Friday, August 28, 2015

Spotlight Friday: AnonymousConservative

Commenter Kitefox suggested this spotlight, and his time has indeed come. He doesn't post that often, and many of his posts are long discursive lectures using many boring strings of needlessly big words. Lectures that argue for killing all liberals, because they're crazy. His manner is this reflective rationalism that is no doubt infuriating in person, as he says crazy crap and then laments your irrationality when you disagree.

But even beyond his academic genocide advocacy, he's got his quirks. He claims not to, but seems to really like Putin. He also jumps on any story wherein shadowy puppetmasters be blackmailing American politicians. And, naturally, he's worried about all the Commies in sci-fi.

Everything you hear outside of Free Republic is lies:
I find it amusing that none of these people complain about MSNBC or CBS as propaganda. Everything is propaganda today - either corporate, political, financial, or personal, and some of the Liberal stuff is beyond belief - to the point a lot of people now just beleive the opposite of what they are told.
I’m not a Putinista, but...
I’m not a Putinista, but I by no means take the western narrative of Ukraine at face value.

The bottom line is, Obama and the EU appears to have set this in motion more than Russia, which seemed happy with the status quo a few months back. Either Obama and the EU did it through gross incompetence (not impossible), or it was for some strategic reason. If it was strategy, you have to ask, was that strategy designed to serve the cause of freedom, honor, or even our national interests? Or is it more likely the strategy was designed to serve leftism and/or some banking/elite’s grand plan to enrich themselves and control something they wanted?

It’s not like this whole thing has a freedom/honor/goodness-obsessed ideologue like Reagan involved on one side, where sides are clear. Sure Putin is a shark, but so are the leftist/globalist/EU types on the other side.

Now, I’m not so sure Obama isn’t using his sanctions to try to get Putin to do something to our economy in return, to trip the collapse Obama has set up these last six years, so when the collapse/correction comes, he can say it was Putin who did it and not him.

I just don’t get why people even care enough to take sides.
Maybe everyone is being blackmailed!
What will be the bombshell is when every government official is on it. If two or three people at NSA, who nobody has even heard of, own the Supreme Court, Congress, the President and all of his staff, all the generals, and most of the media, we are practically, a stealth dictatorship with a illusion of democracy. There is no elected official, unless he does what the secret cabal wants. If he doesn’t, they just Petraeus him, and put in somebody who will do their bidding.

It is funny, but we may end up not sure if Russia is all that more controlled a form of government than we are. If the above article was even half true, this could be the biggest revelation in the history of America.
A really bad attempt at propaganda:
I’d vote for hoplophobe too, but if not, take a page from the leftist playbook, and make it a phobia, so it implies mental illness - like homophobe, just make it a phobia of something respected by society. I’d go with Gunophobe, Defensophobe, Protectophobe, Loyalphobe, Armophobe, Manly-phobe, Masculophobe, Honorphobe, Familophobe, or something similar.
Somehow I doubt he ever wins arguments:
Some examples of using mortal salience with liberals.

Gay tolerance : Point out the CDC data on disease carriage of homosexuals (STDs/AIDS, but things like meningitis, MRSA, Gay Bowel Disease, etc as well), and make the case that homosexual aversion is a rational, evolved trait designed to help one avoid disease exposure. Point out that if a pandemic hits, all those who are homo-tolerant will rapidly be culled from the population, and since a pandemic is unavoidable, homo-intolerance will be normal soon enough. Do it unemotionally, even slightly bemused by it, and Libs will shut up fast.

For guns I like to combine mortal salience (mention of death) with shame over their helplessness, shame over their disloyalty to their loved ones in not wanting to protect them, shame over their own lack of honor, and shame over their own impotence and likeliness to get killed. So I’d comment on how shocked I am that not only are they so disloyal to their own family that they have no desire to be able to protect them from being killed by a thug in a violent encounter, they have the gall to demand that I be remiss in my duty to protect my own family.

Observers, not wanting to be seen as disloyal, cowardly, helpless, weak, and impotent like the liberal, will immediately side with you, giving it a social punch threatening the leftist with social isolation as well.

Leftists argue differently. Facts, logic, truth, being right mean nothing compared to trying to socially out-group the opposition with ridicule, or just mob-alliance against the opposition, often based on the “bad feelings” associated with the opposition position.

