Friday, 14 February 2020

Equal Opportunity Evil: Is the Anglobitch Thesis Going Mainstream?



When I began writing on these issues in 2010, I was viewed as a marginalised commentator, even in the manosphere. In 2020, many of my views on Anglo-American white women have already become mainstream. Over the past decade a veritable army of researchers have emerged who openly discuss white North American women's complicity in slavery, racism and other social malfeasance. Check out the following editorial piece from the New York Times, in which 'radical' or 'progressive' white women's complicity in institutionalised racism is openly discussed:

White Suffragist Racism
Last year, Chicago renamed a prominent downtown street for the celebrated newspaper editor and anti-lynching campaigner Ida B. Wells, who also played a starring role in the earlier 20th-century suffrage movement. Less well known in the city today is the estimable Wells contemporary Fannie Barrier Williams, a member of the black elite who had a profound impact on Chicago during more than three decades of civic and political activism.

As her biographer, Wanda Hendricks, points out, Barrier Williams broadened her influence by crossing racial lines, becoming the first black woman admitted to the Chicago Women’s Club, one of the most powerful white women’s groups in the country. She led the charge to get black women politically engaged and worked tirelessly to open the business world to them as well.

As Harper did, she dissented from the white suffrage movement’s gender-centric view of voting rights, arguing that “black women had unique needs that were defined as much by race as they were by gender and region,” making clear that she was less interested in a political candidate’s gender than in what he or she had to say about the plight of African-Americans. Beyond that, she bluntly reminded white women that racism in their ranks represented a prime obstacle for black women, writing “that the exclusion of colored women and girls from nearly all places of employment is due mostly to the meanness of American women.”

When the Suffrage Movement Sold Out to White Supremacy, Brent Staples, New York Times, Feb 2, 2020

While it might not be the Anglobitch Thesis in its purest form, the essential lines of the Thesis are present in the article quoted above. In brief, the author asserts that 'progressive' Anglo-American feminists have an uncanny knack of retaining racist and reactionary values from traditional Anglo-Saxon culture even while preaching for 'revolution' and 'change'. Although Ben Staples' focus is narrowly political, the Anglobitch Thesis demonstrates that white women's staggering hypocrisy extends into all other areas of life. For example, they retain giga-levels of sexual elitism, puritanical sex negativism and female entitlement even while marching around with placards calling for 'revolution' and the impeachment of President Trump.

In addition, Anglo feminists strive to hide their reactionary addictions behind a smoke-screen of 'genderism' - the ludicrous fiction that that gender transcends all other considerations (status, wealth, ethnicity) in the Anglosphere. This conceptual trick serves to mask their complicity in slavery and other historical crimes, not to mention contemporary racism.

In sum, white Anglo women's hypocrisy is so total that it almost defies comprehension

Moreover, serious academic research is starting to expose the Anglo-American white woman's complicity in slavery and other evils intrinsic to Anglo-American culture. Far from being coerced into obedience by 'evil' white men, white female slave-owners were perfectly capable of performing the most evil deeds on their own account.  Check out the following book review from 2019:

Equal-Opportunity Evil 
A new history reveals that for female slaveholders, the business of human exploitation was just as profitable—and brutal—as it was for men.

Stephanie E. Jones-Rogers opens her stunning new book, They Were Her Property: White Women as Slave Owners in the American South, with a story about Martha Gibbs, a sawmill owner in Mississippi who also owned “a significant number of slaves.” One of them, Litt Young, described her owner as a woman in total control of her financial affairs, including the management of her enslaved workers. Young remembered, for example, how Gibbs’ second husband tried and failed to convince her to stop ordering her overseer to administer “brutal whippings.” After the Confederates surrendered, Gibbs “refugeed:” She took some of her enslaved workers to Texas, at gunpoint, and forced them to labor for her until 1866—“one year after these legally free but still enslaved people ‘made her first crop.’ ” Then, writes Jones-Rogers, “Martha Gibbs finally let them go.” 
Early books about female slaveholders, written in the 1970s and 1980s by historians of women’s experiences, tended to be about elite, wealthy Southerners who fell into that role when their husbands or fathers died. The women in these histories were depicted as having had a conflicted relationship with their role as slaveowner, and some historians posited that these plantation mistresses themselves were restricted and oppressed by the patriarchal society of the Old South. In this telling of history, the women who owned people didn’t directly involve themselves with the day-to-day management of enslaved workers, and certainly not with the selling and buying of the enslaved. 

