When did you hit peak SJW and why? - Get off the woke train and see through the bullshit that is identity politics!

[DiscoRodeo]

When the commies told me their meeting place was a Starbucks

Laughed out loud

They then recommended we cut a deal with a bunch of communists

Also laughed, homage to catalonia eat your heart out

and the club members to go to their socialist meeting in San Francisco

This explains so much.

Or well, I don’t mind throwing extra resources at black people to try to help them out, etc, for a while, but I always felt it should have limits, and expire

Pretty fair take as well, tbh

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

Laughed out loud

Also laughed, homage to catalonia eat your heart out

This explains so much.

Pretty fair take as well, tbh

Also want to point out that at the time, I was attending college at a predominantly Hispanic state, so the commies I was talking to were AOC La Raza types.

 

[asr]

I lost any and all sympathy I had when it became blatantly clear to me that there is no coherence to normal idiots that fall prey to it, and the ones that are coherent are hell bent on destroying the world. To expound I think that you need to look to top down, so look at critical theory and the people pushing for it, those people are monsters and I'm sure plenty of you are aware what cancer that is. The normal person that falls for it tends to lack critical thinking, has a combination of white guilt/class guilt/ doesn't wanna take responsibility for why their life isn't going anywhere. It's easier to blame the white supremacist and patriarchal society than to look at their own failings. What makes it even more insidious is that it preys on actual problems that have plagued our country (US) like racism, look at LA during the crack wars for example, people don't forget that, they pass that down to their kids. That how you get dindu nuffins. It abstracts agency from the individual.

All of what I just said is why I look at normal people that fall for it as idiots and victims ultimately, but what makes me disdain them is their moral fagging and blatant hypocrisy and general retardation and lack of critical thinking, that these people have the arrogance to talk down to me from their ivory tower built upon lies and act as if they're not the clown.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

I used to be a woke neoliberal, now I hate both wokery and capitalism.

I held a lot of modernist beliefs, but I was always quite religious, so when I was stuck at home during the first lockdown, I did some reading and found out that things like GK Chesterton's and the Church Fathers' writings just made sense in a way that the neolibs on Twitter who constantly sperged about troons didn't. Then, of course, St George of Minneapolis got killed and I found myself politically homeless because the people I used to look up to were praising shops being burnt.

I guess following that, I just became more and more redpilled and then at a party, a guy I knew mentioned the CWCki. I looked it up, eventually came here, and you guys made me what I am today. I don't know what I'd call myself now - I'm basically a very socially conservative distributist, and you could probably say that I'm a paleocon, but one thing's for sure; I'm where I am, and I wouldn't go back to being where I was for all the tea in China.

 

[Fougaro]

What made you (...) lose your sympathy for them?​

Understanding basic economics and human nature.

 

[jje100010001]

Interesting parallels with pre-revolutionary Russia- liberals supporting acts of terror, ending up being liquidated first.

Between 1900 and 1917, waves of unprecedented terror struck Russia. Several parties professing incompatible ideologies competed (and cooperated) in causing havoc. Between 1905 and 1907, nearly 4,500 government officials and about as many private individuals were killed or injured. Between 1908 and 1910, authorities recorded 19,957 terrorist acts and revolutionary robberies, doubtless omitting many from remote areas. As the foremost historian of Russian terrorism, Anna Geifman, observes, “Robbery, extortion, and murder became more common than traffic accidents.”

Anyone wearing a uniform was a candidate for a bullet to the head or sulfuric acid to the face. Country estates were burnt down (“rural illuminations”) and businesses were extorted or blown up. Bombs were tossed at random into railroad carriages, restaurants, and theaters. Far from regretting the death and maiming of innocent bystanders, terrorists boasted of killing as many as possible, either because the victims were likely bourgeois or because any murder helped bring down the old order. A group of anarcho-communists threw bombs laced with nails into a café bustling with two hundred customers in order “to see how the foul bourgeois will squirm in death agony.”

Instead of the pendulum’s swinging back—a metaphor of inevitability that excuses people from taking a stand—the killing grew and grew, both in numbers and in cruelty. Sadism replaced simple killing. As Geifman explains, “The need to inflict pain was transformed from an abnormal irrational compulsion experienced only by unbalanced personalities into a formally verbalized obligation for all committed revolutionaries.” One group threw “traitors” into vats of boiling water. Others were still more inventive. Women torturers were especially admired.

