Login or Register
TRP.RED: Home | Blogs - Forums.RED: ALL | TheRedPill | RedPillWomen | AskTRP | thankTRP | OffTopic
The Parables of The Sower
Guns Are More Important Than Pussy (On Becoming Ungovernable)
Published 10/25/22 by Whisper [2 Comments]

It may have come to your attention that a great many people who wield influence in politics, academia, and social media appear to hate straight white men. If you ask them why, you won’t get a straight answer, and if you watch their behaviour, it doesn’t appear to make a whole lot of sense, either, given that most of them ARE straight white men, and that the taxes and revenue they depend on come from straight white men, and that straight white men are pretty much what keeps western civilization going at all.

You have to think about what’s in it for them. What do they want?

The distinguishing feature of these people is not that they want power (everyone wants power), but that they want power for its own sake. They don’t want it to make their lives better. They don’t want it in order to make the changes they wish to see in the world. They don’t want it to help anyone else, or even themselves.

They just like having it. It’s the source of their next dopamine fix. And they are all serotonin-deficient, so dopamine’s all they have to look forward to.

When you understand this, it’s obvious that if they are targeting straight white men, that must be because straight white men are an obstacle between them and power. Because they don’t do anything for any other reason.

So why are straight white men an obstacle between neomarxists and power? Well, this is pretty simple… straight white men are hard to rule. They are the most libertarian demographic out there. And if you do a web search coupling the words “white”, and “libertarian”, you’ll find that the neomarxists are keenly aware of this fact, and expend a great deal of ink lamenting it.

It’s not about your race at all. It’s about the simple fact that you don’t want them telling you what to do, and you don’t want them taking your wealth to use for their purposes rather than your own. Neomarxists don’t hate you because you are straight, white, male, and young… they hate you because you don’t have to do what they say, and they cannot stand being around anyone who doesn’t do what they say.

So what do you do when someone hates you because you are ungovernable? You have only two options. You can either become easier to rule so that they stop attacking you, or become still harder to rule so that their hatred has no power to hurt you.

The first option is, obviously, a non-starter, because if you become easier to rule, you may stop being hated, and even attacked, but you’re not going to prosper. Look at black people in America… they are super easy to rule. They’ve been voting Democrat and trusting the system for sixty years, in exchange for nothing but empty promises and grinding poverty. The places where black people are being shot, arrested, and neglected aren’t run by Republicans, and haven’t been for many, many years.

If you stop resisting, neomarxists might kick you less, but they aren’t going to magically start giving a fuck about you or one problem that you have.

You must become more ungovernable.

How to do that? First, you have to realize that you actually aren’t in a position of weakness. They may have more money, and more cameras and microphones, and run social media websites, and television news stations, and hold elected office, but ultimately they are trying to make you do things, and you are trying to stop them. That means that in order to win, all you have to do is not do the things.

They are struggling to control your body. But since your body is directly connected to your brain, not theirs, you have a bit of an advantage. All you have to do is first not comply, and second, be resistant to the things they will try to do to make you comply.

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty (not freedom, liberty – they are not the same thing), in this order: Soap, Ballot, Jury, Ammo.

You’ve all heard that saying, and people like to repeat it, but very few know what it actually means. It is not a recipe for how and when to overthrow the government. You don’t need or want to seize control of government, because governments are tools for ruling others, and this isn’t about how to rule others, but about how not to be ruled.

Instead, these boxes are the remedies, in order, to a government’s attempts to control you.

First, they make laws and policies without considering your interests and priorities. The remedy to this is the Soap Box. Most people think you are supposed to stand on your soapbox and persuade others to believe as you do, but that’s not what the Soap Box is for. Instead, you are supposed to harangue policymakers so that they know what you want.

Second, the policymakers and elected officials will try to resist your Soap Box by ignoring your concerns and doing what they were going to do anyway. The remedy to this is the Ballot Box. Most people think you are supposed to go to the ballot box and elect people who support the policies you do, but that’s not what the Ballot Box is for. Instead, you are supposed to vote out officials who ignore you when you get on your Soap Box.

Third, the policymakers and elected officials will try to resist your Ballot Box by rigging the system, creating political parties, gerrymandered districts, absentee ballots, ID-less voting systems, and just plain stuffing ballot boxes with fake votes. Anyone think that the Democrats really won the 2020 election? The remedy to this is the Jury Box.

