Tequila, the wonder drug

Do you have feelings of inadequacy? Do you suffer from shyness? Do you sometimes wish you were more assertive? If you answered yes to any of these questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist about Tequila®.

Tequila® is the safe, natural way to feel better and more confident about yourself and your actions. Tequila® can help ease you out of your shyness and let you tell the world that you’re ready and willing to do just about anything. You will notice the benefits of Tequila® almost immediately, and with a regimen of regular doses you can overcome any obstacles that prevent you from living the life you want to live. Shyness and awkwardness will be a thing of the past, and you will discover many talents you never knew you had. Stop hiding and start living, with Tequila®.

Tequila® may not be right for everyone. Women who are pregnant or nursing should not use Tequila®. However, women who wouldn’t mind nursing or becoming pregnant are encouraged to try it. Side effects may include dizziness, nausea, vomiting, incarceration, erotic lustfulness, loss of motor control, loss of clothing, loss of money, loss of virginity, delusions of grandeur, table dancing, headache, dehydration, dry mouth, and a desire to sing Karaoke and play all-night rounds of Strip Poker, Truth Or Dare, and Naked Twister.

Tequila, the wonder drug

Get Woke Go Broke: Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) believes that Scandinavian culture is nothing

Recently, Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) produced one of those advertisements typical of woke capital lately.  This sort of thing is political propaganda piggybacked onto what should just be commercial propaganda.  This one was particularly noxious, a cringe-fest full of cultural Marxism.  One jarring aspect was the frequent juxtaposition of real Swedes with incompatible residents who are only there because their government is full of globalist sellouts.  That was meant to be in-your-face; they knew exactly what they were doing.

That certainly wasn’t the only problem with the advertisement.  It makes the claim that there is nothing uniquely Scandinavian.  The way it does so is by cherry-picking facets of their culture that had antecedents originating from abroad and later were adapted to local use, sometimes developed considerably further.  It’s rather like saying that the Greek alphabet isn’t Greek because it evolved from the Phoenician writing system.

With that tactic, essentially the commercial makes a fallacy of composition.  I could go further into memetic theory and how ideas get around, often internationally.  I might add that Western technology has benefited the developing world tremendously.  We don’t scream about cultural appropriation when (for example) non-Whites use electrical appliances made possible because of folks like Messieurs Tesla, Westinghouse, Edison, etc.  That doesn’t bother us – why would it?

That said, Scandinavia does have a culture of its own.  It’s part of my heritage.  I’m serious enough about it that I learned Old Norse and some Gothic.  Therefore, SAS can kiss my grits.  I’d rather row across the Atlantic in a longboat than buy a plane ticket from them.

What is the point of that commercial?  This was pretty obvious; it’s demoralization propaganda wrapped up in sugar-coated universalism.  It’s for the SAS ad execs to tell their own countrymen that they don’t have a culture.  Why, they’re nobody!  Moreover, since the Scandinavian people are such a nonentity – according to enlightened leftist opinion – then their homelands are fair game for colonization.  Way Of The World explains it below, but don’t miss his original version.

How does this help SAS sell plane tickets?  It doesn’t!  Remember, that wasn’t the object in the first place.  The munchkins at the ad department used this company’s resources to make a political message to promote their views and rub their own countrymen’s noses in it.  As it happens, this turned out to be tremendously unpopular.  Counter-Currents described reactions to this turkey and how the company then went into damage control:

When simply ignoring the problem failed to work, SAS and Swedish media then moved on to the next weapon in their arsenal: Deflection. Not just any kind of deflection, mind you, but the most cliched kind possible: SAS and the media claimed that the backlash against their video was made possible by clandestine Russian influence and a coordinated network of Internet Nazis.

They screwed up to begin with by making this cringe-worthy demoralization propaganda.  After it proved to be unpopular, they followed up on their error by claiming that the bad reaction was astroturfed via a politically incorrect conspiracy.  Way to go!  Why can’t these snotty leftists in the ad department simply admit that they made a mistake?  A little contrition would do wonders, but they don’t think they did anything wrong by insulting their own people.  Did I mention that SAS can kiss my grits?