But in the liberals head is a switch. Colonel Connell hit the button on Mike Wallace with that interview after a whole swath of people arguing logically could not, which is why I think anyone who argues with liberals needs to watch it.

Google “Touching the Raw Amygdala” if you want more on the technique.
I guess Colonel Connell took exception to Mike Wallace for (tone-deafly) saying journalists should continue to report when a nearby US soldier is in danger. Didn't really shake the earth.

Legalize meth:
Meth addicts aren’t victims anymore than Darwin Award winners are. A victim tries to do the right thing and stuff drops on them out of the sky. A cancer patient is a victim. There was a cop in Jersey with two daughters he supported with two jobs who stopped to pick up a pizza and caught a stray bullet in the head from a driveby - that’s a victim.

Some gay dude at a party who wants to get high and have fun so he tries meth, despite all the problems it causes, and the laws regarding it is an idiot.

What nobody seems to grasp is the drug war is a proxy for building up the police state.
This is a square example of sacrificing liberty for security, made worse by the fact we are sacrificing freedom to an ever more powerful government to save people who don’t want to be saved, and who don’t care enough about us to not take that first hit of drugs, or bear the consequences of their own actions if they do.

I say screw-em. Legalize it, and let their actions have consequences. If the consequences get bad enough they’ll get help, and if not, sayonara. I’m sick of people telling me I’m responsible for every selfish idiot who can’t think about anyone but themselves.
The search for Conservative sci-fi
Quick Heads up - I don’t want to ruin it for you, but John Scalzi is among the most repugnant of leftist pussies, and spends his spare time tweeting leftist crap and trying to purge conservatives from the Sci-Fi Author organizations using petty leftist politics. He actually got Vox Day purged from SFWA for being conservative. Personally I wouldn’t advance his interests or career.

Castalia House Publishing ( is actually a conservative publishing house that does great conservative sci-fi specifically to counter the influence of the pink shirts in SF like Scalzi, and which arose because of Vox’s purging.
Oh, sad puppies, you whiners suck so hard! Look it up if you want some bemusement about partisans in the sci-fi industry!

Rationally, it's clear Trump will save America:
I feel kind of desperate about this, because if Donald gets rewarded by us for this, other candidates, and Donald himself, may finally go on the attack over Obamacare, marriage and family, carry reciprocity, corruption, surveillance, limited government, IRS abuses, Justice Department abuses, and everything else we’ve been getting hammered on. If he doesn’t then all we’ve gained through this may be lost, and we’re right back in the RINO pool.

Thanks again for taking the time.
Trump could become the template for all conservatives!
Look, I love Cruz, and deciding which of the two to go with is tough. But if I support Donald, and he wins, our next generation of republican candidate will try to win by being tough and confrontational. Once all the candidates are doing that we get the luxury of looking for the one who appears most solid.
Rationally, it's clear blacks shot by cops are all guilty savages:
You can’t compare Sharpton rallying false outrage over a couple of scumbags who really should have gotten their tickets punched, with Trump advocating for obeying the laws of our nation, and saving innocent people who were murdered in cold blood by savages exploiting a criminal system.

It’s like saying a man wrongly accused of murder is no better than Ted Bundy if he hires an attorney.

Both sides are getting their ideas out. One supports criminal savages breaking the law and attacking innocent people, one opposes it.

No contest which side I’m on.
Research shows gay parents are bad for kids. In other outcome-seeking BS, all suboptimal adoptions are immoral:
I love Dick Cheney, and hate to say it, but I draw the line at kids. If she and her partner wanted to live alone it’s one thing. But the research shows now, it’s a bad deal for the kids, which will not get them any sympathy from me. (Dick is another story, God bless him).

If I carried a latent viral infection, which would make any dog I had mildly sick, I wouldn’t have any dogs, ever. I’d rather know that the dogs I would have had, were healthy and loved elswhere. Why people don’t feel this way with their own kids is beyond me.
Liberalism is narcissism
Liberalism is merely NPD applied to politics. If you understand Narcissistic Personality Disorder, at the level of what is happening in the brain, it all makes sense, from the self-aggrandizement and insistence on their own innate superiority, to the insistence on false realities.
Liberals are prey animals:
Liberalism is he expression of an ancient, rabbit-like, r-selected reproductive strategy, programmed by nature, and designed to exploit free resource availability. Give a population free resources, and it will shift it’s psychology toward liberalism. The five traits of the r-strategy, are all adaptations to free resource availability. If resources are copious, fighting is pointless, so the docile have advantage. If resources are free, every offspring will get food, so you don’t need to find a fit mate, and monopolize them with monogamy, plus promiscuity will produce more kids. Once promiscuity is advantageous, single parenting will predominate, and sexualizing young will also increase offspring numbers. Finally, r-strategists have no loyalty to in-group because there is no group competition.