How did educated, liberal society respond to such terrorism? What was the position of the Constitutional Democratic (Kadet) Party and its deputies in the Duma (the parliament set up in 1905)? Though Kadets advocated democratic, constitutional procedures, and did not themselves engage in terrorism, they aided the terrorists in any way they could. Kadets collected money for terrorists, turned their homes into safe houses, and called for total amnesty for arrested terrorists who pledged to continue the mayhem. Kadet Party central committee member N. N. Shchepkin declared that the party did not regard terrorists as criminals at all, but as saints and martyrs. The official Kadet paper, Herald of the Party of People’s Freedom, never published an article condemning political assassination. The party leader, Paul Milyukov, declared that “all means are now legitimate . . . and all means should be tried.” When asked to condemn terrorism, another liberal leader in the Duma, Ivan Petrunkevich, famously replied: “Condemn terror? That would be the moral death of the party!”

Not just lawyers, teachers, doctors, and engineers, but even industrialists and bank directors raised money for the terrorists. Doing so signaled advanced opinion and good manners. A quote attributed to Lenin—“When we are ready to kill the capitalists, they will sell us the rope”—would have been more accurately rendered as: “They will buy us the rope and hire us to use it on them.” True to their word, when the Bolsheviks gained control, their organ of terror, the Cheka, “liquidated” members of all opposing parties, beginning with the Kadets. Why didn’t the liberals and businessmen see it coming?

That question has bothered many students of revolutionary movements. Revolutions never succeed without the support of wealthy, liberal, educated society. Yet revolutionaries seldom conceal that their success entails the seizure of all wealth, the suppression of dissenting opinion, and the murder of class enemies. Lenin, after all, was by no means the only bloodthirsty Russian radical. In 1907, Ivan Pavlov—not the Nobel prize–winning scientist, but one of the brightest theoreticians of the especially violent Maximalists—published The Purification of Mankind, which divided humanity into ethical races. In this analysis, exploiters, vaguely and broadly identified, constituted a race, “morally inferior to our animal predecessors,” which must be exterminated, children and all, by the morally superior race, whose best members were the terrorists themselves. Remarkably enough, this program evoked no indignation, among other Maximalists or even among other socialists, however moderate. Another prominent Maximalist, M. A. Engel’gardt, argued for a red terror that would kill at least twelve million people. As if anticipating the Khmer Rouge, one anarchist group sought to establish equality by killing all educated people.

And yet the liberals refused to use their position in the Duma to make constitutionalism work. They would not participate in determining the government budget but confined their activities to denouncing the government and defending terrorists. Even when Pyotr Stolypin, the most capable chief minister Nicholas II ever had, offered to enact the entire Kadet program, the Kadets refused to cooperate. Evidently their professed beliefs were less important than their emotional identification with radicalism, of whatever sort.

In one memorable scene, the hero of Solzhenitsyn’s novel November 1916, Colonel Vorotyntsev, finds himself at a social gathering principally of Kadet adherents, where everyone repeats the same progressive pieties. He soon grasps that “each of them knew in advance what the others would say, but that it was imperative for them to meet and hear all over again what they collectively knew. They were all overwhelmingly certain that they were right, yet they needed these exchanges to reinforce their certainty.” To his surprise, Vorotyntsev, as if under a spell, finds himself joining in. It requires an effort to remind himself that what these progressives say about “the people,” whom they do not know at all, contradicts everything he has learned from his acquaintance with thousands of common soldiers. When Vorotyntsev ventures the slightest discordant observation, “just . . . one little thing . . . they were all on their guard. They fell silent, as they had been speaking, in unison, and their silence was aimed at the colonel.” He retreats and, as if hypnotized, repeats progressive pieties with the rest.

What is this strange political hypnosis? Vorotyntsev gives ground and holds his peace, “not because he felt he was wrong, but out of fear of saying something reactionary,” a word Solzhenitsyn italicizes to suggest that, in other cultures and periods, a different term of opprobrium will play the same role. Soldiers who are brave under fire cower before progressive opinion. For a long time, Vorotyntsev cannot bring himself to voice counterarguments, “and he despised himself for it. . . . It was a contagious disease—there was no resisting it if you came too close.”