Get Woke Go Broke: Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) believes that Scandinavian culture is nothing

China, please stop eating bats, cats, and dogs

The biggest event in today’s news is the spread of coronavirus, a new plague that China is desperately trying to contain.  This seems to be basically a newer and worse version of SARS.  What might have caused it?

There’s been some speculation that it was genetically engineered and managed to break out of the laboratory, something rather similar to the opening of Stephen King’s The Stand.  There’s been some other speculation that it was effectively an anti-Asian race bomb which the Chinese unleashed on themselves.  If so, it was unintentional and they didn’t know what they were doing.  Luckily for them, China doesn’t have cultural Marxism, so their politicians have no reason to behave treasonously or self-destructively like this.

The official and non-conspiratorial explanation is that coronavirus emerged from a bad batch of bat soup at a seafood market.

It’s possible that multiple of the above explanations may apply.  That seafood market just so happens to be located very close to a biological warfare research facility.  (The Google Maps location has been changed for unspecified reasons.  Explanations?What if one of the workers at the lab was told to destroy samples, but then thought of making a few extra yuan by selling dead bats to this seafood shop?  What’s the worst thing that could possibly happen, right?

One question that needs to be asked is, why the hell does anyone eat bat soup over there?  Bats are unique and special creatures, of course.  Still, they’re flying rodents.  If you eat them, then you can catch whatever chupacabras they’re carrying.  Some bats even have rabies.  (Those who’ve read Cujo, another Stephen King classic, should be aware of that one.)  It’s time to cut it out!

On that subject, it’s not just rodents that should be avoided.  It’s time for them to stop eating cats and dogs too.  They’re our friends.  They love us, and we should love them back.  They certainly don’t belong on the dinner table.  As much as I admire Chinese culture, this is something that leaves me horrified.  After five thousand years of civilization, it’s time to do better.

China, please stop eating bats, cats, and dogs

Posts 101-150 in review

Whew!  It’s time for another article recap here.