It’s these assumptions about female slaveowning as a kind of passive, half-hearted practice that Jones-Rogers is challenging with her book—and with them, the idea that white women were innocent bystanders to the white male practice of enslavement. Her goal, she told me in a phone interview, was to paint a picture of the way white women economically benefited from their own slaveholding. For some women, slaveholding helped them attract husbands. Within their marriages, a woman like Martha Gibbs who owned enslaved people might retain a measure of independence by maintaining control of “her” slaves. And if those husbands died, or turned out to be failures at business, their wives figured out ways to retain the human property that would ensure their continued material security. 
Jones-Rogers began this shift in historical perspective by looking away from letters and diaries of elite white women that formed the documentary basis for earlier histories, and toward the testimony of the people who had been in bondage. Looking at life narratives of formerly enslaved people recorded during the Great Depression by the Works Progress Administration (Litt Young’s was one of these), Jones-Rogers found multiple instances of these witnesses naming the women who owned them—not simply as “mistresses” but as owners, with everything that entailed. She found stories of times when these women “reinforced their property claims in conversations with or in the presence of their slaves” and “challenged their male kinfolks’ alleged power to control their property, human or otherwise.” 
Examining other kinds of records, Jones-Rogers found female slave-owners all over the archive of American slavery: female authors of the advertisements placed in newspapers when enslaved people ran away, identifying themselves as the runaways’ owners; women awarded compensation for the deaths of enslaved people who had been executed or sold away after being found guilty of fomenting insurrection; women compensated by cities who hired enslaved workers for public works projects. Married women, who under the legal doctrine of coverture were not commonly allowed to hold property once they had husbands, petitioned courts to gain economic rights to the enslaved people they had owned before marriage—and judges often agreed with their pleas. 
The stories from WPA narratives show that from the perspective of the enslaved, female slaveholders weren’t much different from their male counterparts. Many of them were just as physically cruel as men, and they didn’t hesitate to make decisions to “sell away” enslaved people or their relatives. Stories of women who whipped enslaved people with nettleweed or fed enslaved children spoiled meat, and an entire heartbreaking chapter about the practice of separating enslaved women from their infants so that they could act as wet nurses for their mistresses’ offspring, make it clear that Southern women who owned people weren’t kind “mothers” making the best of a bad situation. “If we look carefully at slave-owning women’s management styles, we find that these differed little from those used by slaveholding men—and they rarely treated enslaved people as their children,” Jones-Rogers writes.  
To some (let’s be honest, probably mostly white) people, the fact that white women have the capacity to inflict violence and to cruelly manipulate the lives of others—to be what Jones-Rogers, in our conversation, called “evil and dastardly”—is an eternal revelation. That’s why we still get curious, “look at this weird phenomenon” articles about white women at Unite the Right, or within the alt-right movement. Or why we need to be reminded again and again that white women gleefully attended lynchings, flocked in the thousands to form auxiliaries for the Ku Klux Klan, and avidly protested school integration in the South and the North. This history of slave-owning women’s economic relationship to slavery, Jones-Rogers says, should “remove the surprise.” “If you think about the value, the importance of whiteness in their lives, being a source of power, being a source of empowerment and emboldenment, then throughout history these little things make sense,” she said. “Women can hold their own when it comes to violence.” 
Perhaps it’s a particularly American tic to want to believe in white women’s innocence in the cruelty of American history. Jones-Rogers reports that when she would present her work to scholars in Europe, they’d be unsurprised at its contents. “There was this kind of consensus among them that women could do these things. But when I talked to American historians, and American scholars, they were saying—‘What??? Wow!’ ” 
While writing her book, Jones-Rogers read Hitler’s Furies, Wendy Lower’s history about Nazi women’s participation in genocide on the Eastern Front during World War II. “One of the arguments Lower makes is, the reason why we may be shocked is, we hold onto this hope that at least one half of humanity still has some good in it,” Jones-Rogers says. “We need some part of humanity to have this inherent, natural empathy. When we find out women can be just as vicious and atrocious, it’s very disillusioning. Because who else is left?”
Rebecca Onion, Slate, February 14, 2019 

This compelling review also highlights how the pedestalising puritanism of Anglo-American culture inhibits objective assessment of white Anglo women's historical and ongoing crimes. Since European researchers were not steeped in gynocentric puritanism, they accepted Jones-Rogers' research far more readily than their North American counterparts.

