Monday, April 17, 2017

The Grave Dumb Sin Of Over Analyzing Hypotheticals...

It’s a fine line between making a point and stating the obvious.

The alt-media or alt-right is growing rapidly because it (more often than not) states the obvious, rather than trying to make a point. Memes are a good example of this.

State, or present, the obvious and people will see the point. Try to make a point and you either end up sounding  preachy and sanctimonious or you leave people scratching their heads trying to figure out what your point is.

We don’t always do this, of course, but we do do it.

The left and old right, however, go the “making a point” route exclusively because those damn facts are always ganging up on them and kicking the non-subjective shit out of them.

Whenever a SJW tosses out some pre-packaged Soros-funded talking point disguised as a question, such as, “how would you feel if you were a homeless refugee?”, I always reply that I’d rather ponder how I’d feel if I were a bad-ass warlord with harem full of Victoria’s Secret  supermodels.

Emotionally manipulative hypotheticals are all the left has, but even in that they have to be able to control a very narrow array of hypotheticals, lest reality again invade into their intellectually retarded safe spaces.

Back to the point of this post... there is an element within the new schools of discourse that gets a bit too carried away with unnecessary ponderings on what-if’s and maybe’s, and that, of course, is the neo-reactionary world.

It’s one thing to what-if the present or near-future but the neo-reactionaries have a tendency to what if long range scenarios involving highly complex theoretical and hypothetical overlapping situations, which may or may not evolve given happenstance A B & C developing into an inevitable D E & F.

They tend to go off on long involved rants about the pros and cons of an Aristotelian based nobility ruling over a land based empire, during a a multi-year drought, in the year 4242 AD, and stuff like that.

Granted, it’s sometimes interesting -but only for so far. The Nrx has long been seen as the crazy uncle in the attic of the alt-right for a reason. Occasionally enlightening, but still crazy.

So when someone asks me about the Nrx I always suggest that they not get overly involved with groups who develop complex systems that require multi-leveled hypothetical analyzing to unpack.

Or just think of it like this: treat queries into what a person or group are about like you would a person to whom you ask the basic, simple, question, “What do you want?” The longer it takes them to answer that question the faster you should be backing away and regretting having asked it.