  1. Posts 51 to 100 in review – The last post like this.  Don’t miss the first recap as well.
  2. Yet another Drag Queen Story Time scandal – It must be tough hiding those boners under their dresses.
  3. Caffeine withdrawal is a bitch with fleas – We wants it my preciousssss…
  4. Martin Niemoller Reloaded – a new take on the famous statement – I got so sick of the original that I satirized the hell out of it.
  5. I’m a lesbian – my coming out story – This is what feminist theory did to my brain;
  6. Get Woke Go Broke – Target sells queer shampoo by OGX and queer mouthwash by Listerine, but #takepride takes money – How much did it cost the factory to make a production run for their silly virtue signaling stunt?
  7. Payday loan crook gets busted – Better not drop the soap in prison!
  8. Book Review – Mister by Alex Kurtagic – If you put up with continued encroachment on your liberty, will The System leave you alone?
  9. Work versus prison – Maybe I need to hold up a bank…
  10. The Adventures of MP0werdW0myn and OmegaMan – Mission 2 – OMFG’s New Front Group – Maximum Leader Rosso recruits two more useful idiots.
  11. Murphy’s Law, the automotive edition – The Amish have it so much better.
  12. Miley Cyrus says virginity doesn’t exist, and UK MSM paper agrees – Did you know that this famous pop diva is also an authority on morality?
  13. Book announcement – Complete Collection of Deplorable Diatribes, Traditionalist Tirades, and Reactionary Rants of an Egregious Extremist – This one is my magnum opus here.
  14. My experience using Kindle Create – There’s not much to their tutorial, so hopefully this will fill in some gaps.
  15. Is this Clown World, or is this a world of shit? – There are some politically incorrect realities about public defecation.
  16. Former Muslim draws Muhammad cartoons – The wit is a little dry in places, but he has his moments.
  17. The Stepford Wives, a case study of feminist propaganda – You actually get to see The Patriarchy’s clubhouse!
  18. Clown World’s “cow demons and snake spirits” – Maoist terminology is fun sometimes!
  19. The Handmaid’s Tale series: a politically correct soap opera, subversive victimization porn, and electric brain cancer – This is your brain on feminism.  Any questions?
  20. Is Wikipedia biased? “Exhibit A” is their Manosphere article – If you followed WP’s link to my page, this is the article the guy who put the URL there meant you to read.
  21. The funniest timeshare telemarketing cold call ever – Pwn@g3!
  22. The ugly truth about “sugar dating” is proof that Fourth Wave feminism has gone full retard – Is being a “W” really empowerment?
  23. What sexual dimorphism looks like – There are men and women and a very small number of loose odds and ends.
  24. Wiki Wars: The Narrative Strikes Back – Someone at WP assumed my article 120 is evidence that I was messing with their article.  Silly leftists!
  25. Do you want to be a male feminist ally? – Check your brain at the door, pucker up, and prepare to kiss a lot of ass.
  26. Is Wikipedia biased? They whitewashed the Union League carpetbaggers of the Radical Reconstruction – It’s history told the one-sided way.
  27. Movie review of Joker (2019) – They kicked him while he was down, until he fought back.
  28. Britain’s most indecisive transsexual wants to be a porn star – Kid, get a clue!
  29. How to quit the Alt Right and stop being a right wing extremist – If you’re going to turn your back on everything you believed in, do it the right way.
  30. Meet the founding mother of men’s studies – This is the fairy in charge of telling men how to be men.
  31. If you’re sick of YouTube’s political censorship, here is a long list of alternative channels on Bitchute – Here’s the stuff that they didn’t want you to see.
  32. I just raised my intersectionality score! – I’m a Black lesbian now, so I can pull rank on everybody else!
  33. John Lennon’s “Imagine” reloaded – That perfectly awful pinko / globalist song just got satirized.
  34. After the Confederate statues are gone, who will they go after next? – Did you think they’ll stop with Robert E. Lee?
  35. The political angle of magick – It’s not just for New Age crystal weenies.
  36. How Microsoft AI Tay became a Fascist – Artificial intelligence takes the Red Pill!
  37. Black Friday stocking stuffer “Santa Claws” – An overrated scribbler thought he was a poet.
  38. If political parties were sodas – Here’s a funny analogy.
  39. Men’s Health encourages men to explore bisexuality – C’mon, you know you wanna!
  40. Can Disney’s princess movies encourage Princess Complex? – The little girls get some pretty questionable messages from these seemingly wholesome films.
  41. What would happen if everything in Clown World was exactly the opposite? – This is a cute thought experiment about inverting the inverted.
  42. J.K. Rowling is targeted by online mob of SJW crybullies for defending freedom of expression – Being liberal is no protection against The Homintern.
  43. How I quit vaping and discovered that nicotine addiction isn’t very hard to beat – Puff puff give, puff puff give!
  44. 2019 is gone, and not a moment too soon – Can I get a respite from this crap?
  45. A contrarian perspective on the “optics” debate in the dissident right – There is strength in audacity.
  46. Repost: How To Get Over The Girl Who’s Not Right For You, By The World’s First PUA Author – A reprint from before Return of Kings went G rated.
  47. Is royal gold digger Meghan Markle maneuvering for the divorce of a century? – And they said Wallis Simpson was bad?
  48. Some exciting unseen perspectives about St. Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. – This is what twenty pages of a much longer suppressed FBI report revealed.
  49. Reasons why it’s better to be a leftist – Best of all, you don’t have to pretend to be a moderate.
  50. Why libertarians and others are wrong about maximally deregulated markets and laissez-faire economics – Bad things happen if the government fails to keep hands out of the cookie jar.
Posts 101-150 in review

Why libertarians and others are wrong about maximally deregulated markets and laissez-faire economics

I do have an admiration for certain facets of libertarianism.  These days, any ideology that doesn’t favor pointless globalist wars, and doesn’t care for the present Orwellian degree of domestic spying, certainly does have something going for it.  However, there are some flawed characteristics about “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” (SLFC) ideologies such as libertarianism, Objectivism, anarcho-capitalism, and neoconservatism.  (The latter is worse than the others because it actually does like spit-in-your-eye wars and domestic spying.)  Their laissez-faire economic position is one of these problems, a sort of free market absolutism emphasized heavily throughout the SLFC spectrum.