While such works are worthy enough, and it is good to see the Thesis taking root in the Anglo-American mainstream, it will be noted by my long-time readers that my first book, Havok, was describing historical Anglobitch perfidy as early as 2009.

And I am still way ahead of the cultural curve. I predict that in 2030, issues like the Dogpill, Hyper-Hypergamy, Sexual False Consciousness and female child abuse will be as 'mainstream' as white Anglo-American women's historical racism is today.




Friday, 7 February 2020

Are Men and the Manosphere Evolving Away from Sexual False Consciousness?



As I have explained in detail elsewhere, Sexual False Consciousness is the widespread male delusion that young, attractive women hand out sex for free. Moreover, not only do they spend every hour of every day handing out free sex, they give it to ageing, blue-collar schlubs in pick-up trucks. All utter nonsense, of course: and yet such delusions are ubiquitous among blue collar males, who truly believe that 18 year old models are gasping for sex with mechanics and road-sweepers.

http://kshatriya-anglobitch.blogspot.com/2015/04/sexual-false-consciousness-and-blue.html
http://kshatriya-anglobitch.blogspot.com/2014/07/illusions-and-structures-how-sexual.html

Sexual False Consciousness is the erotic expression of the American Dream and it serves the same purpose in neutralising the masses as its economic counterpart. Like the American Dream, SFC encounters little resistance because most American males have bought into the delusion they can achieve it. And because the sexual rewards for success are so alluring (and the price of failure so catastrophic), they cannot accept that most of them will never have sex with actresses, models and other attractive women. Like blue-collar schlubs who seriously think they have a chance with models and actresses, the average American male would sooner wallow in delusions of sexual success than accept his sexually disenfranchised reality. In the following video, the audience readily laps up the  fiction that some fat, semi-ethnic schlub can attract the interest of a young white beauty:


There it is: clear proof that SFC is alive and well in 21st century America. In fact, only with the rise of the Internet has Sexual False Consciousness been offered any challenge since the mid-1960s. Little wonder that males from generations Y and Z are the first to begin throwing off its brain-rotting yoke.

Here's proof:

The “manosphere” is getting more toxic as angry men join the incels
Men from the less extreme end of the misogynistic spectrum are drifting toward groups that espouse violence against women, a new study suggests. 
In 2014, Elliot Rodger went on a shooting and stabbing spree, killing six and injuring 14 at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Rodger was a self-proclaimed “incel” (short for involuntary celibate)—a group of young men who feel furious at their perceived rejection by women and meet online to discuss and spread their ideology. Their toxic misogyny fuels a hatred for women that has led to several recent incidents of mass violence, with many incels citing Rodger’s own disturbing manifesto as an inspiration.

The authorities are taking note. Last month, the Texas Department of Public Safety released a report finding that incels “are an emerging domestic terrorism threat as current adherents demonstrate marked acts or threats of violence in furtherance of their social grievance.” 
Now a group of computer scientists have painted the most complete picture yet of the misogynistic groups that fuel the incel movement online.

The “manosphere,” as it is known, is divided into four broad groups. “Men’s right’s activists” (MRAs) claim that family law and social institutions discriminate against men. “Men going their own way” (MGTOW) take this feeling of grievance further, arguing that society can’t be “amended”; they often avoid women, blaming them for their problems. “Pick-up artists” (PUAs), meanwhile, date and harass women; they believe society is “feminizing” men. 
And then there are the incels, the most potentially violent of the group. Incels abide by the “black pill,” a belief that women use their sexual power to dominate men socially. For that, incels want revenge.
The team’s analysis found that the manosphere is evolving—and fast. Over the past 10 years, the population of men identifying as men’s rights activists and MGTOW—traditionally older and less violent—is falling while younger, more toxic PUA and incel communities have seen a spike.