The five traits of the r-strategy - docility, promiscuity, single parenting, early sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group, explain every facet of the Leftist psychology, from early sex-ed for kids, to communism and free birth control for everyone.

Liberals are just the rabbits of our society, and I expect once resource contract in the coming collapse will reverse the leftist slide we have been seeing.
See, he wrote a book full of crap science and bad animal analogies:
I have a general theory of political thought, and wrote a book about it. The theory is that Liberalism is an advanced version of a Darwinian strategy seen in nature, and adopted to avoid the risk of free competition, be it for resources, mates, whatever.

If the theory is correct, the true Liberal adopts their worldview in childhood, and their brain becomes averse to the fear of uncertainty in their future (due to amygdala dysfunction). The only way to curtail their noxious pursuit of everyone’s oppression is to make pursuit of it create uncertainty in their future. ie, if they think everyone is going to be against them, and they are going to be ostracized, they will retreat.

There is a second type of Liberal, which I refer to as the Lemming. They are only Liberal because they think everyone else is, and they go with the flow. They have to be convinced that Liberals are losers, and they shouldn’t associate with the Liberal, because it makes them look bad.
In his book, he explains how liberals are all evil traitors to the core:
I wrote a book on the evolutionary psychology of Liberals. The theory was that the Liberal is an evolved psychology, designed to seek personal advantage at the expense of their group
I state in the book (written a year ago) that the Liberal fears nothing more than being exposed, as this, historically would have led to a purge, and Darwinian destruction. Thus, when acrimony and division grew, the Liberal will panic, for fear of being outed. That is what they are programmed to do. That is the root of the current calls to all “Come together.” If we up the acrimony and division, the Liberal will go to ground, as under Reagan. They are programmed to. They are a treasonous subversive walking the fine line of a traitor. They want us to think they are of our own, as they selfishly betray us.

Yes, they will use any future violence to call for coming together, so they may continue to hide amongst us. We must seek to continue to portray them as the enemy, and increase the partisanship and attacks on their character, and control they seek.
God's plan is that liberals are a different species, you see:
To understand God’s plan, you must understand his mechanism. You see all of this throughout nature too, in other animals, and it has been documented in biology for decades in r/K Selection Theory.

The present sexual revolution is simply a case of the copious dopamine produced by our essentially free resource availability today triggering a brain program designed to change the human reproductive strategy.

Free resources does this by actually remodeling the brain in an organized, programmed fashion
Sadly, it works if resources are free. You’ll have around three kids, while the welfare queen in the city will have fifteen kids by fourteen dads. It is basically the Idiocracy effect from the movie, and so long as resources are free, society will lean toward the r-selected model.

It isn’t permanent, but to bring back the K-selected greatness, the population must endure a period of dopamine withdrawal and violence due to resource restriction, to trigger deeply laid brain pathways that will bring back the K-selected brain program in the organism. Think the fifties, after the Depression and WWII, the success of which produced the Sixties, which produced the seventies and Carter. Reagan upset the applecart with debt spending, which has created the weird period of extended free resources and r-selection that has all of us scratching our heads lately at the weirdness.

Don’t fall into the trap of not seeing how programmed this is, at the societal level, or you will never see the real solution, or what God has planned for us.
Here comes the made-up science!e
I think we are splitting into different directions on the definition of amygdala activity. I think you are seeing amygdala activity as being production of aversive stimulus (which is admittedly a popular view I disagree with). I see amygdala activity as seeking answers to shut off aversive stimulus, which I believe is triggered by the amygdala (and could be triggered mistakenly due to maladaptation in some cases). The panic though, is actually produced by the Anterior Cingulate Cortex.

So my hypothesis based on a lot of readings and personal experience (and I do have formal training in Cognitive Neurosci) is the amygdala encounters threat, triggers the ACC, and the ACC then forces, via panic/brain-pain, an amygdala-driven search of the brain for all possible actions and outcomes, until it hits on a potential act that could shut off the ACC’s panic response somewhat.

