Showing posts with label Hoyt-Sarah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hoyt-Sarah. Show all posts

Saturday, March 4, 2017

Sarah Hoyt: Wars and Rumors of Wars

Upside Down

Let’s hope this tide is not a blood tide, though it will be, in some places, at some times. It always is. Man is a fighting ape.

But if you are a manager, or have the ear of one, think through things. How everything is affected, what is likely to come next. Then try to influence things to keep stuff going, with minimal shocks.

Because the confused and shell-shocked elites have started fighting back. This is most obvious after the elections, and in politics, but it’s happening at all levels. And because they don’t know why things are failing, they’re starting to get paranoid. There’s going to be a lot of deplatforming and politics of destruction ahead. And that leads very easily to politics of physical destruction.

Be prepared. Think about the future as well as you can. This is difficult, on account of the future hasn’t happened yet, and there’s things you’ll not take in account and things that will go wrong. Sure. But you’re plenty smart enough to keep a step or two ahead of destructive change. Most of us are.

Most industries/institutions/polities won’t get this. You must try to save what you can from the wreckage, but be aware, too, that we’re about to go upside down.

Be ready for it. Be prepared. Don’t lose your way. We’re going to need all the people who can think through this, plus some, to avoid a blood letting that will make the French Revolution or the American Civil war look like tea with the parish ladies.

Keep your head, keep your sanity. Be not afraid.

Monday, September 14, 2015

Sarah Hoyt on the Impending Collapse

Excerpt; the coming separation will be very, very messy; read the whole thing at her site:
The Great Divorce

"You see, for years being a leftist has been a positional good. What I mean is for years (probably more than a century) it’s been assumed that the caring, etc. man is the one who wants to subjugate humans to the whim of the state. This is partly because it is typical of humans to trust in the man on the white horse, and the peculiar form of it in the twentieth century was the “government bureaucrat.” Possibly because the economic and industrial conditions meant the people doing the trusting (the “intellectual class”) were educated much like government bureaucrats.

But for years, certainly before I came here in the 80s, being leftist was the mark of education and breeding.

Because any views that disagreed with the left were considered “stupid” this by definition meant to be considered smart you had to make the right (left) noises. A lot of upper class families, and certainly most of the intellectual establishment was all but communist by the 40s and 50s. (To believe Heinlein.)

And you’d think that they’d become less leftist since the USSR fell, but they didn’t. They went around muttering that the good guys lost, for a while, and then set about carrying on their bizarre faith, now transmuted into radical feminism, radical environmentalism, etc, before they’d gotten far away enough from the debacle that was the USSR to come up with the witty idea that real “communism has never been tried.” (I tell you what byotchs. We’ll try it right after we try unfettered capitalism. If the very fettered version of the thing we had in the US lifted the entire world out of historical misery, imagine what the unfettered version would do.)

Their social signaling remained the same. The more left you were, the “smarter” and “more educated.” (This is true so far as more educated in these days can mean more indoctrinated.)"

[Emphasis added]

Friday, January 9, 2015

Sarah Hoyt Sees Red

"Which is when I started to see red.

The film of red grew as these asinine cowards, these craven and self-regarding poltroons, started saying things like that the brave men and women who risked their lives for free speech should have been more careful of the feelings of others. These are the same people who routinely, three times a day, post some dig at Christianity, some mockery of Americans, some pseudo-witty comment about Republicans. But see, none of those people threaten to kill them.

The brave social(ist) justice warriors are ever ready to speak truth to the power that will not hurt them. Towards Islam, otoh they adopt the crouching position and kiss the terrorists gangrenous blood-soaked pudenda.

Is this their pathological admiration of anyone who has the cojones to do what they’d like to do and cut the throats of everyone who disagrees with them? After all, these are the idolaters of Che, he who clubbed children and puppies to death. Are they, in their heart, hyenas who dream of being lions? Or perhaps – since the lion is a lazy beast who relies on size and intimidation – they are lions who dream of being hyenas.

But I might give them too much credit. Perhaps just as after nine eleven, they find themselves scared. After all these barbarians they keep trying to dress in the robes of the noble savage, might not know that they are quite willing to betray their countrymen in order to be the ones killed last."
Yes. They are cowards, both physically and intellectually. To be despised and shunted into oblivion.

There is much more at the link: go there, read it all.

OK, I must include this:
"With your words, your mollycoddling, your excusing of abhorrent deeds, your covering them under the tattered blanket of victims of racism, you prevent a sick, murderous culture from changing. You keep human beings in subjection. And you encourage the murder of innocents for no greater crime than speaking their minds.

The blood of the staff of Charlie Hebdo is on your hands. No matter how much you wipe them on the cloth of self-regard and self excusing, you cannot run from yourself.

I hope in the back of your mind, the horror of what you are doing burns like acid. I hope you wake in the night screaming “mea culpa.”

I hope so, because that would mean you are redeemable."
And there's this observation from the comments:
Phantom:
"Oh and by the way. All you brave Social Justice Warriors out there implying (or coming right out and saying) that “it’s understandable” that the Mooselimb head choppers went after Charlie Hebdo. Just want to remind y’all that this is the soft racism of low expectations. It’s understandable that the jihadicks would kill people for publishing cartoons because Mooselimbs are a bunch of murderous pukes with room temperature IQs and zero impulse control."
Soft racism; but it is fixed hard to the Leftist narrative.