Worryingly, it seems that there has been a significant migration from men’s rights groups to incel groups. Every year since 2015, around 8% of MRA or MGTOW members appear to have become more radicalized and joined incel groups online.

“The older [groups] are dying off,” says coauthor Jeremy Blackburn, an assistant professor at Binghamton University.

Indeed, it seems that not only are older, less violent groups dying off, but membership in the more violent groups is becoming more toxic. To determine the level of hate being espoused by these groups, the team used a machine-learning tool developed by Google, called Perspective, that looks for keywords in speech. It produces a “toxicity score” to give an idea of how much hate speech is being used in the forums.
The team’s analysis showed that speech in the most extreme manosphere groups on Reddit, known as subreddits, was far more hateful than the speech of a random sample of Reddit users, and more on the wavelength of fringe far-right hate groups like those that frequent the social network Gab. And it’s getting worse. Over time the toxicity score has risen across all manosphere forums. 
To keep track of the various manosphere groups, the team had to skim seven dedicated forums, along with 57 subreddits and a number of specialized wiki groups. Many of these wikis sprang up after the groups were banned from social media for their extreme views. The team built software to scrape information on threads dating back to 2015, encompassing 138,000 users and 7.5 million posts. 
The way these groups use language made the task tricky. Summer Long, a research assistant on the project, says that the extreme end of the manosphere often uses vulgarity as a self-deprecating measure, which can confuse the systems trained to look for such words. 
Incels also often use seemingly innocuous language to sidestep Reddit moderators. One term that appeared often was “smv,” which stands for “sexual market value.” And one common trope is “spinning plates,” used by pickup artists who date as many women as possible. To a casual observer, those words might mean nothing. To a wannabe incel, they are a sign he’s come to the right place. 
“It’s worth noting that this is a big challenge and that [our way of] measuring toxicity is not perfect,” says Blackburn, noting that Google Perspective has been shown to miss problematic language and might even exhibit racial bias. Still, he thinks that this is a major first step toward identifying people’s migration from less violent groups to more violent ones. 
So what can be done? One step might be to create tools to help spot and protect potential victims, along with an earlier analysis of when and how men’s rights and MGTOW groups get radicalized, says Blackburn.
Reddit has taken steps to crack down on incel-sympathizing subreddits. For example, r/Incel has been banned since November 2017, but an alternate subreddit, r/Braincels, quickly took its place, gaining nearly 17,000 followers. It was banned in October 2018. After the publication of Blackburn and his colleagues’ paper on the arXiv preprint server, Reddit put the r/MGTOW subreddit in quarantine, which means that its content is deemed “extremely offensive or upsetting to the average redditor,” it can’t generate ad revenue, and visitors must click a pop-up saying they understand that other redditors find it offensive. But this crackdown has forced many incels toward even more extreme sites, like Gab. 
Long said spending time in these forums and subreddits as a woman was “eye-opening,” and that she could see how minds are “poisoned” in an echo chamber. 
“It’s horrifying,” she says. “But you can see how it molds someone’s view into being fatalistic. [It’s] a no-hope ideology.” 
Tanya Basu, MIT Technology Review, Feb 7, 2020

Yes, it looks like Sexual False Consciousness is on the way out at last. And since SFC is the principal force binding the male masses to the existing social order, the effects of its collapse will surely be great indeed. Over the past decade, many SFC-brainwashed chumps and deluded tradcucks have laughed at me and my words. But of the many who laughed then, not so many are laughing now; and in the coming decade, I doubt many of those who are still laughing will be laughing any more.




Friday, 24 January 2020

Farewell to a Glorious Decade



Friends

Having been writing on these themes for over a decade, I have come to a watershed. I have used all the ideas floating around in my notes as blog posts and feel I have now described the Anglobitch Thesis in all its potent totality. I was watching Incel TV’s channel recently, and he expressed pleasant surprise at how popular his videos have become. Although my ideas are distinct from his, I feel exactly the same way. When I started my blog and website a decade ago, I never thought I would have the better part of a million page views and fans all over the world of every race and profession. Even less did I dream that young men would have used my books and posts to build fulfilling romantic lives outside the Anglosphere.