Which is the stage we are now at. If you think the Ballot Box still matters, consider that congress has an approval rating of under 25%, and a reelection rate of over 90%. If you think that the Soap Box still matters, just try writing a letter to your congresscritter that disagrees with the platform of the political machine they are beholden to. See what the response looks like.

So what does it mean to use the Jury Box?

It means that the law is just words on paper unless it is enforced. To use the Jury Box means to nullify the law by not non-compliance, both on a personal and a collective level.

Juries can vote to acquit for any reason, or no reason at all. Laws can be disobeyed without consequence if the people doing so are too numerous to target, or too expensive to prosecute, or too hard to find. State and local jurisdictions can simply nullify federal law. When was the last time anyone cared that federal law still forbids marijuana use? Unless your home state still goes along with it, voluntarily, it makes no difference at all.

Remember, you are not trying to control the authoritarians. You are just trying to prevent them from controlling you. If the Soap Box and the Ballot Box fail to prevent them from passing crazy laws, then it’s time to make those laws not matter.

Then, if you ignore the law, there is only one thing left for authoritarians to do.

(Oh, they could withhold things you need from them, I suppose, but if you still allow yourself to depend on the federal government for anything you need, you’re clearly a retard, and I can’t fix stupid.)

No, they have to send thugs after you. That’s what the Ammo Box is for. Your AR15…

(You do own one, don’t you? If not, see the previous comment about retards.)

… isn’t for marching on D.C. and guillotining socialists in front of the capitol building. It’s for when they send thugs to drag you out of your home. You might think it can’t work, because they have a lot more men, and guns, than you do. But you’re wrong. They don’t.

There’s a lot of straight white men in America with guns, who don’t want to be told what to do. You outnumber government thugs by many orders of magnitude. They might be able to step on you, but only if you are alone.

This means that the strategy of the Ammo Box is about not being singled out. Do you live in state that’s going to ignore federal law if it tries to violate your rights or disarm you? Do you live near a bunch of people who will disobey with you when the shit hits the fan? Do you know your neighbors? Are they the sort of people who think for themselves, or do they do what their television tells them to? Do they burn down the local business distract if they see something on TV they don’t like?

Might be time to pack that moving van, not to leave the country in pursuit of pussy, but to get where you’re not in hostile territory when the shit hits the fan. Pussy is everywhere. The same cannot be said about “a fighting chance to control your own destiny”.

Make sure you own some land. And a rifle with plenty of ammunition. Make sure you’re not living or working around lots of people who are governable, and can be weaponized against you. Make sure you’re not dependent on the good graces of people who want to control you.

Make sure you’re not vocally right too early. You don’t want to be the only visible person making a stand. Pick your moment. It’s going to have to get a lot worse before most people are tired of getting kicked and ready to stop trusting “the system”.

Remember, society hasn’t “failed you”, because it wasn’t ever on your side in the first place. Start thinking about how to limit its power to harm you.

Because pussy isn't the only problem you have.









[2 Comments]
NARS: The Real Epidemic
Published 09/15/21 by Whisper [1 Comments]

You may have noticed that a lot of people are dropping dead lately.

Lots of folks are eager to tell you that this is due to China's latest innovation in super-colds ("SARS"), and that you need to inject yourself with medical experiments for the rest of your life.

Others are asking the question "how many of those people who died of the super-cold were obese to begin with?" to which the answer is not forthcoming.

Which might lead you to wonder how many people are dying of cancer, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome, and why insulin now costs one firstborn child.

So what is the plague of our time? Covid? Metabolic syndrome? Sugar? Corn subsidies?

Not really. All of these things are bad news, but most people who apparently died of them, and countless more besides, actually died from ... NARS.

They listened to someone who was Not A Real Scientist.

The world abounds today in "experts", who have PhDs, and professorships, and tenure, and research grants, and lots of awards written on impressive CVs, who appear on your television accompanied by some state bureaucrat, or media talking head, who tells you that you must do everything they say, or the world will end next Tuesday.

But none of these things make someone a scientist. A scientist is someone who follows the scientific method to get a result.