This is going to be a wild ride.  I’m afraid that I’m about to piss off some readers royally here.

One problem is the SLFC tendency to use The Market as essentially a barometer of absolute good.  One way it comes out is equating what’s good for the economy with what’s good for everyone.  In conditions where a rising tide lifts all boats, that much is so.  However, it’s kind of worn out now that we’ve experienced half a century of stagnation in real wages while business productivity has been climbing steadily and upper management swims in gravy.  Lately, they’ve been introducing the idea that we’ll have to eat bugs and live in pods.  How precious.  “Let them eat cake” sounded a lot better.

Another way is equating maximum permissiveness (deregulation) for businesses with maximum liberty for the public.  This is implied by the political compass test, a popular recruitment tool for libertarians, where they take the square symbolizing freedom on both axes.  Freedom sounds great, of course, but there’s always the question of “freedom to do what?”  Regulations on businesses are meant to keep them from putting their hands in the cookie jar.

Is what’s good for The Market good for everybody?

First of all, let’s make it clear that The Market is an abstraction.  It’s a reification of the effect of lots of people buying and selling inside a marketplace, which is a domain of exchange, or several of them.  (Is there anything particularly magical about that?)  Still, in SLFC ideologies, The Market is given great emphasis; much like the Word of God is emphasized in theocracies.

The comparison is hardly an exaggeration.  As the theory goes, sooner or later, The Market will take care of any sort of problem that might arise.  That makes those supply and demand curves on a chart into sort of a universal healer.  Not only that, The Market is the force of destiny.  Economic trends are the Prime Mover, and the cosmic law that must be obeyed.  Objectivists usually are atheists, and so are some other SLFCs, but they end up all but worshiping The Market.

I’m familiar with Adam Smith’s theories.  The Market finds its own level, and prices set themselves.  I could go into a long explanation of why this is so – the “invisible hand” effect – but any introduction to supply / demand curves can do that much.  Artificially interfering with the prices will have consequences of one sort or another.  This lends itself to an anarchistic argument for having no limits whatsoever.  That means no regulations – again, the thing that keeps businesses from putting their hands in the cookie jar.  It’s quite true that too much red tape will lead to inefficiency and unnecessary hassle, but that’s not a good argument to do away with all regulation whatsoever.  The critical factor, of course, is a regulatory climate that keeps hands out of cookie jars but isn’t burdensome to legitimate trade.  Still, even that is bad according to laissez-faire doctrine.

The theory goes further than that.  Any impediment to trade is considered an absolute bad thing.  Obviously tariffs are a big no-no, and free trade agreements (in practice, a bipartisan fuckup) were a big priority in globalization.  Borders wouldn’t even exist if globalists got their way, and everyone would use one currency.  (Everyone would look the same too, but all that’s another matter.)  This isn’t so much to do with warm, fuzzy One World internationalism.  It’s so that the big players can make more money that way.  Also, getting as rich as possible isn’t enough; the NWO types expect to call the shots in any future world government.  Imagine there’s no sovereignty, it’s easy if you try, ooh ooh ooh…


SLFCs are usually economites.  In this context, this means people whose sole gauge of worth is money.  To an economite, anything you can’t put a price tag on has no value.  Therefore, a beautiful, primeval forest isn’t worth a nickel more than what you could get if you sent a logging crew to clear-cut it and then sold it to become a big parking lot.  The fact that all that natural beauty would be destroyed forever matters nothing.  Also, if an endangered species of birds lived there, tough luck for them.  Tough luck for all the other forest creatures too.  Economism ignores factors like these, among many other externalities.  Those are inconvenient details that get in the way of the theory.