But my ideas were unexpectedly popular from one reason: they are the truth. Once, truth could be suppressed by the mainstream media’s Sexual False Consciousness and other tricks of social manipulation: with the rise of the Internet, that is no longer the case. In addition, the Internet permits the instant transmission of knowledge and opinion to a global audience, exposing things long hidden or suppressed. The Dog Pill is a good example of this; it never occurred to me that a large minority of Anglo-American women prefer sex with dogs to men. Similarly, I never knew that Canada was a rabid stronghold of institutional misandry; in 1989, I thought Marc Lepine to be a pure anomaly.

Now I know better.

Yes, a lot of ideas have passed under the Bridge of Years during the past decade: MRA, PUA, the Red Pill, the Black Pill and even the Dog Pill. However, the Anglosphere has only grown more misandrist, (hetero) sex-negative and gynocentric in that time, with the result that at least a third of Anglo-American men have been sexually disenfranchised by female hyper-hypergamy. Meanwhile, the Anglo-American authorities have been pushing male-to-female transsexualism as a 'solution' to the crisis, offering 'escape' to weak men who cannot endure life in a misandrist gynocracy. Of course, a quick glance at the official mortality rates of MtF post-op transsexuals demonstrate that this option offers no real 'escape' at all.

These facts, coupled with the rise of the Internet and the attendant retreat of SFC, have only meant that my status has grown while people like Roosh, Paul Elam and Roissy have fallen into obscurity. Today, low-tier guys approaching Anglo women in the street can be imprisoned for harassment; ten years ago, that would have been unthinkable. Similarly, the whole 'man up' tradcon agenda advanced by older Boomers like Elam, Fleming and Peterson is a laughable relic in an openly misandrist society. Why on Earth should men shoulder traditional masculine responsibilities in a culture which ridicules and excoriates them? A man can lose everything - including his liberty - at the snap of a woman's fingers in the modern Anglosphere. With the social contract in tatters and women free to do whatever they like with complete impunity, men have nothing whatsoever to gain by adopting traditional male values. 

That is why my work has marched from strength to strength along a broadening path of glory, while theirs is already forgotten.

Though my ideas now attract a lot of incels (especially young ethnicels located in North America) and I am flattered by their interest, my ideas are still primarily aimed at non-incel Anglo-American males who simply want a functional heterosexual relationship. I am at core a Red Pilled thinker – or perhaps Crimson Pilled – rather than fully Black Pilled. Given the Anglosphere’s distinctive gynocentric puritanism, a normal (6+) white Anglo-American man can best achieve his romantic ambitions by emigrating and immersing himself in another culture. MGTOW is fine for awakened men who want to remain in the Anglosphere for personal or professional reasons; but the whole idea of ‘Going Monk’ smacks of crabbed and unhealthy Anglo puritanism, not something I would ever endorse.

While I won’t be posting as much as I did during 2019, I will still be active on this blog. I aim to post only when moved by important events, rather than expanding the body of theory I have shaped over the past decade.

If people want to send me guest articles exploring features of the Anglobitch Thesis, you are very welcome. I think ethnic experiences of Anglobitch sexual fascism in North America would make very powerful articles, as would stories from men who have fulfilled their sexual and romantic ambitions after leaving the Anglosphere.

In addition, I am working on a prophetic novella which imagines what the next decade holds for men across the Anglosphere. This work will project from present social trends and conditions to describe Anglo-American gender-relations as they exist in 2030.

What those are like, most of you can probably guess.

RK




Wednesday, 1 January 2020

Get the VantaBlack Pills Armed and Ready: The 2020s will See the Triumph of Reality over 60 Years of Sexual False Consciousness


People before the mid-twentieth century took their reality from reality, not a media-modulated simulation of it. This is why people like Shakespeare saw female nature for what it is, or had such a sure grasp of the incel problem and its social implications. In those times there were no magazines, films, TV shows or grinning celebrity stooges to distort an individual's perception of reality. A good analogy would be signal to noise: a smart person prior to the twentieth century got a pure signal between reality and thought, with much less noise (except for organised religion and classical education, for the educated classes) to cloud the signal.