  1. Ask a question about something.
  2. Observe that thing.
  3. Based on your observations, make a guess as to the answer to your question.
  4. Make a prediction of what you will see if your guess is true.
  5. Do an experiment, observe the results, and see if your prediction comes true.
  6. Tell others what you saw, regardless of what it was.
  7. Repeat this a lot.

Question, observe, guess, predict, experiment, tell, repeat.

If you do this enough, you end up with a bunch of guesses (we call it a hypothesis) that have been tested really often and never proven false. That's as close to "truth" as we can ever get.

That's it. That's all it is. None of those steps is "have a PhD", or "work for a prestigious institution", "get a research grant", or "appear on TV as an expert".

Anyone who represents himself as a scientist, but doesn't do each and every one of those steps for every result he represents as "scientific", is NARS: not a real scientist.

So this is how you scrutinize these so-called "experts".

  • Did they give people a questionnaire to fill out, instead of running an experiment and observing directly? NARS.
  • Did they run a whole bunch of internet comments through computer analysis and get some numbers about how those words co-occurred? NARS.
  • Is their actual study hidden behind a paywall? NARS.
  • Does their paper not contain all the details needed for a knowledgeable person in their field to repeat the experiment? NARS.
  • Are they telling you their "expert opinion", and expecting faith in it as if it were an experimental result? NARS.
  • Do "99 out of 100 scientists in field X agree that Y"? NARS.
  • Did they do statistical analysis of a bunch of archived data, and then form a conclusion, instead of guessing at something they hadn't seen yet? NARS.
  • Did they wave their PhD or professional title at you on twitter, then tell you something and expect you to believe it? NARS.

As you can probably tell by now, NARS outnumber real scientists, by a lot, even among the so-called scientific community. Some fields are entirely NARS, others are so dominated by NARS that they have shouted the real scientists into silence, or gotten them kicked out of the guild.

Are all NARS wrong 100% of the time? No, of course not. Sometimes, experienced guesswork does tell you something.Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. But without a scientific result, you can't ever tell if a NARS is right this time... so why would you ever trust one?

Is every non-scientist intellectual a NARS? No... some of them aren't representing their opinions as scientific results at all. Maybe they are just giving you a hypothesis that you can test.

But when you hear "trust me, I'm an expert", without further explanation, then recognize the battle cry of the NARS, and do not be intimidated. Because a scientist knows truth, which will be true whether you believe it or not, while a NARS is utterly dependent upon your unquestioning faith to preserve his appearance of expertise.

A scientist, when questioned or doubted, will simply make a prediction and be proven right, because that's what truth allows you to do.

A NARS, when questioned, will rage and point to his credentials, his prestige, his trappings of expertise... because he cannot vindicate himself with a true prediction.

Even a bunch of Bronze Age goat herders understood this:

Deuteronomy 18:22 - Whenever a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord and the oracle does not come about or the word is not fulfilled, then the Lord has not spoken it. The prophet will have spoken presumptuously, so you need not fear him.

NARS are the false prophets of our time.

NARS told us that fat caused heart disease, and we should eat carbs instead. NARS told us that the polar icecaps would be gone by 1998, No, 2008. No, 2013. No, 2015. No, 2026. What is it this week? NARS told us the oil would be gone by now. NARS told us in 1970 that it was already too late to avoid mass starvation due to overpopulation. NARS told us the Soviet agricultural programs would make famine a thing of the past, if only those dumb Kulaks would stop growing grain the way their ancestors had for generations, and start listening to the "experts". NARS told us we could defeat communism by fighting a war in Vietnam. NARS told us to stop eating meat and dairy, and stuff ourselves with pasta and bread. NARS told us ANA would be able to hold off the Taliban by itself.

Since before you born, NARS have been predicting things that didn't happen, then predicting again, as all trace of their previous failure vanished real quick from the public discourse.

How many economists can tell you what the market will do tomorrow, or what policies will create prosperity? How many psychologists can look at a marriage and tell you if it will end in divorce, or tell you how to seduce a woman? How many physicians can diagnose you correctly and cure you, if you have something more subtle than shingles or a broken arm?

NARS kills people. Don't let it kill you.

When a self-styled "expert" tries to tell you something, demand he show his experiments. Demand he demonstrate his power.

Until he does so, assume he is a liar. Skepticism is the only vaccine that can save you from dying of NARS.










[1 Comments]
Next Page