Posted on 08/26/2012 9:06:54 AM PDT by AnonymousConservative
Perverts have always existed here and elsewhere.About 45 years ago the Rat Party,as part of its coalition building efforts,has basically declared that “anything goes” and that “the 50’s were a repressive,despicable era”.After having specifically and proudly announced their acceptance of various misfit groups...from welfare parasites to illegal aliens to sexual perverts...members of these groups have gravitated toward the Rats and,in the case of parasites and wetbacks (at least) their numbers have grown substantially.It’s simple and,IMO,need not be explained by complicated scientific graphs and tables.
Absolutely fascinating theory, bravo to you for your research - which answers so many questions I have had about American culture and liberals for so long. Your website which I’ve been reading is like turning on light after light in a darkened room.
For example:
“To this end, the r-selected organism will seize every mating opportunity, no matter how unfit the mate. Since mate fitness is unimportant, extremely r-selected individuals will not bother with monogamy or mate guarding, instead following a strategy of mating as often as possible. This will result in individuals investing as little as possible in each offspring, through low-investment rearing strategies such as single parenting.”
There is an advantage in this form of understanding though.
In looking at it as r/K selection, you are able to discern the majority’s K-selected views more clearly, and see exactly where the Liberal’s r-selected views diverge. Once you see that, you can better argue in such a way as to appeal to the Lemmings.
For example, Libs support single mom’ing it. They argue every woman should be able to do as she wishes as a parent, thereby trying to make it an issue of parental freedom. K-selected individuals value freedom, so this can make the argument tolerable to the uneducated.
In the r/K paradigm though, single parenting is merely low-investment parenting, designed to maximize offspring production, at the expense of the offspring’s rearing quality. Highlight in the debate that the Liberal doesn’t care about the children, and that they are supporting something which hurts children, simply because they are programmed to not care about children or their rearing, and you create a wedge between the Lemmings, who value K-selected urges, and the Liberals. K-selected individuals will always put the child first.
I am also exploiting Liberal Narcissism, using some interesting realities in science. If enough people are talking about how Liberals and Gays are the same, Liberals will reflexively try to avoid being labeled with the Liberal tag.
Liberals need to feel superior. And for all their talk about tolerance, and the embrace of their lessers, they are remarkably bigoted. They like gays - so long as they feel superior to them, and the gays are their lessers. Begin to associate Liberalism with homosexuality, and you will hear Liberals squeal.
I actually probably understand Liberals better than Conservatives, so a lot of what I am doing is pointing out ideas which will drive Liberals crazy, if they enter the dialog.
I agree that there are real advantages to this selection theory: Not only adding biological underpinnings to political discourse, but it also resurrects Nietzsche’s psychology of slave-ressentiment of master morality and puts a 21st century scientific spin on that.
First off kudos and thanks for posting the entire blog.
I liked it and will visit your site.
Second, liberals are soooo ghey...
Homosexuals and liberals- perfect together!
HOMOSEXUAL, because there’s nothing GAY about it.
I think if enough people see it, and begin using it, it could make a differnce. I’m just hopeful enough people will look at it that ti will ctach on. It seems like the technical nature limits it’s appeal to a smaller subset of Conservatives who have mechanically minded psycholgies.
Thanks for the kind words.
“thanks for posting the entire blog.”
Thank you for reading it.
“Second, liberals are soooo ghey...”
Agreed.
Why isn’t this just a very short step from eugenics, Master Race concepts and all that horrific stuff?
LOL.
Your site is now one of my small family of bookmarked sites.
It’s really no different than avoiding an ugly, stupid, ill tempered, foul smelling, irrational and sickly date.
So homosexuals and liberals should all be receiving therapy and genetic treatment to cure their problems. The kind thing would be to bring them back to normal from their insanity.
Horses, cows donkeys, goats, sheep, dogs, and Democrat womyn.... Wonder which end of that spectrum they start at.
In a previous post we posited that homosexuality may be an extreme form of the reversal in sex specific behaviors which is seen in r-selected populations, where females become more “masculine,” so as to better protect and provision the young they raise alone, while males become more effete, so as to avoid the conflict which is dangerous and disadvantageous under conditions of r-selection.
That explains a great any things.
The difference between this and Eugenics is this describes Conservatism and Liberalism, and explains what the underlying forces driving both are. This understanding doesn’t, per se create a prescription.
Now if you are K, what you want prescribed will be apparent. It is freedom, where each man rises and falls on their own merit. You can argue that is Social Darwinism, but in reality it is social K-selection. Everyone earns what they can produce in free interactions with others. It’s just freedom.
If you are r-selected, you will abhor this free environment, since you will be programmed to be horrified by any thought of free competition among men. You want that r-selected environment, where everyone has free resources available, all the time, regardless of ability, effort, or determination. This is not sustainable, as we are seeing now, and as a result, it will lead to desires for Eugenics, but only where the Liberal is the one who decides who breeds, and who get’s sterilized What the extreme left side of the spectrum wants, is in truth, Social Darwinism as well, but it is Social r-selection, where everything is apportioned to all equally, by force, and nobody enjoys any advantage. Absent aggressive Eugenics, it si unsustainable, and this is why the left has been so pro-eugenics throughout history.
The problem is everyone wants something “nice.” Nature, unfortunately isn’t nice. If you embrace Conservatism, some will invariably not demonstrate ability, effort, and determination, and they will not have as much as others. It’s not nice, but it isn’t cruel either, if private charity kicks in, which it will.
If you embrace Liberalism, the r-selected cohort will engage in promiscuity and single parenting, exploding their numbers on the freely available resources you provide. They will not contribute much, and they will feel entitled to a lot, and eventually, they will crash the entire system, bringing in K-selection with a bang, as we are about to see.
At this point, I am more about characterizing all of this than prescribing solutions, which I think are obvious to the Conservative intellectual.
“It’s really no different than avoiding an ugly, stupid, ill tempered, foul smelling, irrational and sickly date.”
Perfectly said.
“Horses, cows donkeys, goats, sheep, dogs, and Democrat womyn.... “
They are all the same, if you’re Liberal enough!
*shrug* The horses are prettier and smell better...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.