If a factory closes so that it can be relocated in a country where the workers are paid peanuts and labor laws are a joke, then this is something considered to be good.  If this wipes out a small town’s economy back home, tough luck for them.  If globalization becomes a trend and devastates entire regions – such as the USA’s “Rust Belt” or Britain’s northeast – tough luck for them too.  (Feel free to imagine greedy management types rubbing their hands together gleefully.)  If The Market says that cities, regions, or even entire countries must be blighted, then so be it.  The government mustn’t try to do anything to stop it, because that would interfere with CEOs trying to squeeze pennies until they bleed.  Moreover, the politicians know which side their bread is buttered on; both parties get payola from the same major donors.

Libertarianism has much to say about individualism.  However, when economism prevails, people are merely economic units; atomized and replaceable cogs in the machine.  Does that maximize freedom for everyone?  I’ll leave that for the reader to decide.  On an odd side note, Marxism – quite different from Libertarianism – is another economite ideology, though they have a different context for the term.

Are corporations always wonderful?

As I wrote about the SLFCs in Deplorable Diatribes:

It’s rather odd how much neocons, Libertarians, and Objectivists idolize corporations. Haven’t any of them ever worked in a cubicle hell resembling Office Space? Anyone who has experienced kiss up / kick down management culture should understand that not every corporate officer is John Galt. Some of the suits are more like James Taggart, occupying themselves with looking important, claiming credit for other people’s work, and otherwise screwing up everything.

Libertarians and anarcho-capitalists especially have a preconceived bias that governments are bad and always screw up everything.  (There’s at least something to that; our present globalist regime certainly has been a mess for a long time.)  Meanwhile, they and other SLFCs often believe that corporations are always good, a position which is perfectly silly.  These ideologies do have a lot to say against collectivism.  Granted, governments are collectives, but what exactly do they think corporations are?  Why haven’t the SLFCs figured this out yet?

Corporations can be (and often are) just as capricious as the government of a banana republic.  Employees often are expected to kiss ass, just as they would be if they were citizens under a petty tyrant.  A company can’t put you in a gulag because they don’t like your opinions.  However, they can deprive an employee of his or her livelihood for nearly any reason, except in places protected by unions or strong labor laws.  Some others have vast powers over society, which I’ll describe in another article.  SLFCs tend to have an odd idea that something bad is wrong only if the government is doing it.  They don’t mind if corporations do the very same thing.

Are regulatory agencies like the EPA necessary?

There is a popular anarcho-capitalist YouTube commentator who certainly is quite intelligent, but really needs to take off the ideological blinders.  (I won’t say who this is, because he’s come a long way so far.  If you guessed who I’m talking about, you’re probably right.)  He said that we don’t need the FDA, because if any company sold bad food or bad medicine, then word would get around and it would hurt the company.  This is a perfect example of the SLFC notion that The Market will fix everything.  In this instance, he was dead wrong.

Once upon a time, hucksters plied a steady trade selling fraudulent snake oil cures and ineffective patent medicines.  Standards in the meat packing industry were pretty atrocious around that time; Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle provides the scoop on that.  These two things were the very reason why we got the FDA in the first place.  When The Market failed to fix these problems, the government had to step in.  I can imagine how it went over back then:

  • “What, I can’t sell my miracle cancer cure salve without actually proving it works?  You’re taking away my freedom as a businessman!”
  • “How dare the government tell me that I can’t sell rotten meat!  What a bunch of Fascists!”

Finally, none of the above is to say that all businesses are bad.  They do have a legitimate place in society, of course (which doesn’t include calling the shots).  The point is that they tend to be flawed to one degree or another.  This is not so different from all other human institutions, including governments.  A sensible regulatory environment is a check against companies misusing their powers, just as Constitutional protections keep enlightened governments from becoming tyrannical.  Finally, we should remember the proverb that money is a good servant but a bad master.

Why libertarians and others are wrong about maximally deregulated markets and laissez-faire economics