One sometimes hears that “the pendulum is bound to swing back.” But how does one know there is a pendulum at all, rather than—let us say—a snowball accelerating downhill? It is unwise to comfort oneself with metaphors. When a party is willing to push its power as far as it can go, it will keep going until it meets sufficient opposition. In the French Revolution, terror was eventually stopped by “Thermidor,” and then by Napoleon. But in Russia, Stalin proclaimed “the intensification of the class struggle” after the Revolution, entailing an unending series of arrests, executions, and sentences to the Gulag. What meets no resistance does not stop.

https://www.firstthings.com/article/2020/10/suicide-of-the-liberals

 

[Yinci]

Gonna post my opposite reaction. I love them and they are good cannon fodder between me and some of you fucks. They can say what they want.

 

[Pargon]

I don't trust any group that wants power for its own sake.

 

[ThatOneLurker]

Once they started saying things like:

"Your grandkids are going to be brown!"

Once they started talking like that and promoting things like Critical Race Theory, and legitmately planning shit like a "Great Replacement" It became clear that it wasn't just about equality. This was about hatred against White people and trying to wipe us from the face of the Earth and history. I don't know if they'll succeed, but they've done a pretty damn good job on destroying White countries and demoralizing us. There's just so much fear and hate now... How do you fight against this? What tactic can you employ to convince people to help you fight them off? How is it even possible?

Everyone I've ever talked to seems to know the problem—at least vaguely. But no one has any solutions. My hope is that automation, CRISPR, and old Whites dying out will encourage an increase in European countries before their situations become critical. In my opinion, America is beyond saving. The best chance at saving it is unironically embracing Castizos and trying to stabilize the White population, but I have no idea how that can be done.

Does anyone have any hopium? This shit fucks with me bad and crashes my mood.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

Once they started saying things like:

"Your grandkids are going to be brown!"

Once they started talking like that and promoting things like Critical Race Theory, and legitmately planning shit like a "Great Replacement" It became clear that it wasn't just about equality. This was about hatred against White people and trying to wipe us from the face of the Earth and history. I don't know if they'll succeed, but they've done a pretty damn good job on destroying White countries and demoralizing us. There's just so much fear and hate now... How do you fight against this? What tactic can you employ to convince people to help you fight them off? How is it even possible?

Everyone I've ever talked to seems to know the problem—at least vaguely. But no one has any solutions. My hope is that automation, CRISPR, and old Whites dying out will encourage an increase in European countries before their situations become critical. In my opinion, America is beyond saving. The best chance at saving it is unironically embracing Castizos and trying to stabilize the White population, but I have no idea how that can be done.

Does anyone have any hopium? This shit fucks with me bad and crashes my mood.

This is why we need thunk-provoking ratings back.

 

[Bosmadden]

Once they started saying things like:

"Your grandkids are going to be brown!"

Once they started talking like that and promoting things like Critical Race Theory, and legitmately planning shit like a "Great Replacement" It became clear that it wasn't just about equality. This was about hatred against White people and trying to wipe us from the face of the Earth and history. I don't know if they'll succeed, but they've done a pretty damn good job on destroying White countries and demoralizing us. There's just so much fear and hate now... How do you fight against this? What tactic can you employ to convince people to help you fight them off? How is it even possible?

Everyone I've ever talked to seems to know the problem—at least vaguely. But no one has any solutions. My hope is that automation, CRISPR, and old Whites dying out will encourage an increase in European countries before their situations become critical. In my opinion, America is beyond saving. The best chance at saving it is unironically embracing Castizos and trying to stabilize the White population, but I have no idea how that can be done.

Does anyone have any hopium? This shit fucks with me bad and crashes my mood.

It's remarkable how cynical they are. They'll openly espouse extinguishing the white race and celebrate the browning of America and at the same time they'll call the great replacement a 'conspiracy theory'. I see this time and again, rank hypocrisy and brazenly lying is in the air they breath, if they didn't have double standards they'd have no standards at all.

But yes I agree most of Europe is going to be fine. The US and Canada OTOH are fucked. America has experienced the greatest inward migration of foreigners in human history. Every single time this has happened, from the late Roman Republic to the Turkish migration into Asia minor to the Bantu invasions of southern Africa, it has led to calamitous war and societal collapse. For fun go read up on the Visigoth migration into the Roman Republic, the politicians who wanted to accommodate the Barbarians and make them into Romans "just like us" sound exactly the same as any Civ Nat boomer politician today, it's amazing to read.