The Truth Killer

This is why the repulsive Richard's soliloquy in Shakespeare's Richard the Third is still so relevant, five hundred years after it was written. It came from sharp observation of reality itself, not a distorted representation of it:

But I, that am not shaped for sportive tricks,
Nor made to court an amorous looking-glass;
I, that am
rudely stamped, and want love's majesty
To strut before a wanton ambling nymph;
I, that am curtailed of this fair proportion,
Cheated of feature by dissembling nature,
Deformed, unfinished, sent before my time
Into this breathing world, scarce half made up,
And that so lamely and unfashionable
That dogs bark at me as I halt by them,--
Why, I, in this weak piping time of peace,
Have no delight to pass away the time,
Unless to spy my shadow in the sun.

Richard the Third: The West's First Black Pilled Hero?

This speech is completely free of Sexual False Consciousness; there is no trace of self-delusion, idealisation of women or other coping mechanisms. Richard knows a sub-four, hunchbacked male like himself will never be loved or admired, only feared and despised. And given this fact, he determines to fully accept his outsider role and set about destroying his peers with gusto. He is, in all respects, a Black Pill hero. Nor is Shakespeare alone among pre-modern writers in possessing an acutely Black Pilled mindset. The British Victorians Anthony Trollope, Charles Dickens and Thomas Hardy all had a better grasp of female nature than any modern writer. Hardy's stories are full of deluded females chasing handsome, Dark Triad Bad Boys and shunning short, ugly Nice Guys; he drops depleted-uranium Black Pills everywhere.

So why is Sexual False Consciousness such a modern - in fact, late twentieth century - phenomenon?

Answering this question not only sheds much light on SFC, it also implies that the 2020s will be the decade when the Black Pill eclipses SFC as the dominant paradigm of western sexuality.

Although the mainstream media originated in the nineteenth century as printed newspapers and journals, it only acquired total hegemonic dominance over the western masses after world war two. This stranglehold only began to loosen in the late 1990s, although it fundamentally remained in place until around 2009. That momentous  year began to see the introduction of social media into every aspect of life, obliterating the mainstream media consensus that had dominated mass thought for the previous sixty years. The subsequent election of Donald Trump, the UK's vote for Brexit and the West's nationalist resurgence are all manifestations of this process; and without sounding too pretentious, I think the rise of the Black Pill and the Manosphere in general are also part of this 'reclaiming reality' agenda. 

Yes: we are part of a wave.

The Post-War Boom: Anomaly, not Norm

I do not think the rise of the Black Pill is a revolution, however. In fact, it is the restoration of normality after sixty years of media-induced delusion. This is because the mid to late twentieth century - the mainstream media's historic pinnacle - was actually an anomaly, in virtually all respects. It was defined by relatively high social mobility, economic prosperity, progressive rhetoric, institutional feminism, a western media monoculture and extreme levels of Sexual False Consciousness. This is why the Baby Boomers who grew up in that era find the Red and Black Pills so incomprehensible; they actually think a one-eyed Indian janitor has a serious chance with racist Anglo-American models and actresses, or that hyper-hypergamous women want sex with everybody, or that 'looks don't matter', or that some nobody can 'work his way up from the mail room' to become CEO of a multinational.

In those days the MSM could peddle these myths without resistance from autonomous social media and the free, honest discussion it facilitates,  which is why Baby Boomers and older Generation Xers are the age groups most deluded by SFC (and false consciousness in general). Brutal Black Pill facts like female sexual fascism or the Dog Pill are simply beyond the deluded minds of those media-indoctrinated generations.

The Post-War, Blue-Pilled World is History, Now

From the standpoint of 2020, this now seems entirely self-evident. Enough time has now elapsed between the post-war era and the rise of social media for us to clearly see that one-eyed Indian janitors bouncing around in bed with sneering Anglobitch models was just a fiction cooked up by an omnipotent mainstream media: Sexual False Consciousness in its purest form.

But now our time is come. The collapse of media-maintained Sexual False Consciousness means reality is reality for the first time in sixty years. Baby Boomers and their irksome delusions will start dying off in earnest throughout the 2020s: and good riddance. Worsening levels of sexual disenfranchisement and other forms of male ostracism across the Anglosphere will only add fuel to this conceptual renaissance. At present, 27% of American males under 30 have been incel for over a year; by 2025, this percentage will surely rise to 50% or or more. I am not not being presumptuous when I say the 2020s will be the decade for incels, the Black Pill and all forms of dark enlightenment.

The Black Pills are Coming...