my supplementation regime as a drug therapy. After thinking about it for a while I concluded he was correct, but it was a case of using the nutrients to create a drug effect that counteracted the degeneration caused by years of abuse in the form of exogenous toxins and endogenous deficiencies.

That begged the question of what a healthy body actually was and since it's practically impossible to find anyone who is actually well nourished, all the various therapies revolve around treating add-on complications in people who are already sick in a physical way. Compared to relationship problems, this is where I actually see game. In the same way good nutrition is critical for a body to function correctly and avoid physical pathologies, a good moral foundation is necessary in order to avoid various emotional and social pathologies. In both cases these actions occur in an environment of lies and ignorance.

The drug industry started out as people acting in ignorance trying to treat diseases that were actually caused by either trauma or an unknown problem; but what they were trying to treat often wouldn't have been a problem if the patient had proper nutrition. When certain people realized what a real profit center they had on their hands they took control and what we see today is the result: they depend on people being sick in order to make money. In the same way the church started out on good footing, but everything was reframed in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and the Bible's clear instruction on sexual morality was thrown out and replaced with a mixture of pagan beliefs, stoic philosophy and roman law. This was a huge power-grab because when you control someone's sexuality and marriage you control their life.

Feminism is a disease that results from a bad moral foundation in the same way that various forms of cancer are the result of a body deprived of proper nutrition for years. Game is similar to a drug intervention therapy that resolves symptoms but doesn't deal with the root problem. Learning the truth of nutrition and its role in health will destroy a lot of existing beliefs about medicine and the responsibility of individuals to care for themselves and their children (with the associated guilt from knowing they didn't). Likewise, understanding the correct moral paradigm causes a lot of guilt in people when they learn they got it wrong and taught others the wrong thing to their detriment.

I'm hacking away at the root- the moral root. It may sound strange and really odd, but like nutritional issues, the oddness and even "wrongness" is a result of being taught the wrong thing.

"What? You're refusing to take statins for your high cholesterol and also eating lots of high-fat food? Don't you believe doctors and medical research? You look at a little bit of anecdotal data and think the medical industry is wrong. Don't you think the medical community would know it if you were right? You're practically accusing us of lying to you!"

"What? Sex doesn't make you married and you're wrong to have sex without a proper marriage ceremony! Don't you listen to the church? You take Scripture out of context and get it wrong. Who do you think you are to tell us that Christendom has had it wrong for 1500 years? You're practically accusing us of lying to you!"

Unknown said...

The "cuck impulse" is so strong in Christianity that you can't get past the the very first chapter of the New Testament before you find it lauding the "Cuckold Carpenter" myth.

"His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant." (((Matthew 1:18))) Merry Cuckmas! http://i.imgur.com/PTaeMEN.jpg

Friedrich Nietzsche notes astutely: "Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence. Christianity—the revaluation of all Aryan values, the victory of chandala values, the gospel preached to the poor and base, the general revolt of all the downtrodden, the wretched, the failures, the less favored, against 'race:' the undying chandala hatred is disguised as a religion of love." [Twilight of the Idols, Chap. 6]

Avraham said...

However this would not be from a Jewish point of view. Pledged to be married refers to "Erussin" (kidushin) as opposed to "nisuin."
This is not what is called today engagement. In those days there were months between the original kidushin and the later nisuin

That is marriage has two parts. The original kidushin which makes her a married woman. But they do not live together until nisuin or chupa. Two stages. But in terms of being a married woman that happens right at kidushin. So what happened then was she was pregnant after being married. And actual married woman. Normally the husband is not allowed after that to live with her. The Beit Din requires a divorce. So the fact that Joseph took her anyway is not really reflecting Jewish law.

Avraham said...

I am not saying what Joseph did was wrong. He must have had good reason to think the word that had come to him was valid. I do not know how to decide such things. But he must have felt that he could depend on it. See the first ch of ketubot. [Anyway for the woman to be forbidden to her husband in such a case the act has to be with her consent.]

Avraham said...

I do not mean any disrespect for Nietzsche. It is just that on this particular point he was off base. But I agree he was a serious thinker that needs to be taken seriously even if one does not agree with him.

CarpeOro said...

As with many Trump supporters, I have to shrug at the commentary that he is controlled opposition. If he is, things will still continue in the direction they have been. In the country of the blind, you make the one-eyed man king. If he turns out to only be talking the talk, then things will get a lot more heated and progress at a bloodier pace. I'm old enough that I don't look forward to it, but young enough to want it to happen sooner than later....