Anyway the very best we can hope for is a colder version of Brazil, with a vast brown underclass ruled over by a hyper corrupt white elite. More likely is an ultra violent version of Mexico, with cartels and gangs ruling over local fiefdoms while a weak central government pays out gibs to keep a lid on things. Outright civil war will depend on whether the migrations will ever stop (not looking likely) and if the prog left abandon their religious mania (again not looking good).

The prediction is that things will really kick off by the 2030's, but the Covid shutdown may have speeded things up a bit. Folks are already moving to where their tribes are (yes even the white liberal Biden voters). The movement of millions of whites out of blue states and cities and into red state small towns and suburbs has two parts of fuck all to do with taxes and 'quality of life'. it's about escaping the chaos that comes with third world migration and surrounding yourself with people who look like you. That's a sign of hope, but we'll either survive the hard times that are coming or we won't, if you aren't at least thinking about preparing you're a fool.

 

[FunPosting101]

I was never part of the SJW thing, but I was also not really massively strongly opposed to it until it really started picking up steam all over the internet. It's fucking terrifying to me sometimes when I think back to what the internet was like just six or seven years ago, nevermind ten years or earlier, in comparison to what it has turned into now.

 

[Legoshi]

I remember reading some article when I was 12 about some black woman going about how her black skin that never ages made her better than white people and

Saint Trayvon of the Skittles is what did it. The anti-white shit was hitting the mainstream and I’m not into self loathing so that was that. Quaint days by comparison to the horrorshow we see today.

I was never a SJW but I was pretty far to the left because I thought issues were based more on class than race. OWS was a sign that people were finally beginning to figure that out. Of course our benevolent billionaires decided to wage a race war as a response and that’s why all of them are now woke.

I remember when I was 12, I read an article on some woke publisher about how black people are superior to white people because muh melanin and skin don't crack, and I couldn't believe I internalised it inside. When you get a conscious of your own, you realize how fucked up this shit is.

 

[Ken Barlow]

Three bullet-points:

• This site and synthesizing verboten viewpoints.
• The sense of humor of users.
• Rational and intelligent debate by people born without the handicap of NPC Downs Syndrome.

Also, never forget, it is fun laughing at retards in the general Cow forum.

Semper Fi

 

[Bloody bunny]

They all come off like the trashes people I have ever met.they are liars and charlatans.they are people I hate most in life, people who get that little bit of power and think they can finally get back at the asshole who pants him in middle school by fucking with you.

 

[knobslobbin]

How do you fight against this? What tactic can you employ to convince people to help you fight them off? How is it even possible?

Easy, you normalize white pride and bring back judging the fuck out of cultures that deserve said judgement.

All of the niggerfaggotry and based shit floating around the alt-right web is just a preview of what society has to turn to soon if we are to survive.

"Your grandchildren will be brown"

As long as little bastard nigglets are nazis!

 

[Afinepickle]

Two main reasons.

1. They destroyed the the Occupy Wall Street Movement out of sheer spite for working class people. The last breath of legitimate liberalism and a call for genuine wealth reform got pozzed to hell and back until it was nothing but progressive stack bullshit. Their champagne faux socialism and sheer contempt for working class America fills me with all kinds of rage.

2. Brainwashing my friends. I live in a VERY Liberal area and so fucking many of the people I used to know have been transformed into insufferable bug people by their rhetoric which they succumb to all out of a desperate desire to fit in. I hate it.

 

[Golly]

"Social justice" didn't always mean what it currently does. Growing up, I understood it to mean concrete support of charity and measurable acts of service for the disenfranchised. It started morphing in the early 2010s. I was getting a little leery at the increased featuring of "intersectionality", but figured it was a fringe thing. It was probably the women's march led by Madonna after Trump's inauguration where I cut ties with the idea. It laid bare just how meaningless and grasping the current wave of feminism had become. SJWs and idpol have only succeeded in undermining and obfuscating movements for actual progress. Activism will not be taken seriously for decades now.

 

[Lizu]

When you see hot political takes being circulated by people who draw furry porn online for a "living", you know who not to join.

 

[Merry]

The Zimmerman Trial and media coverage of the event revealed the gigantic double standard to me. I was into liberalistic politics around then.