The panic then drives the action. In this model, the ACC is the driver using punishment, and the amygdala is the guy whose job is seeing reality honestly and trying to diminish the punishment by finding something to do to the world around you to turn off the punishment. I ignore the studies about anxiety and amygdala size and connectivity, because a narcissist may show no panic, not because he is good with coping with stress, but just because he denies all reality,
So conservatives have larger amygdalae, smaller ACCs, and less panic under threat and more comfort with threat (even as they feel panic) - because they have greater amygdala-linkage to the rest of the brain, better logical modeling capability, and a resultant better problem solving capability.

Liberals (and narcissists) have developed to try and shield themselves from panic by somehow hacking their perception of reality upstream of the amygdala, so the stressful reality doesn’t make it into the amygdala to trigger the ACC, instead being replaced by the non-triggering “false reality.”
His profile is short on personal details, long on his anecdotally researched personal theory that amazingly fits his politics.

And, finally, then animal metaphors go off the rails...
Rabbits are more likely to try and get wolves to genocide others by fomenting conflicts. Clinton, Weiner, Obama, aren’t going to wade into a battlefield when everyone is going at it. But they will send armed feds to do it for them if they can.


  1. There was a cop in Jersey with two daughters he supported with two jobs who stopped to pick up a pizza and caught a stray bullet in the head from a driveby - that’s a victim.

    I guess he was too cowardly to protect his family from the bullet of a thug?


  2. Liberalism is merely NPD applied to politics. If you understand Narcissistic Personality Disorder, at the level of what is happening in the brain, it all makes sense, from the self-aggrandizement and insistence on their own innate superiority, to the insistence on false realities.

    Donald Trump: No narcissism there!

  3. AnonymousConservative is just another savagesusie or butterdezillion on FR ... pseudo-intellectual, rather boring

  4. He seems hung up on the idea that liberals are only liberals due to popularity... take the popularity away and liberals will go away. Reminds me of Jack Chick logic.

    1. The irony in that freeper fallacy is that many of the conservative icons portray themselves as conservative because that's where the money is. If it were profitable and there were a small but rabid liberal base, Limbaugh et al would be blasting right wing nut jobs all day

    2. How dare you take the name of the Prophet (RUSH pbuh) in vain !!!! Burn ...heretic!!!

    3. Next, I'll besmirch the name of the holy mother....Phyliss Schlafley

    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. HarleyLady27 posts,

    Betrayal Papers: Part III – Obama’s Scandals and Assaults on Freedoms Explained

    but who cares, they are already up to Part 3 in their fearless expose of whatever, let's look at the source instead, The America Report. Really, if you can't trust a site with a name like that, who can you trust?

    And sure enough there is a recent story about Obama and the Soviet Union and some underwater shit and god knows what else.

    CLUES UNLOCK OBAMA I.D. MYSTERY: FBI Soviet spy files, SUBUD cult, and a dead body

    Please be sure to send RimJob another basket of breadsticks and do it today! This kind of quality reporting is only to be found on the premier conservative site on the internet, FREE REPUBLIC!

    1. I sure wish they'd have had half the curiosity about the biographies of the architects of the Iraq War prior to the invasion as they do about alleged Obama's guilt-by-association ties (the Rosenbergs? Really?). They might actually have learned something.

  6. First time I've ever heard "Gay Bowel Disease".

    Thanks, Free Republic!

  7. AnonymousConservative probably picked up the "r/K selection" craziness from "Race, Evolution, and Behavior", a 1995 book by the late Canadian scientific racist J. Philippe Rushton. Rushton's theory was that Europeans and Asians were K-selected (the "good" kind) while Africans and Native Americans were r-selected (the "breeds like rabbits" kind) His book got little attention in the mainstream (languishing in the shadow of "The Bell Curve", which was published the year before) but it's considered holy writ in the more intellectual corners of the racist far right.

    Incidentally, even Rushton would have considered AC's understanding of the theory to be nonsense on stilts. For one thing, r/K selection has nothing to do with aggression versus docility; there are highly r-selected predators and highly K-selected prey animals.

    1. I think the most idiotic part is the idea that social adaptation is a neurologically observable effect that takes place in one generation.

  8. conservatives have larger amygdalae, smaller ACCs, and less panic under threat

    Yes, I seem to recall their clam, reasoned reactions to 9/11, immigration, racial matters and pretty much everything in general: "OH SHIT WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE SOMEONE SHOOT SOMEONE ALREADY DADDY SAVE ME"